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.



Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.
Read more

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.
Read more

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.
Read more

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…
Read more

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much
Read more

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.
Read more

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.
Read more

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.
Read more

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.
Read more

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.
Read more