Skip to main content

I miss my wigs.

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1
(2014)

(SPOILERS) The chief problem with The Hunger Games: Catching Fire was that it essentially reheated the first film, not an uncommon complaint of sequels generally. The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1 remedies this but in so doing exposes a far greater ailment. Without the central, and unlikely, gimmick (as in, this world is not really any more plausible than that of the much derided Divergent) of this particular totalitarian regime, there is no glue holding the picture together. As a result the entire edifice begins to crumble, and the makers are left clutching desperately at the life raft of propaganda commentary. Of course, cutting the book in half for strictly artistic reasons doesn’t help anyone to tell a compelling story either.


I haven’t read the Suzanne Collins’ novels, and I’m not particularly inspired to, and I’m not going to spoil if for myself by reading a synopsis. It’s quite possible that Mockingjay possesses a rousing, thoughtful and insightful conclusion that justifies all this extra time taken. I’m doubtful, though. Lionsgate (and Warner Bros too) are dab hands at milking bashful cash cows with finite literary lactose on tap. Lionsgate did it with Twilight, and Warner did it with Harry Potter. The end is nigh, and the decision to double up has zero to do with making a coherent or satisfying film. It’s not such a problem ending on a cliffhanger, it is a problem if the resulting story becomes aimless or listless. Breaking Dawn – Part 1 at least boasted the majestically warped horror show of Bella’s pregnancy to hold incredulous attention. And the Deathly Hallows: Part 1, for all its “Let’s camp out in the woods for an hour” rap was much more interesting than the banal big battle conclusion. I fear that is the kind of place Mockingjay – Part 2 is heading. If so, it can’t even claim a fitfully interesting lead-in.


We pick up with Katniss suffering PTS as a result of the climax of Catching Fire in which she lost Peeta (to the clutches of Donald Sutherland’s nefarious President Snow), the most mystifying point in a love triangle since… well Taylor Lautner. Josh Hutcherson can act to some degree, so he’s got that as an advantage over Lautner, but he has no chemistry with Lawrence and he’s an uphill battle (particularly so, given his height restrictions) trying to make a beta male character sympathetic when as a performer he lacks presence (and is unable to impress upon us Peeta’s intelligence, apparently the character’s strongest suit).


Considerably more might have been made of the position of the rebel leadership, that the captured Tributes are traitors, so it’s lobbing a soft ball to establish outright here that Peeta has done his very best while undergoing starvation and Manchurian Candidate-style brainwashing. Despite the gritty action and handheld camera, and the moves to show politics as a murky business no matter which side is talking, there’s never any doubt that our noble and true heroes are noble and true. It might have been more honest to have a central character break under torture, since that would be the response of most of us (the picture is also guilty of continually playing to stereotypes, which is why it attempts to cast doubt on the stalwartness of the not-so-manly Peeta). Peeta’s out of the loop for most of the movie, which serves to reinforce how unlikely Katniss’ affections are; she is overcome with emotion at every sight of paltry Peeta on the Capitol’s broadcast.


Nevertheless, she finds time in her busy weepy schedule to canoodle with manly beefcake, and brother of Thor, Gale. Liam Hemsworth isn’t quite as one-note as previously, since he has considerably more screen time, but Gale is in no danger of being unveiled as a layered character. The more we see and hear of him, volunteering for heroic suicide missions, saving as many townsfolk from a bombing run as he could and then berating himself for not saving more, the more immodestly noble he becomes. Gale’s judgemental traits (of Peeta’s betrayal, of Katniss’ emotional superficiality towards him) may be implicitly criticised, but Hemsworth is unlikely to dispel his rep as an impassive plank any time soon.


This isn’t such a great picture for J-Law either. Katniss is granted a bravura moment with a bow and arrow against some fighter planes (and director Francis Lawrence stages an outstanding piece of action as a chimney collapses, seen through the window of a derelict warehouse), but spends an awful lot of time blubbing, fretting, and being generally underwhelming. I’d go as far to say Lawrence comes unstuck here, buffeted by the demands of having her character doused in despair or subject to the demands of others. She is largely without the contrasting upsides; when she Katniss comes over all spontaneous, her recognised greatest strength, the dialogue and visuals are anything but.


There was surely a better path through this uncertain territory, but Peter Craig and Danny Strong haven’t found it. The ground is fertile enough; Katniss, who has been used and manipulated by Snow, now finds herself used and manipulated by the rebels. To the end that she must inspire all through becoming the symbol of the rebellion, she is done up in superhero duds (X-Men by way of Dark Knight) and sent out to scenes of devastation (a hospital, the scene of the aforementioned bombing). There’s almost a meta-quality to this, but not in a good way; President Coin (Julianne Moore, exuding steely perfection) and Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman) mull over what to do to best get the message across and rouse the masses. So too, the writers mull what to do to find an involving storyline and stumble from one site of carnage to another. There’s no tension here, and the results are close to aimless.


Occasional moments are suggestive of the intelligence and perceptivity the picture clearly seeks. Replaying Katniss’ impromptu speech (which itself is astonishingly well-composed, and so entirely unbelievable, for something apparently off the cuff) to stirring music, or doing the same with footage of her fighter-jet take down, adds an another level of reading to what we have just watched. The speech feels even more rehearsed, while the heroic jet-busting now looks fake. There’s also a beautifully observed moment where we Coin gives a stirring speech and we cut to Plutarch in the audience, silently mouthing the words he has written for her. But what are we to make of the en-masse three-finger salutes and the instant anthem sung by Katniss; James Newton Howard’s score instructs the viewer to be as easily prodded into unquestioning reverence. There’s a sense that, whenever the picture is about to say or do something interesting, the trappings of juvenilia resurface and put it in its place.


I’m not sure accounts of real world embrace of the three-fingered salute in any way legitimise the picture as a genuine inspiration for overthrowing the status quo; rather, they emphasise that iconography is easily mimicked (the most obvious of these is V from V for Vendetta, another picture where impact comes from broad strokes rather than great depth) and that, where there is general apathy, something is better than nothing. I don’t see any reason its Young Adult status should give the picture an easy ride; it chooses to go there, after all. But perhaps Part 2 will surprise me, and I will reconsider Part 1 in a different light.


There are several new characters here, but most noticeable is how limited the impact of the old ones is. Hoffman steals the film in his every scene, suggesting an exemplar of craftiness and cunning; Plutarch should have written the whole movie. Harrelson, Banks, Tucci, Banks, all get a moment or two but not so they are memorable; its lip service, really. Claflin, who made a great impact on the previous picture, is reduced to an utterly indifferent presence. Malone gets one scene and is much missed. Robert Knepper, who can be counted on to eat any scenery in his eyeline, seems to get about two lines.


Jeffrey Wright manages to make an inauspicious character seem much more alive and intriguing than he actually is. One wonders if half the grand thesps here are doing it as a favour to their kids, or because, like Christmas panto, it’s an easy undemanding engagement that pays the bills. But this is a picture wasting a huge amount of time doing very little that’s engaging, so it really should be finding time for its most colourful characters (who, like the setting, are now drab and grey).


The exception is the introduction of Natalie Dormer as stylish and sexy media type Cressida, sporting tattoos on her half-shaved head and a hairstyle that must require a lot of adjustment for wind direction (her assistant is covered in piercings and ring pulls, so neither are best set for dirty-shooty-explodey conditions). Like Wright, Dormer has more greater impact than her part on paper suggests.


Following a gratuitous “save the cat” scene (even with its po-faced “This is important” face on, the makers still find time to respect grand movie clichés), the picture stumbles and plods to a non-climax of sorts. Boggs (House of Cards’ Mahershala Ali) leads a daring raid to extract the Tributes. Momentarily director Lawrence strikes two plot threads together and they catch fire, as Katniss attempts to distract Snow while the SWAT team get down to business. We are left wondering what has happened to them, but then learn the mission has been a success. This is despite the fact that the team are baffled. It was all too easy; no one stopped them from escaping. 


So of course, rather than behaving cautiously (because, let’s face it, unless you’re the sloppiest bunch of rebels ever you’ll expect something rum to be afoot) they let Peeta get all strangle-happy on Katniss. It’s the weakest of twists, not just because it is telegraphed that something will go amiss (Snow has dropped such heavy hints, all but the most befuddled would get the gist; “… it's the things we love most that destroy us”), but also because it is logically unsound. And ending on Peeta’s mental malaise isn’t the most must-see –what-happens-next of cliffhangers (I may be mistaken but I don’t think anyone much cares about the half-pint numpty).


Lionsgate may well muster a good showing for the finale, but it’s evident that a good proportion of the great unwashed have already got the message this isn’t all that. Which has happened before. The Matrix Revolutions recklessly forsook the very aspect that sparked imaginations and instead served up a hardware-packed extended battle scene. It was little wonder audiences didn’t care for the picture. An instalment of The Hunger Games didn’t necessarily need to flounder without a game (notably, both this and The Matrix announce the central attraction in their titles, so the studio cannot be too surprised if audiences end up feeling short-changed), but it really does need to have forward momentum, engaging ideas and sharp scenarios. The Hunger Games – Mockingjay Part 1 has sufficient ideas to play with, but it is unable or unwilling to develop them in the face of a severed storyline and a teen romance triangle that musters nary a shred of conviction.






Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

You guys sure like watermelon.

The Irishman aka I Heard You Paint Houses (2019)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps, if Martin Scorsese hadn’t been so opposed to the idea of Marvel movies constituting cinema, The Irishman would have been a better film. It’s a decent film, assuredly. A respectable film, definitely. But it’s very far from being classic. And a significant part of that is down to the usually assured director fumbling the execution. Or rather, the realisation. I don’t know what kind of crazy pills the ranks of revered critics have been taking so as to recite as one the mantra that you quickly get used to the de-aging effects so intrinsic to its telling – as Empire magazine put it, “you soon… fuggadaboutit” – but you don’t. There was no point during The Irishman that I was other than entirely, regrettably conscious that a 75-year-old man was playing the title character. Except when he was playing a 75-year-old man.

The more you drive, the less intelligent you are.

Repo Man (1984)
In fairness, I should probably check out more Alex Cox’s later works. Before I consign him to the status of one who never made good on the potential of his early success. But the bits and pieces I’ve seen don’t hold much sway. I pretty much gave up on him after Walker. It seemed as if the accessibility of Repo Man was a happy accident, and he was subsequently content to drift further and further down his own post-modern punk rabbit hole, as if affronted by the “THE MOST ASTONISHING FEATURE FILM DEBUT SINCE STEVEN SPIELBERG’S DUEL” accolade splashed over the movie’s posters (I know, I have a copy; see below).

This popularity of yours. Is there a trick to it?

The Two Popes (2019)
(SPOILERS) Ricky Gervais’ Golden Globes joke, in which he dropped The Two Popes onto a list of the year’s films about paedophiles, rather preceded the picture’s Oscar prospects (three nominations), but also rather encapsulated the conversation currently synonymous with the forever tainted Roman Catholic church; it’s the first thing anyone thinks of. And let’s face it, Jonathan Pryce’s unamused response to the gag could have been similarly reserved for the fate of his respected but neglected film. More people will have heard Ricky’s joke than will surely ever see the movie. Which, aside from a couple of solid lead performances, probably isn’t such an omission.

Look, the last time I was told the Germans had gone, it didn't end well.

1917 (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I first heard the premise of Sam Mendes’ Oscar-bait World War I movie – co-produced by Amblin Partners, as Spielberg just loves his sentimental war carnage – my first response was that it sounded highly contrived, and that I’d like to know how, precisely, the story Mendes’ granddad told him would bear any relation to the events he’d be depicting. And just why he felt it would be appropriate to honour his relative’s memory via a one-shot gimmick. None of that has gone away on seeing the film. It’s a technical marvel, and Roger Deakins’ cinematography is, as you’d expect, superlative, but that mastery rather underlines that 1917 is all technique, that when it’s over and you get a chance to draw your breath, the experience feels a little hollow, a little cynical and highly calculated, and leaves you wondering what, if anything, Mendes was really trying to achieve, beyond an edge-of-the-seat (near enough) first-person actioner.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.