Skip to main content

My dear Miss Everdeen, make no mistake. The game is coming to its end.

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 2
(2015)

(SPOILERS) Well, it’s better than Part 1. Although not the last YA franchise to dubiously split its finale in two, there’s no obvious inheritor to The Hunger Games’ crown of rampant billion dollar grossing hit. As such, we may see fewer such desperate cash grabs in future (I don’t think anyone’s holding their breath for The Divergent Series: Allegiant and The Divergent Series: Ascendant). Arguably, the bean counter led strategy – whatever lofty notions director Francis Lawrence professes regarding the decision’s legitimacy – has led to an uneven, laborious second half of a movie series that set off at a fair old clip. So, while The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part Deux focuses in on its theme of the moral vacuum that accompanies authoritarian structures reasonably successfully, it finishes up very much lesser to the shamelessly crowd-pleasing first two outings.


Which come down to Russell Crowe’s Gladiator shtick: “Are you not entertained?” Daft as the premise of The Hunger Games is (admittedly, it passes for wholly credible when jostling for space with The Maze Runner or Divergent), it’s essential conceit of gladiatorial combat between bright (and not so bright) young things is an instantly winning formula. It’s no coincidence that, for all its earnest ruminations regarding nominal system change, propaganda and power corrupting absolutely, Mockingjay – Part 2 is at its most spirited when rehearsing yet another (unofficial) games; as Finn (Sam Claflin) even obligingly suggests “Welcome to the 76th Hunger Games”.


Which rather highlights that, for all its ability to communicate worthy themes to a wide audience, The Hunger Games’ aspirations get bogged down in self-importance whenever it opts to acknowledge this head-on. That’s when the commentary feels at its most YA; when calls upon Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) to deliver an impromptu speech (most notably to a would-be assassin), or a character sets out why Alma Coin (Julianne Moore) feels threatened by Katniss’ influence, just like President Snow (Donald Sutherland), rather than letting the audience realise this themselves. 


When it does show, the effects are invariably potent, such as Coin bombing the shield of children assembled outside Snow’s palace in a topical false flag operation (well, topical if you entertain conspiracy theories) or Katniss taking out the incumbent president during Snow’s public execution. As with most big movies with a political bent it tends to deliver when it doesn’t let on that it only has so much to say, actually (see also Captain America: The Winter Soldier).


But part of this is also comes back to allowing itself far too much time wallowing in a mire of introspection of its own making. We already got the message about Katniss as a poster child for the new order, and her mixed feelings about it, in Part Un, so pressing the point during the first half of the picture feels like overkill. This repetition ensures Mockingjay – Part 2 drags for long stretches, to the extent that it frequently feels like an unhurried prestige mini-series adaption, dotting every i and crossing every t of a sacred text.


Such reverence also leads to a number of structurally unwieldy choices (the assault on the palace looks headed for a grand climax, but then Katniss passes out all-aflame and we’re forced to regroup; it sucks all the energy out of the frame). Jennifer Lawrence good as she is, is unable to carry that weight of such pacing problems solo, and there isn’t enough substance in other roles to take up the slack. 


While the “adults” in the cast are generally fine actors, few of them have enough going on to make them truly intriguing. Moore’s Coin proves disappointingly undifferentiated when she goes as far as suggesting a Hunger Games for the Capitol kids (paint her as a baddie, sure, but not quite so clumsily/overtly) and there are too many good actors (Gwendoline Christie, Stanley Tucci, Robert Knepper) reduced to a single scene.


Others stir and repeat (Philip Seymour Hoffman, sadly in his final performance, Woody Harrelson, Jeffrey Wright, Elizabeth Banks – although a little Effie goes a long way) with little of note to show for it. At least Michelle Forbes has a decent role in the mid-section of the picture as a very Michelle Forbes not-to-be-messed-with lieutenant, while Sutherland (who like Mr Bronson in Grange Hill, has to pay) relishes the chance to bring silky menace during the closing sections. In particular, there’s his marvellous reaction on realising who Katniss’ arrow has sought out, a brief amusement before the crowd, baying for blood, descend on him.


There are similar problems of representation with the younger cast. The ones who cause spark to fly, Claflin, Jena Malone and Natalie Dormer (who, along with Pollux decides not to go the distance in getting rid President Snow, which as played is a bit abrupt and possibly chicken livered), aren’t given paltry screen time, and we’re expected to find the inert love triangle between Katniss, Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) and Gale (Liam Hemsworth) involving. Unfortunately, Lawrence must choose between two guys who don’t exactly bring the charisma, and she opts for the titch with whom she has zero chemistry. 


I wouldn’t be quite so unkind to Hutcherson as to label him the Taylor Lautner of The Hunger Games, since he can approximate a performance – although I’m not sure I could take another scene of Peeta frothing about his brainwashing – but it’s impossible to be invested in Katniss and Peeta luxuriating with their burgeoning brood in a golden meadow come the final scene (which seems to take an eternity to get to; I was half expecting a further cut to Old Gammy Katniss). Perhaps Peeta’s conditioning will kick in once again during the closing credits?


The differing moral philosophies of Katniss and Gale provide a strong enough dividing line for why it isn’t to be between them, but it might have done the picture more of a service to present his case less brusquely. Likewise, the blunt response of Johanna over whether there should be a Capitol games; too frequently the picture takes the easy route of Katniss being all on her own on her moral high ground. 


That’s a failing generally, though; there might have been some agency in charting an ambiguous course we see with the uncertain political future of the districts (people have short memories, we are told; they’re definitely in trouble with Patina Miller’s Paylor, who doesn’t fare well with lines like “the sadistic inventions of game makers meant to make sport of our deaths”). Accordingly, Katniss doesn’t end up with gumby Peeta out of love. Rather, it’s an attempt to find stability between two broken people. If that was the intent, it doesn’t translate because her relationship with Peeta has never been convincing on any level.


The action though, when it comes, is top notch, as you’d expect from Lawrence. Perhaps also as you’d expect from Lawrence (the helmer of I Am Legend) he has a penchant for CGI beasties (and CGI oil), although the Mutts here are rather better rendered than Will Smith’s adversaries. That sequence is fairly intense Aliens-grade stuff for a 12-certificate, although, by this point in the movie, it’s become patently obvious that Katniss carrying a bow around a war zone is about the dumb as, I don’t know, one of the Avengers using it as his weapon of choice. Even stronger is the lack of punch pulling in the aforementioned infant massacre. The picture’s to be congratulated for not making war fun, although alas it’s mostly only really good when war is fun, as the deadly game of booby traps and dismemberments through the streets of the Capitol attests.


It will be interesting to see how studio Lionsgate’s fortunes fare now their half-decade-plus of YA coffers-fillers has run dry. The moderately successful at best Divergent is probably closer to what any studio should expect if they’re lucky, given the copious corpses of failed YA fare strewn across the last few years, rather than the Twilights and Hunger Games. As for The Hunger Games’ legacy, as with Harry Potter it was an error to split its final instalment. Mockingjay – Part 2, and its immediate predecessor, will probably be awarded merit points by devotees of the novels, for whom more is usually more, but the decision has hobbled the potential of what was a naturally cinematic series.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mondo bizarro. No offence man, but you’re in way over your head.

The X-Files 8.7: Via Negativa I wasn’t as down on the last couple of seasons of The X-Files as most seemed to be. For me, the mythology arc walked off a cliff somewhere around the first movie, with only the occasional glimmer of something worthwhile after that. So the fact that the show was tripping over itself with super soldiers and Mulder’s abduction/his and Scully’s baby (although we all now know it wasn’t, sheesh ), anything to stretch itself beyond breaking point in the vain hope viewers would carry on dangling, didn’t really make much odds. Of course, it finally snapped with the wretched main arc when the show returned, although the writing was truly on the wall with Season 9 finale The Truth . For the most part, though, I found 8 and 9 more watchable than, say 5 or 7. They came up with their fair share of engaging standalones, one of which I remembered to be Via Negativa .

Schnell, you stinkers! Come on, raus!

Private’s Progress (1956) (SPOILERS) Truth be told, there’s good reason sequel I’m Alright Jack reaps the raves – it is, after all, razor sharp and entirely focussed in its satire – but Private’s Progress is no slouch either. In some respects, it makes for an easy bedfellow with such wartime larks as Norman Wisdom’s The Square Peg (one of the slapstick funny man’s better vehicles). But it’s also, typically of the Boulting Brothers’ unsentimental disposition, utterly remorseless in rebuffing any notions of romantic wartime heroism, nobility and fighting the good fight. Everyone in the British Army is entirely cynical, or terrified, or an idiot.

Isn’t it true, it’s easier to be a holy man on the top of a mountain?

The Razor’s Edge (1984) (SPOILERS) I’d hadn’t so much a hankering as an idle interest in finally getting round to seeing Bill Murray’s passion project. Partly because it seemed like such an odd fit. And partly because passion isn’t something you tend to associate with any Murray movie project, involving as it usually does laidback deadpan. Murray, at nigh-on peak fame – only cemented by the movie he agreed to make to make this movie – embarks on a serious-acting-chops dramatic project, an adaptation of W Somerset Maugham’s story of one man’s journey of spiritual self-discovery. It should at least be interesting, shouldn’t it? A real curio? Alas, not. The Razor’s Edge is desperately turgid.

It’s not as if she were a… maniac, a raving thing.

Psycho (1960) (SPOILERS) One of cinema’s most feted and most studied texts, and for good reason. Even if the worthier and more literate psycho movie of that year is Michael Powell’s Peeping Tom . One effectively ended a prolific director’s career and the other made its maker more in demand than ever, even if he too would discover he had peaked with his populist fear flick. Pretty much all the criticism and praise of Psycho is entirely valid. It remains a marvellously effective low-budget shocker, one peppered with superb performances and masterful staging. It’s also fairly rudimentary in tone, character and psychology. But those negative elements remain irrelevant to its overall power.

You have done well to keep so much hair, when so many’s after it.

Jeremiah Johnson (1972) (SPOILERS) Hitherto, I was most familiar with Jeremiah Johnson in the form of a popular animated gif of beardy Robert Redford smiling and nodding in slow zoom close up (a moment that is every bit as cheesy in the film as it is in the gif). For whatever reason, I hadn’t mustered the enthusiasm to check out the 1970s’ The Revenant until now (well, beard-wise, at any rate). It’s easy to distinguish the different personalities at work in the movie. The John Milius one – the (mythic) man against the mythic landscape; the likeably accentuated, semi-poetic dialogue – versus the more naturalistic approach favoured by director Sydney Pollack and star Redford. The fusion of the two makes for a very watchable, if undeniably languorous picture. It was evidently an influence on Dances with Wolves in some respects, although that Best Picture Oscar winner is at greater pains to summon a more sensitive portrayal of Native Americans (and thus, perversely, at times a more patr

My Doggett would have called that crazy.

The X-Files 9.4: 4-D I get the impression no one much liked Agent Monica Reyes (Annabeth Gish), but I felt, for all the sub-Counsellor Troi, empath twiddling that dogged her characterisation, she was a mostly positive addition to the series’ last two years (of its main run). Undoubtedly, pairing her with Doggett, in anticipation of Gillian Anderson exiting just as David Duchovny had – you rewatch these seasons and you wonder where her head was at in hanging on – made for aggressively facile gender-swapped conflict positions on any given assignment. And generally, I’d have been more interested in seeing how two individuals sympathetic to the cause – her and Mulder – might have got on. Nevertheless, in an episode like 4-D you get her character, and Doggett’s, at probably their best mutual showing.

You’re a disgrace, sir... Weren’t you at Harrow?

Our Man in Marrakesh aka Bang! Bang! You’re Dead (1966) (SPOILERS) I hadn’t seen this one in more than three decades, and I had in mind that it was a decent spy spoof, well populated with a selection of stalwart British character actors in supporting roles. Well, I had the last bit right. I wasn’t aware this came from the stable of producer Harry Alan Towers, less still of his pedigree, or lack thereof, as a sort of British Roger Corman (he tried his hand at Star Wars with The Shape of Things to Come and Conan the Barbarian with Gor , for example). More legitimately, if you wish to call it that, he was responsible for the Christopher Lee Fu Manchu flicks. Our Man in Marrakesh – riffing overtly on Graham Greene’s Our Man in Havana in title – seems to have in mind the then popular spy genre and its burgeoning spoofs, but it’s unsure which it is; too lightweight to work as a thriller and too light on laughs to elicit a chuckle.

The best thing in the world for the inside of a man or a woman is the outside of a horse.

Marnie (1964) (SPOILERS) Hitch in a creative ditch. If you’ve read my Vertigo review, you’ll know I admired rather than really liked the picture many fete as his greatest work. Marnie is, in many ways, a redux, in the way De Palma kept repeating himself in the early 80s only significantly less delirious and… well, compelling. While Marnie succeeds in commanding the attention fitfully, it’s usually for the wrong reasons. And Hitch, digging his heels in as he strives to fashion a star against public disinterest – he failed to persuade Grace Kelly out of retirement for Marnie Rutland – comes entirely adrift with his leads.

I tell you, it saw me! The hanged man’s asphyx saw me!

The Asphyx (1972) (SPOILERS) There was such a welter of British horror from the mid 60s to mid 70s, even leaving aside the Hammers and Amicuses, that it’s easy to lose track of them in the shuffle. This one, the sole directorial effort of Peter Newbrook (a cameraman for David Lean, then a cinematographer), has a strong premise and a decent cast, but it stumbles somewhat when it comes to taking that premise any place interesting. On the plus side, it largely eschews the grue. On the minus, directing clearly wasn’t Newbrook’s forte, and even aided by industry stalwart cinematographer Freddie Young (also a go-to for Lean), The Aspyhx is stylistically rather flat.

I don't like the way Teddy Roosevelt is looking at me.

North by Northwest (1959) (SPOILERS) North by Northwest gets a lot of attention as a progenitor of the Bond formula, but that’s giving it far too little credit. Really, it’s the first modern blockbuster, paving the way for hundreds of slipshod, loosely plotted action movies built around set pieces rather than expertly devised narratives. That it delivers, and delivers so effortlessly, is a testament to Hitchcock, to writer Ernest Lehmann, and to a cast who make the entire implausible exercise such a delight.