User Score
8.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 995 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 74 out of 995

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 25, 2013
    8
    Following the success of the first Hunger Games, Catching Fire does what a good sequel should do, focus on the consequences that came with the decisions made in the first film. In some ways I prefer this to the first film and in some ways I don't. This film has better acting, better visuals and a much more interesting story that focuses on the actions of characters rather than characters in action. It didn't give me a feeling of closure like the first film though. The first film can stand on its own as a good science fiction film, whereas this film still does feel like a sequel. It doesn't stand on its own but it still continues a great story and I enjoyed it. Expand
  2. Nov 30, 2013
    8
    This movie actually exceeded my expectations, in the sense that it was well thought out, and debatably better than its predecessor. The effects were enhancing, and the storyline was easy to follow, yet the movie kept viewers engaged. I vicariously felt the pain characters had experienced with all of the obstacles thrust above them. This adaptation of the beloved teenage novel is a cut above the rest. Expand
  3. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    This is one of those times where the sequel actually plays better than the first. This movie actually carried better than the book also. Lots of internal drama and lack of a clear plot line make this better for teenagers and older but overall a good experience.
  4. Nov 26, 2013
    7
    Catching Fire takes what was wrong with the first film, and learns from it. This is the first true Hunger Games adaptation that captures the chaos of the games in full effect. Catching Fire's film direction and devotion to staying true in story, makes me wish the first film was redone in this manner. Jennifer Lawrence and cast improve on their performances, and I am pleased to inform everyone that the camera-shake monster isn't in Catching Fire. Thank freaking God! Expand
  5. Nov 26, 2013
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If the ultimate goal was to entertain then catching fire accomplished then and the proceeded to exceed expectations. However In doing so I feel as a fan my intelligence was insulted. The cliffhanger if you want to call it that, I call it more of a ball buster) was the equivalence of driving a Ferrari on a race track and slamming on the breaks due to a squirrel crossing on the track. Great movie and because of that I'm planning on watching the 3rd one. I don't enjoy having my face slammed against the windshield when I was going to stop the car anyways. Expand
  6. Nov 22, 2013
    8
    For me, this was on about the same level as the first movie. However, it also manages to exceed several qualities of its predecessor. For one, it felt more dark and mature in how it handled all of the characters. It also felt much more intense and gripping, especially during the games. Once again, the cast gave exceptional performances. Jennifer Lawrence's performance was definitely a step up from the first film, as her portrayal of Katniss felt more detailed and compelling to watch. Josh Hutcherson and Liam Hemsworth also return as Peeta and Gale respectively. There were also some great new additions to the cast. Sam Claflin gave a slick performance as Finnick. Phillip Seymour Hoffman was great as always too! I was also happy to see the very underrated Jena Malone playing Johanna. Overall, it followed the book pretty well. Really, my only issue with this movie was that in some spots, it focused a little too much on the rather cheesy and cliche side plot of the love triangle between Katniss, Gale, and Peeta. Other than that, this was a fun and compelling sequel to the already great first installment! Expand
  7. Nov 23, 2013
    10
    I don't believe that a sequel will be much better and highly enjoyable than its predecessor. Here on this film, all of the elements of the film cinematography, acting skills, plot, and imagine the dramatic violence have been upgraded superbly. This is the trilogy that will make you hungry to watch all of its movies even when you are busy.

    Katniss Everdeen known as the famous star,
    Jennifer Lawrence has come up to the stage again for her strong and unique performance along with Peeta Melark, known as Josh Hutcherson which is now more brave and unusual compare to the last film. They fight against the evil Capitol which is ruled by President Snow main antagonist because of the events of the last film.

    Hunger Games Catching Fire not only provides more of the 3D and visual effects but also the film manages to introduce the characters one by one which makes it more of a straight line. And add up the thrilling scenes. Here the experience of thrill just been more of a horror than ever before.

    Hunger Games Catching Fire is really a very good and possibly one of the best films on this year. So I highly recommend everyone to watch it. It really saves your money when you watch it on theatre and preferably on 3D. For those who didn't like the Hunger Games (the predecessor) pretty much, well this sequel will definitely transformed you into a fan of the trilogy.

    The Hunger Games Catching Fire Rating 10 10
    Compared to -
    The Hunger Games (the predecessor) Rating 8 10
    Expand
  8. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    In comparison to its predecessor, I won't say that "Catching Fire" disappoints, but it did not really go as tremendous as I thought it was going to be. The first hour, for me, was a bit too slow-paced, but it gets way better right after the moment Katniss stood up for Gale over the Peacekeeper Commander. What I love the most is the portrayal of Johanna Mason by Jena Malone and Finnick Odair by Sam Caiflin. I honestly didn't expect it from them both. Overall, Catching Fire is a good sequel, but not flawless. The ending hits just right because it makes you feel you want the next movie right at that second. Expand
  9. Dec 10, 2013
    8
    Much better than its predecessor, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire kept me involved throughout. As a fan of the books, there were no omissions or additions to the movie that I couldn't ignore or overlook. I found Josh Hutcherson particularly charming and believable as Peeta with Tucci, and Kravitz capturing Flickerman and Cinna perfectly, but Lawrence and Hemsworth both failed to convince me that they were anyone except themselves. Lawrence didn't even really seem to be trying or want to be on set most of the time. Expand
  10. Nov 22, 2013
    9
    Amazing film, and I can't wait to see it again! The fact that it follows the book fairly well is a huge two thumbs up! Nothing is worse than a film based on a book that doesn't follow the book at all. So again I repeat, I truly enjoyed this film.
  11. Nov 30, 2013
    8
    Surprisingly great, 'Catching Fire' was much darker and appeals to a wider crowd than its previous, preteen formatted prequel. It offers much more than what disappointed viewers of the 'Hunger Games' might expect. I could rank it among the best films of 2013.
  12. Nov 23, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I was very disappointed after reading the Catching Fire book. The movie was good, I was just expecting more out of the book, I feel if they had added on 10 more minutes, nearly all the books info would have been covered. There wasn't enough out of the training, Katniss' friend (the Avox) was never addressed, and there was more, but I'm having trouble remembering through my frustration. Expand
  13. Nov 24, 2013
    10
    Seen the movie twice already. I loved it so much mainly because it lives up to the book a lot. I also enjoyed that it was three hours long, expected it to be much shorter. Anyways, the movie was AMAZING, totally worth watching!
  14. Nov 24, 2013
    10
    Really great movie, quite faithful to the book. (which, might I add, we don't get very often). Keeping in mind, that not everything written can be shown. I really enjoyed it. The movie had some really emotional scenes, but I'm not going to spoil it for you. Great acting, stunning SFX and overall a great movie. I now anxiously await the next part Mockingjay.I recommend this movie to everyone.
  15. Nov 24, 2013
    8
    Not having read the book, I'm sure fanboy/girls are whining about what they left out. Not all of us have time to nerd out and read all the books. That being said, I really enjoyed the movie! With one more book left being split into two, which makes sense(more money) I was entertained! The acting was solid special effects, and drama excellent! Go!
  16. Nov 25, 2013
    10
    JUST FOR BRAZILIANS:

    "Em Chamas" consegue ser uma ótima adaptação cinematográfica, sendo bem fiel a obra escrita por Suzanne Collins e superando longa-metragens de outras sagas, tais como Harry Potter e Percy Jackson e os Olimpianos.
  17. Nov 25, 2013
    9
    Con un final que te deja con ganas de más "Juegos del hambre en llamas" logra superar a su predecesora, lo único que se siente flojo o un poco forzado es la relación entre Peeta y Katniss. No he leído el libro pero la narrativa de la película logra atraparte durante todo el film. Recomendable.
  18. Nov 25, 2013
    10
    This was another great movie in the hunger Games Series. This second installment stayed true to the book and ended at a time the audience was like, "What? Don't end it now!". I do wish they went a little further since they still have so much material to work with for the third book. I will be adding this DVD to my collection when it comes out. Well done acting, costumes and script. It would be difficult to step it up from the last movie, but everyone did! You must see! Expand
  19. Nov 26, 2013
    9
    The first installment of this series was just kind of on par. Catching Fire takes that same premise of the first film and vastly improves it. It really was the first movie with a stronger plot. Jennifer Lawrence does a good job as usual, but Josh Hutcherson really drives it home. A very surprising performance enhancement by Elizabeth Banks, her character actually had emotions this time around and they got to me, Their was one scene with birds, you will know what I'm talking about, that genuinely terrified me when no mainstream horror movie can.
    In conclusion: if you liked the first one, Catching Fire is that but better. If you didn't like the first one, wait for the sequel to come out on DVD/Blu-Ray and give it a try.
    Expand
  20. Nov 26, 2013
    8
    Great overall movie but her crying was way too overtop constant (but really funny). A little graphic for some viewers. I`ve read both books and this might have been my favorite, except for the train scene, witch was shortened. Also the poison cleansing scene is over the top and sounds like a different sort of movie.
  21. Nov 27, 2013
    8
    I haven't read the books, or much abut the entire storyline. The film was enjoyable and the story was slightly predicable. But it has the enjoyment factor and I am looking forward to the next one!
  22. Dec 5, 2013
    9
    This was an amazing movie. period. The end will make you want to punch the person beside you because of frustration but overall its an amazing experience, its as if just as you get into it. it ends.
  23. Dec 8, 2013
    8
    The new V for Vendetta, awaiting the next shows a future where tyranny dominates the reigns Nazism, a new vision and hope our princess, win so that our future generation see what not to do.
  24. Dec 15, 2013
    8
    I love the Hunger Games books, so when the first film came out, I was very sceptical about it. I thought it was going to be trash and untrue to the books. And while it still lacked some core elements, it was still amazing and this film is no exception. At the heart of it is Jennifer Laurence's preformance as Catniss which is refined from the first film, therefore being more believable and more realistic. In fact every actor in the film shows just how talented they really are. Sometimes it's hard to notice dew to Laurence's top notch acting. The directing is also on par with this. The camera takes shots from very unique and interesting angles, which also makes the action feel more brutal and organic. The story is complex, and touches on problems with real life politics. There's one HUGE problem with the film... Throughout the film I asked myself Am I watching the Hunger Games one?" My ticket said Hunger Games Catching Fire. So why did I think this? Because they took the story of the original and copy and pasted it onto this! The fundamental point of a sequel is to improve not to copy! Despite this I still love the film and I recommend to everyone. Expand
  25. Dec 23, 2013
    9
    This movie had some serious action, plot twists but an anticlimactic closing which has left me excited for the next installment of the series. Let the true fun...begin!
  26. Dec 10, 2013
    8
    Much better than its predecessor, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire kept me involved throughout. As a fan of the books, there were no omissions or additions to the movie that I couldn't ignore or overlook. I found Josh Hutcherson particularly charming and believable as Peeta with Tucci, and Kravitz capturing Flickerman and Cinna perfectly, but Lawrence and Hemsworth both failed to convince me that they were anyone except themselves. Lawrence didn't even really seem to be trying or want to be on set most of the time. Expand
  27. Dec 11, 2013
    8
    The movie was not as good as the trailer and it isnt better than the first one. I highly recommend it to the people who have read the books, they´ll enjoy it and will be eager to watch the next one. As for those who have not i think they´ll be highly entertained but will find it awkward in the end.
  28. Jan 27, 2014
    10
    A must watch !, this movie is well done. This time there's no sharky cameras, that's an improvement. It's start only at the middle of the movie, but personally its a 2h30 film that passed so fast !
  29. Dec 12, 2013
    10
    A real Hit compared to the first movie, One hell of a Action thriller movie, And very enjoyable for those who have read the books, I would strongly recommend seeing this or buying it when it comes out on dvd.
  30. Dec 12, 2013
    8
    Catching Fire is a perfect follow up to the original, and offers great creative direction and depth in themes that keeps it going. Definitely worth the watch.
  31. Dec 13, 2013
    8
    Brilliant movie, a great sequel even better than the first Hunger Games, very entertaining and with solid acting across the board. If you liked the first movie you will love this.
  32. Dec 14, 2013
    8
    The movie leaves gaps of the book out in places. That being said, the construct of the film does much more to move the plot forward and give legs to the central plot of being under the government's boot than the first in the series. The film is less sluggish than the first, but without Jennifer Lawrence and Woody Harrelson offers little in the way of acting.
  33. Dec 17, 2013
    10
    Amazing! Best movie I have seen all year, from the first 10 minutes of the movie I was already holding my seat and knew it was going to be a good movie. I didn't really enjoy the first Hunger games but this was better than anything i could have expected! If you haven't't seen it I cant recommend it enough!
  34. Dec 17, 2013
    10
    This movie just awesome. The cast so natural,the animation and the setting so stunning,the plot is exactly like the book. This is the best movie of the year. The story is like really happen in the past... Awesome. Jennifer is a talented cast. Congrats for all the catching fire team
  35. Dec 21, 2013
    9
    Francis Lawrence surprise us again after a great direction and I Am Legend brings unlike previous: better special effects (although they are not the best and that subtraction), better plot and a great ending. Jennifer Lawrence turns and more beautiful than ever and even better acting than the previous (looks like the Oscar he hit well), Josh Hutcherson and Liam Hemsworth act better, but no big deal, Donald Sutherland puts you goosebumps as Snow, Elizabeth Banks splendid as usual, and the other brilliant performances (especially Woody Harrelson). The finding: the last sentence says Liam Hemsworth leaves you with a lot of desire to see Mockingjay. The bad thing about the movie: the opening minutes becomes boring. Expand
  36. Dec 23, 2013
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The movie is great. It's not a happy (silly) fairy tale featuring a prince finding a princess and live happily together but a dark society instead. The plot is amazing which follows the book (I think so, I skipped some parts for the book), the acting is good (at least it satisfy me) and the best thing is the theme of the story is not deleted when translating the book to the movie. It still features how dark the society is through comparisons (the Capitol's party and District 12), atmosphere (I hear Katniss's mum started to cry when she heard her daughter is going back to the games through TV) and conversations (the little girl in the tour told Katniss she thought being a tribute is glorious and wanted to join the games when she grew up). These scenes are memorable to me and they really makes me think of the society today. Of course, there are some scenes between Katniss and Peeta/Gale, but the overall message is obvious and memorable. I can't wait watching the last two films. Expand
  37. Dec 27, 2013
    9
    This is one of the best movies of 2013 in my opinion. I found myself intergued from start to finish and wanting more once the film was over. Gone is the shaky camera in combat. The movie follows the book perfectly with only one or 2 notable diferances. The acting is good all around which is necesarry to make a good movie. It is slightly dissapointing how much it feels like the first book/movie. Despite of that short coming it is a fantastic movie
    score
    9.6
    Expand
  38. Jan 7, 2014
    9
    The Hunger Games Catching Fire is an example of cinema done right. I went into the theatre pretty nervous that this movie would not live up to its expectations. The book had so much content that I knew wouldn't make it into the movie that I almost convinced myself before the movie started that it was going to be bad. I was completely wrong. The movie as a whole followed the book pretty well going up into the hunger games. Sadly I haven't finshed the book because I'm not interested In Catnices love triangle being mentioned every page, which leads me to my next point. The movie doesn't force the love triangle stuff down our throats. The acting in all areas was amazing.

    But the movie isn't perfect. There were a few things missing that I think should have been added in the final cut. In the book, we learn how Haymich became a champion of the hunger games. We also learn a bit about the Avox's. These servants of the capitol have been branded traitors, had their tounges removed, and tasked with waiting apon tributes as they get ready for the hunger games. You can see them in the backround of some scenes but as far as the audience knows, they are just random people. These missing pieces dont ruin the puzzel, but they would make it more complete. Plus the Movie made a betrayal seem painfully obvious. The way the actor portrayed his character in a certain scene kinda ruined the surprise. The book did a better job of keeping that secret.

    Overall, despite the few hickups, The movie was spectacular. the arena was beautiful and the special effects looked somewhat realistic. I say somewhat because I have yet to see a movie other than Avatar that nails 3d effects and cgi flawlessly. The acting was great and the story was engaging. Now I knwo the next movie is going to be harder to see because it is the most gruesome of the trilogy, but after seeing this movie I think they can pull it off.
    Expand
  39. Jan 22, 2014
    0
    How is this piece of crap rated 8? The plot makes no sense, the acting is average. The movie itself is an idiotic boring cruel story. Are people really so stupid to enjoy this? It makes me sad...
  40. Mar 19, 2014
    0
    what the hell is this the plot makes absolutely no logical sense they all speck like the editor speed there voices up extremely high oh and wait for this **** when there are fun survival fights they put it in **** pitch black!!!!!! why so i had no idea what was going on all i knew that there was two people trying to fight these beasts from clearly something that is from matrix from where they change things in the arena and why the hell dogs what the **** so wait wait wait you can make anything like a t-rex or a **** mecha but you make dogs what the **** and all the people in the arena are clearly rip offs of characters from one of the best games in the world tomb raider the main boy and girl are clearly laura croft and peter the other geologist and its appoling and the president is the profit from bioshcok infinity and well everyone else is a dochue thus movie is terrible how could anyone **** up a such a good plot like this Expand
  41. Dec 16, 2013
    9
    Definitely the best action movie of the year, its subtle traps in ecstasy voltage, Jennifer Lawrence is doing very well and every time convincing me more as an actress. We definitely expect a splendid party culminated last one of the better designed trilogies century.
  42. Feb 13, 2014
    8
    A major improvement over the first installment. It has a better plot, better twists, more action, and more drama. Above all, it delves more into the setting in which the story takes place, as well the themes behind the story itself.

    It also retains the aspects of the first movie, like the great performances by Jennifer Lawrence and Woody Harrelson, while adding new just-as-great ones,
    most notably the late Philip Seymour Hoffman and Jena Malone. The directing is also very very good.

    Very glad to have watched this movie, especially that i wasn't very satisfied with its predecessor. Looking forward to Mockingjay.
    Expand
  43. Mar 9, 2014
    10
    An absolute masterpiece. It kept me guessing and is filled with tension and emotion. The performances are fantastic and believable. The movie had me on the edge of my seat and constantly questioning things like who to trust, or how character relationships would/will turn out. As someone who has not read the books I have no idea what to expect next from this fantastic series, and the ending has me begging for the next chapter. All in all I found "Catching Fire" to be an improvement in every way on the already fantastic original. It's a movie like no other and I highly recommend that you check this series out. I am completely blown away with how fantastic this movie turned out and I already had pretty high expectations. Expand
  44. Mar 20, 2014
    10
    A wonderful thrill ride of a sequel that vastly improves the first film in every way! As a reader of the book, I'm proud to say I really enjoyed this. Bring on Mockingjay Part 1!
  45. Dec 9, 2013
    6
    This is a sequel to the movie "The Hunger Games", the second in a series of three, after a book trilogy with the same name. I haven't read any of the three books but I saw and liked the first movie. Those who read all three books claim that the second movie is much a better adaptation. That very well may be but I liked the first movie somewhat better. Taking into consideration the movie's genre (Sci-Fi, Action) I admit that it is done well: directing, cinematography and action.
    Watching it for two and a half hours I did not feel bored. But the first movie had more surprises for me, maybe that is why I expected a bit more.
    Expand
  46. Nov 23, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It was better than the first one... but exactly the same as the first one! More complete lack of tension! More non-violent fighting to the death! No blood! More hiding in the jungle for 90% of the time! (at least she wasn't up a tree the whole bloody time). More engineered killer mist/killer monkeys/killer waves! The only real difference between the two is that at the end of "Catching Fire" there's a potential rebellion.. and then the film ends! And then we get to await another money thieving two-part sequel! Expand
  47. Jan 8, 2014
    7
    At the end of the first Hunger Games, we thought we could relax because our two heroes had won the games and managed to finagle their way out of having to decide which one would kill whom. Their threat to commit a double suicide rather than fight each other had led to the games being closed with two winners instead of only one, forcing the director of the games to commit hari-kari to save face. Now the two lovers are back in District 12, and their mandate is to tour all the districts to promote the 75th Hunger Games. However, the Nazi-like President Snow, played by Donald Sutherland, is getting restless and worried—Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) has become a symbol for the revolutionary spirit in Panem.

    Katniss's mockingjay pin has been adopted as the mark of the revolution, and the three-finger salute, the symbol of solidarity, is often raised in her presence. Snow wants her dead, but he fears her enough that he cannot kill her outright. Instead, he announces that the 75th year is a good excuse for a quarter-quell game, where the winners from all the previous 24 years will reunite and once again, fight to the death until there is only one man, or woman, standing. As Johanna Mason (Jena Malone) from District 7 notes, the players thought that after they won the game for their year, they would be rich and safe for life, and instead they have to go through the harrowing experience all over again. Ditto for the audience; it’s emotionally exhausting to have to go through the games all over again.

    This time the simulated reality includes poisonous fog, murderous monkeys, and bloody rain. The new games director, Plutarch Heavensbee (played by Philip Seymour Hoffman), seems to be keen on achieving Snow’s wish to make sure that Katniss is killed during the games. But the plot emphasis in Hunger Games 2 is not the games, even though they are revisited and are almost as unnerving as ever. In Part 2 of the Hunger Games, it is the revolutionary spirit of the people that is the main thrust of the film. President Snow is correct in his assessment that Katniss is a symbolic force to be reckoned with; the people are rallying around her, and the revolution is rumbling.

    The love story between Katniss and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) is at first dismissed as an act that the two devised as a sort of reality television show. Back in District 12, Katniss continues to pursue her amorous bond with Gale Hawthorne, played by Liam Hemsworth, her true love. But there is a twist in the plot when Katniss and Peeta reunite as an affianced couple who may end up having to kill each other at the end of the games. This time the romantic act becomes real.

    Hunger Games is a trilogy, and thus the open-ended finale to this film was unavoidable as we are obliged to wait for Act 3 to finish the story. However, the original Hunger Games did a better job of providing both a satisfactory ending and a lead-in to the next installment, whereas Hunger Games 2 seems to end, quite literally, in mid-air. The performances are strong and the sets are lavish, but much of the plot interest has been generated by the excellence of Part 1, whose mythic ambiance continues to enthrall. The Day of the Revolution is an interesting dystopian theme for Part 2, but the tension of the revolutionary idealism has been somewhat subdued in favor of the repetition of the games, which in this film are not quite as daring, intense, or as purposeful as the first time around. Nevertheless, the themes of social injustice are well executed once again—including the dictatorial suppression of civil liberties, the unacceptable distribution of wealth, and the insanity displayed by the bizarre fashion, make-up, and hairstyles of the extravagantly and absurdly rich.
    Expand
  48. Apr 16, 2014
    9
    Besides from having some dull performances from some supporting cast members, having some unrealistic life-saving coincidences and the occasional lack of logic, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is better than its great predecessor, proving to be bigger and more thrilling and providing a powerhouse performance by Jennifer Lawrence and a fabulous performance by Stanley Tucci. A rare sequel that surpasses it's predecessor, albeit not having the emotional impact of the original. Expand
  49. Jan 1, 2014
    10
    Much better than the first movie and I really enjoyed that one. Unlike the Hobbit that is also showing at this time this movie follows the book fairly closely. I just re-read the series a few months ago knowing that this movie was coming out. I think that the special effects were well done and the acting was above average. I look forward to the third book part one?!
  50. Feb 2, 2014
    8
    Great adaptation of the the world famous teen lit, more so thanks to another great performance by Jennifer Lawrence. The second half went into the same motions, with another dip into the 'arena' but for the first half of the film, we see the start of the rebellion and a surprisingly insightful view of 'heroes' and 'symbols' in such social revolutions.
  51. Jun 13, 2014
    8
    It kept me excited but also provided food for thought. I love how the whole of it reflects back on the viewer... we witness first-hand how seductively entertaining a show like Hunger Games would be. But while watching the show, we get the benefit of seeing through the lies and peaking into the backstage drama, which has more depth in this sequel. The ending surprised me. Recommended!
  52. Jan 2, 2014
    4
    One of the most overrated movies. I don't know what intrigues people about this movie. It is an ok film but nothing spectacular. The first part was better in my opinion but again overrated
  53. Nov 27, 2013
    6
    THE HUNGER GAMES (2012, 7/10) is a harbinger of another monolith box-office knockout with quite different teen spirit from TWILIGHT franchise. Its dystopian milieux strike as a resounding backbone to carry its social onus which is unusual to be seen among its peers. As the second part of the trilogy-turns-quartet (a lame strategy when shifts from the source novel to its cinematic adaption), CATCHING FIRE basically is an amped-up survival battle as its predecessor (with an elaborate overture to dovetail its storyline development), new helmer Francis Lawrence (I AM LEGEND 2007, 8/10; CONSTANTINE 2005, 7/10) barely achieves a middle-of-the-road tactic to fulfill his demanding task.

    Since I tend to divide movie from its source material, I am a piece of blank paper towards the plot and its characters’ ominous destiny, so the great pleasure comes from newcomers (name-checking Sam Claflin and Jena Malone) in the series since it did pique my curiosity to know whether they will survive in the end, both actors are camera-friendly and vividly evoke laughters and empathy. So tracking back to the love triangle, Hemsworth’s part is tapering down quickly meanwhile J. Lawrence and Hutcherson manage to breakout from their asymmetrical relationship, although judging from all levels, she looks like a big sister (and caretaker) to him, but which also accomplishes an unorthodox heroine and hero pair against all odds. Tucci and Banks are as excellent as they could be with their flamboyant antics, while veteran Sutherland and Harrelson are unequivocally underemployed as the antagonist and the mentor respectively, plus the new blood Hoffman doesn’t seem to exhaust too much effort to accentuate the final twist.

    So it all strips down to Jennifer Lawrence’s emotional curve out and out, save her swaying affections towards two boys, her awakening sense as a token of rebellion trudges through a laboriously-designed victories’ tour, which also gives Katniss (passively though) a strong conviction what will become her goal in the chapters to come, the great part of the story has just begun!

    I watched it on an IMAX screen, and the effect is no more than satisfactory, during the game time, the CGI looks cheaper and faker than usual top-notch Hollywood output, the entire hue is also a shade darker in view of its 2D default, one can barely get the full idea what is happening during the high points. Brightness aside, the definition of the images is another disappointing factor. So maybe one crucial reason (my own conspiracy theory) is that the cinemas’ apparatus is not equivalent between here in Shanghai and in USA, where it gained raving reviews, but as far as I am concerning, the technique bloopers are too blatant to overlook, markedly mar the movie for me, but I will keep as loyal as possible for the remaining two successors (both will still be under the tiller of Francis Lawrence), just because Julianne Moore is on board now as a key role, god bless the mockingjay!
    Expand
  54. Jan 25, 2014
    2
    If it wasn't for the stupid commentary my sister and I did through out while watching this, I would have been bored to tears. Needlessly wrong, Cut out a ton of key things from the books that were essential to have, and the acting in this film was below average at best, Mainly because of the poorly written dialogue where it seemed that the actors/actresses took the film far too seriously.

    To say that this is better than the first film is an absolutely joke. Catching Fire flat out sucked.
    Expand
  55. May 23, 2014
    10
    | Great improvement on the first film. A must-see if you’re a fan or want in on the hype! |
    +The emotion of the characters is brought on strong with compassion;
    +Avatar-grade scenery and animals… enough said;
    +Follows the novel very closely, +story is very understandable;
    -Some parts are left out.

    You can find more on this review at http://BLAZONREVIEWS.tk!
  56. Apr 3, 2014
    8
    Catching fire is a movie based on the second book of the hunger games trilogy.
    It actually managed to stay true to the source material even though it could be difficult to follow for newcomers. Some cuts had to be made in order to fit in the movie-time vs book-time but they do not harm the story flow.
    Katniss Everdeen is the main character, surviving the first deadly edition of the
    hunger games and now trying to find a way to elaborate what happened to her while trying to move on with her life.
    What she doesn't know is that her actions are inspiring a revolt in the whole world, so she must decide if obeying the capitol rules or be the "mockingjay" and be the embodyment of the spark of the rebellion.
    The story is captivating from start to finish, new additions to the cast are welcome and well rounded enough to be likable and relatable.
    Main problem is that it ends on a big cliffhanger wich will see its resolutions in the two upcoming films.
    Expand
  57. Nov 23, 2013
    9
    With the sequel being more matured than its first movie as it explores deeper on the theme of the whole franchise and also providing more thrilling edge of your seat action, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire will lead both fans and viewers wanting more.
  58. Nov 23, 2013
    9
    "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" is absolutely fantastic. It's brilliantly acted, powerful, emotional and much more ferociously intense than the first. The directing is smooth, more thought-provoking than the first, and is very faithful to the book. Anyone who loved the first cannot miss out this excellent sequel.
  59. Apr 11, 2014
    10
    I like science fiction. I like post apocalyptic stories. I like dystopian stories. I like smart original stories. I like the Hunger Games. It's a fine story about an Atheist utopia where everyone's happy and peaceful and life is good without gawd.
  60. May 29, 2014
    7
    Once again I liked the pre-games dystopian sequences, but this times the games were more intense and the whole story becomes more complex. I like the fact that the plot moves from hunger games to revolution. Overall, this part is slightly better than the first movie.
  61. Dec 26, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Fino a che questo resta il film di Attila (sì, cioè, di Donald Sutherland nei perfidi panni del presidente Snow), la seconda puntata della saga tratta dai romanzi di Suzanne Collins funziona in modo soprendente per essere un prodotto segmentato su di un pubblico adolescente. La vittoria congiunta di Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) e Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) nell’episodio precedente ha dimostrato che ci si può ribellare alla società un po’ nazistoide basata sui distretti sottomessi a un ferreo potere centrale: il tour della vittoria fa da scintilla per alcuni focolai di rivolta, così Snow (su viscido consiglio del Plutarch di un Philip Seymour Hoffman sottoutilizzato in maniera clamorosa) trova il modo di ributtare nella mischia la ragazza e il relativo compare di sventura con lo scopo di far fuori almeno lei inventandosi una sfida tra i vincitori ancora in vita. Tutta questa parte sostenuta da un più che discreto ritmo e da una sceneggiatura che riesce a coinvolgere anche lo spettatore di passaggio: c’è il consueto contrasto tra la miseria ovvero l’opacità dei distretti e lo sfarzo colorato della capitale, la scelta delle squadre per la preparazione ai giochi, la sfarzosa presentazione al pubblico in televisione sullo sfondo di scenografie (e all’interno di inquadrature) alla Leni Riefenstahl peccato solo che Stanley Tucci abbia meno spazio nei panni del luciferino presentatore Caesar, mentre Cinna (Lenny Kravitz) si inventa per Katniss un vestito ‘ribelle’ che gli costerà caro. Poi iniziano i giochi veri e propri, causando un vero e proprio crollo di interesse: il nuovo regista Francis Lawrence risparmia al pubblico i faticosissimi (per la vista) traballamenti della camera a mano utilizzata dal predecessore Gary Ross, ma si resta dalle parti del videogame di sopravvivenza pieno di effetti, ma con qualche trovata banale (la nebbia, le scimmie), i personaggi degli altri tributi delineati solo in maniera grossolana e persino i dialoghi che paiono qua e là tirati via. Di positivo c’è che questa seconda parte occupa meno di un terzo della durata complessiva e termina quasi di colpo con un mini-ribaltone dopo il quale manca solo la scritta ‘continua’ sullo schermo, ma, si sa, questo il prezzo da pagare alla trasposizione di successi letterari a puntate. A proposito di durata complessiva: due ore e mezza sono un po’ troppe, una bella bonifica di personaggi e situazioni avrebbe giovato al risultato finale, ma in questi casi il pubblico di riferimento non avrebbe perdonato le dimenticanze o le forzature rispetto al testo originale (così, però, una trasposizione di ‘Guerra e pace’ durerebbe almeno dodici ore…). Tocca perciò accontentarsi di una pellicola in cui la regia diligente di Lawrence che però funziona meglio, anche a livello complessivo, di quella di Ross mette per immagini una storia più coerente e attenta alle sfumature della ‘lotta di classe’ rispetto a quella del primo film, oltre a ridurre la violenza che vi serpeggiava in maniera eccessiva: merito di un team di sceneggiatori nuovo di zecca composto da due che non sono gli ultimi arrivati come Simon Beaufroy ("Full Monty", "The Millionaire") e Michael Arndt ("Toy Story 3", "Little Miss Sunshine"). Insomma, nel complesso il giocattolone si fa apprezzare più del suo predecessore e lo stesso devono avere pensato in produzione, visto che regista e sceneggiatori sono stati confermati per il capitolo finale (che, accidenti alle strategie di marketing, arriverà in due puntate). Ovviamente ci saranno anche tutti i personaggi chiave della vicenda con i relativi volti: da quello bello e intenso di Jennifer Lawrence a quello ruvido dell’ex ‘assassino nato’ Woody Harrelson (il cui Haymitch ha qui ridotto il consumo di alcool) per finire a quelli con meno presonalità dei giovani protagonisti maschili anche se il nuovo arrivato Sam Claflin (Finnick) alza un po’ la media. Da notare, infine, la furba colonna sonora: oltre alla partitura di James Newton Howard, ecco spuntare Coldplay, Of Monsters and Man, The Lumineers (tutti sui titoli di coda), The National e molti altri, inclusa Patti Smith. Expand
  62. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    Outstanding! I love the books and I love this movie! Jennifer Lawrence brought it, as well as Woody, Donald Sutherland, Phillip Seymor Hoffman, Sam Caflin, and Josh Hutcherson. Although, the person who really stole the show was Jenna Malone as Johanna! She was fantastic! I can't wait to go see it again!
  63. Dec 9, 2013
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Making comparisons, it’s undeniable that “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire” has overcome the first film of several possible ways. It is by far the best movie adaptation I’ve ever watched. Director Francis Lawrence (who thankfully also took charge of the two parts of “Mockingjay”) followed to the letter the most important events of the book. I believe that if Francis would've taken the whole saga, the first film would be even more rewarding for all of us.

    The implementation of the scenes of the tour, followed by the act of the Peacemakers’ violence in District 12 (Gale can say so!), Katniss finding out she has to return to the arena, the training, the scenes inside the arena, with the fog, the monkey mutts, and the jabberjays (I loved that scene). I just can’t describe how amazing this movie is.
    Expand
  64. Nov 24, 2013
    9
    It may be decidedly more grave than expected, but with such sobering thematic elements in play, the gravity is just the point. "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" is a thrilling, brilliant, and carefully acted sociopolitical sci-fi action epic.
  65. Feb 10, 2014
    9
    The second instalment has more drama, conflict, engaging characters, and a vicious arena. A way is found to return the champions to the battlefield. But nothing is really what it seems to be. There are layers under which the different characters are working.

    Catching Fire takes the conflict steadily away from being everything about who survives in the arena to the larger issue, which is
    the tyranny of the Capitol. Katniss, for the sake of the audience, doesn't know much about what is being plotted in secret, mainly because she isn't the most discrete and patient of people.

    Gale Hawthorne is developed further before the focus once again returns to Katniss and Peeta. Both of them must form alliances if they hope to have one of them survive. Finnick and Johanna breathe some life into an otherwise stagnant narrative. They are both cocky and witty and peculiar, and talented in the art of killing. Beetee is skilled with the use of electricity. Haymitch is much more cunning and resolved this time around. He seems to have a purpose he is keeping from both Katniss and Peeta.

    President Snow wants Katniss to make the people of the districts believe that it was true love that made her want to eat the berries alongwith Peeta at the end of their previous expedition into the arena. People are taking her deathwish for a display of defiance. For her part she wants to cooperate so they would leave her and her family in peace. She just wants to live the rest of her life recovering from the mental damage she has suffered from killing all those people. But it isn't working and Snow finds another way for quelling the hopes of the inhabitants of the districts.

    Hoffman plays the new gamemaker hired by Snow. He is tasked with arranging Katniss's death so the whole issue about the mockingjay would go away. He lives up to his name in his last performance of his life. Sadly we won't be able to see his character in the next two instalments.

    The stakes are higher than the lives of both the characters. It is freedom that is the goal here and the movie ends in a way which would leave the viewers in no doubt about where the story is headed. The promise is large and I hope that they deliver. I know the last book was a bit underwhelming, so some modifications would have to be made to keep the following two sequels interesting. The theme discussed is the same as before_ human suffering though poverty, hunger, war and persecution.

    They did everything they could have with this instalment. The budget was bigger. The set design, visual effects, costumes and weapons more impressive. But the reason the movie succeeds is they also went bigger with the characters. They felt more lively and real. If this instalment is any indication, the next two films are going to earn huge sums of money too. Catching Fire has turned the franchise very lucrative.

    9.5
    Expand
  66. Mar 24, 2014
    5
    Kind of funny that the Hunger games of this movie only happen just over 80 minutes in. Plus this movie's version is ALLOT tamer and shorter than the first movie.

    For the most part this movies real focus is the politic and the aftermath of the first movie. Storytelling and character development of the central characters is done well enough. However, there is little development of side
    characters, which makes me wonder why did they bother to have so many?

    The shaky cam of the first movie is gone, but then again there is little need for it either.

    Overall:
    Catching Fire does have a bit more plot and a better overall story arch than the first movie. It expands on the universe and leaves you wanting more (which is coming.) However, in the end Catching Fire failed to really impress and felt more like this should have been made into a epilogue for the first movie and a prologue to the next. On it's own, it mostly feels like filler that easily could have been condensed and could have used some better overall writing.
    Expand
  67. Feb 7, 2014
    8
    Whatever you say I am not a big fan of this franchise. I did not like much the first installment other than a decent entertainment. So this was another 'let it go' movie from me. But when the time came to see it, I was a little surprised of being better than the first. The second hour was good and before one was a mild slow. The real interest is the, follow-up movies from here on. The end of this part created a curiosity for the next movies of the series. Looks like it would be very interesting with big changes in story than first two.

    The movie series supposed to be a trilogy, but you know it tasted big commercial success that mean big buck in filmmakers pocket. In 2013 this movie was the highest gross from north America. So like 'Deathly Hollows' and 'Breaking Dawn' this franchise following the same path by breaking the third volume into two. Whatever, I am expecting the third and the fourth movies 'Mockingjay part I and II' would have more exciting than previous movies with many twists and turns.

    It was so sad to hear about Philip Seymour's sudden tragic demise. His best parts are yet to come in the next movies of the movie series. The franchise told they wrapped most of his portions of the last two volumes and now they decided to make minor changes in his character. That's good to hear, hope he it will be an unforgettable show from the great actor.

    The end scene before the credits roll the logo of 'Catching Fire' changes into 'Mockingjay'. It was awesome, I just sensed some great is ahead. So like teenagers, it interested me and created curiosity. Looks like I got reason to watch 'Mockingjay' movies.

    7.5/10
    Expand
  68. Jun 16, 2014
    8
    I love the story and the special effects are good. The only bad side to this movie is that sadly we've been here before with the first film. I think I sort of went in knowing what this film was going to be like. I wouldn't be surprised if the last two movies are scored lower than the first two. I think the first one is the best. Whenever a new movie comes out you don't know what to expect, will it be good, or will it be bad? No one knows until someone sees it. The one thing I've seen over the years is in all genres especially in action and horror films the special effects have gotten way better. Catching Fire is an awesome sequel, but if there's one Hunger Game film to watch over and over again, it's without a doubt, the first film will always be the best. Expand
  69. Nov 22, 2013
    10
    Catching Fire is a massive improvement over The Hunger Games in every way. It is shot and directed better on the whole, the action is clearer and the acting is much improved. The Spectacular Now is my favorite movie of the year, but this is a damn close second and still a 10.
  70. Nov 24, 2013
    5
    As with many 2nd installments this falls short. Only "The Empire Strikes Back" ever got better. The first half is decent but then it falls apart. Doesn't live up to the book either...
  71. Nov 24, 2013
    6
    Seems like Hunger Games is becoming the next Matrix trilogy. Interesting and original first movie, followed by sequel that continues the story where it should be left at. Catching Fire has it moments but essentially it is watered down version of the previous one.
  72. Jan 16, 2014
    3
    My first guess is Jennifer Lawrence is regretting having signed the contract for these films now, as we've seen her in much better characters in Silver Linings and American Hustle, where she really had an opportunity to show how much she's good.

    The film wants you to be concerned with Panem's troubles, but you just can't get involved. The advantage of the first one was that the Games
    themselves were crude and you didn't know what to expect, but in this one you know how it all will go already and you fail to be transported in the tributes' shoes. As for the ending, it was a crystal clear sign that this is just a transition film, a lot like The Two Towers was. My suggestion to filmmakers is to stop splitting films and make a very long one, be it 7 hours.

    Just poor, not worth the money or the time, not interesting, not involving.
    Expand
  73. Nov 22, 2013
    7
    Catching fire knocks the original off the podium. Two things that need to be mentioned. 1. The visual effects were stunning. & 2. The actors. So many great names in this film! Woody Harrelson, Philip Seymor Hoffman, Donald Sutherland, and Jennifer Lawrence. So good, a great ensemble. That being said, I felt like there wasn't much excitement. As well as there wasn't much of Caeser. (The talk show host)
    None the less. I would go see it in theatres for he effects. Can't wait for the next two films.
    Expand
  74. Jun 11, 2014
    8
    First of all I'd like to start out saying that I think this second one was better than the first. What amazes me the most about this is that the movie/story/book/author/director were able to keep the whole series going with this book. Them thinking of a way to keep it going in such a clever fashion amazes me. This I think is better than the first because not only did it portray the story better but it did it in a way that gets me excited and suspended. Movie over book, but only for this second one, catching fire, for the first it would have had to be a whole different conversation. Expand
  75. Jul 12, 2014
    8
    Consensus: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is as good as it should be, it's exciting, thrilling and well acted. 83/100 [B+]

    The film begins as Katniss Everdeen has returned home safe after winning the 74th Annual Hunger Games along with fellow tribute Peeta Mellark. Winning means that they must turn around and leave their family and close friends, embarking on a "Victor's Tour" of the
    districts. Along the way Katniss senses that a rebellion is simmering, but the Capitol is still very much in control as President Snow prepares the 75th Annual Hunger Games (The Quarter Quell) - a competition that could change Panem forever. I watched this film on my computer, because i'm not a huge fan of these books and this franchise.

    The plot still interesting and the acting still excellent here. I mean, it is a film made it to please the fans of the book, was also made ​​to raise tons of money and also was made to continue with another sequel, to please more fans and make more money, haha. I'm not complaining, that's what this franchise is, it's a franchise with quality, exciting moments and lots of fun for a young audience. Jennifer Lawrence is the star of the film, she gives her 100%, the other performers are good too but Lawrence is definitely the only character that we care about. Sam Claflin and Josh Hutcherson are just a plus.

    Throughout the film there are lots of enjoyable violence and memorable action sequences, Catching Fire is a very effective sequel, this director knows how to make this more exhausting, thrilling and atmospheric. These unlucky characters have to deal with angry monkeys, dangerous fumes, etc. The screenplay is terrific, though at times is predictable, the chemistry between these characters is truly believable. Overall Catching Fire is exciting, violent, full of social commentary and more themes from its source material that will please fans of the book, fans of the franchise and casual viewers, i will watch the next film of this franchise of course. [B+] Check out my blog: www.memobosque.blogspot.mx Twitter: @MemoBosque
    Expand
  76. Apr 26, 2014
    2
    I liked the original Hunger Games, but this second instalment was very disappointing. A lot of action at night, so we can't see what's happening. Too much of the movie was spent in the pre Hunger Games bit. The actual Hunger Games action seemed too fake. It was action for actions sake, with no continuity or reason. Talking about continuity - every time you see Catniss, she has a different number of arrows in her quiver! Acid smoke that just stops, then magic water! Too ridiculous. I won't be watching the next instalment. Expand
  77. Mar 16, 2014
    6
    Worse than the first one but still a decent movie. The first hour was interesting and really made you think but after that it turned into something everyone has already seen before. The game, not much different and not any better than the game in the first one. Visuals are great and Jennifer Lawrence as usual is wonderful but in the end it is slightly above average movie with an 62.6 out of 100.
  78. Feb 5, 2014
    3
    Catching Fire is another prime example of how Hollywood can truly bring out the worst in an adaptation of an already mediocre piece of writing.

    The story picks up a few months after the events of the original, with the lifeless Katniss Everdeen and laughably stupid Peeta Milark, continuing across the country on the victory tour of the previous Hunger Games.

    To think that they can now
    label lead star Jennifer Lawrence as an Academy Award Winner is criminal to boot, but the fact that any merit could be sung to her appalling performance as Katniss, makes me question the very stability of peoples comprehension and/or impression of what quality writing and quality performances look like when they are melded into one.

    It's hard to rely on the supporting cast, when the majority of the male roles are there just to make teen girls salivate, and the few female roles that are not Katniss are obviously there for pure sex appeal, to keep those teen girls teen boyfriends interested through this near two and a half hour excuse for a film.

    Miraculously, the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman, with only about twenty minutes of screen time, offers salvation for every scene he appears in.

    I've asked friends that loved the film, what did they actually love so much about it. One told me, that she LOVED the special effects.
    But in a year that has given us Gravity, I don't think a film like this can even be viewed as a success in the SFX department.
    Especially not with those bloody monkeys anyway…

    There are a few slow pan shots at the beginning of the film that would make you think otherwise, but before you know it, we're back to obnoxious closeups with shaky-cam included.

    As I have said before, upon reading the books, despite the poor writing, I would have been happy knowing that the targeted audience would be reading something which touches on some darker geopolitical messages that are not present in other acclaimed books for the age group.
    The fact is though, that no one cares about that when it comes to the big screen. No one's asking themselves the big questions like, "Is the Hunger Games something that can be justified at all?" or "Why do they doubt the perseverance of humanity?". No. The big question echoing around the theatre, is "OMG, who is hotter, Peeta or Gale? lol #whatahottie #teamGale"

    A simply awful film.

    A 3 out of 10.

    Jack Valentine
    Expand
  79. Nov 24, 2013
    9
    There are not many surprises in "Catching Fire", the second in the Hunger Games trilogy, and that's good because it means the usual stellar acting of Jennifer Lawrence, maybe the best actress in Hollywood today, supported by a fine cast, with Donald Sutherland getting a more pronounced role as the evil President Snow. He truly casts a menacing shadow over the movie, just like in the book.
    What that means is that those who normally prefer books to movie adaptations will be again pleased to see that "Catching Fire" does follow the book very closely. Jennifer Lawrence shows herself to be remarkably versatile and approachable. When in a few scenes she becomes very upset, you have no trouble believing her grief, so believable her performance. I predict a long and brilliant career for her.
    The effects are great, the settings brilliant. Even for those who read the entire trilogy, one is already eagerly awaiting the final chapter "Mockingjay", that, like the first two installments, will have movie goers lined up outside their favorite theaters like no other movie has done in recent memory.
    Expand
  80. Nov 24, 2013
    8
    All aspects of the movie completely improve upon the first film. Once again Jennifer Lawrence's flawless performance captures the whole film and leaves me wanting the next installment.
  81. Jan 18, 2014
    8
    The Hunger Games is now a powerhouse to behold. With Jennifer Lawrence's new found talent in brilliant acting she can hold this film on her back, and make the franchise as good as the books. Catching Fire was probably one of the most vital books in the trilogy and this movie holds up well. The new director change caused for a more balanced and thought out film. Jennifer shows that shes not another bland Kirsten Stewart and she will need to grow on this in the coming films. 8/10 Great. Expand
  82. Apr 19, 2014
    8
    Catching Fire has improved significantly upon the original Hunger Games film. Now we are presented with less shaky cam and more depth. However, the ending is still too deus-ex-machina-esque...
  83. Feb 9, 2014
    7
    A hell of improvement since the last movie, but it still got a boring start & a low tempo, as the previous movie had. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire got a beautiful story, and the movie itself is very well made and it got some interesting and cool stuffs that you haven't seen in movies before, and the actors couldn't have been more awesome actually, and I really admire Donald Sutherland & Philip Seymour Hoffman's spectacular performance in this movie, but I also love the drama in this movie!

    The bad thing about Catching Fire is the beginning, it wasn't unique at any way, a little boring & lengthy actually, and it continued to be lengthy for about one hour, until more things started to happen. The ending was beautiful and unique, but I felt that something really was missing in the ending, and it was quite stupid.
    My conclusion of Catching Fire is that it's a beautiful movie, but it got many deficiencies, such as the opening scene, the tempo, lack of action & that the movie is a little boring at some places, and I think that they could have done much more in this movie! The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is watchable, but it might not be recommended for those who likes movies with action, but it's a great movie overall.

    The Hunger Games: Catching Fire gets a 7/10
    Expand
  84. Jan 24, 2014
    7
    I didn’t care for the first film but, at the behest of many friends and a girlfriend who loves the books, I gave this one a chance and actually found myself enjoying the experience. While I’m still not blown away by this franchise, I did think the story was much more interesting this time around and the introduction of new, more interesting characters, really helped get me into it. Granted, I still have some issues like the action isn’t that satisfying, Hutcherson isn’t a very memorable actor (and it play havoc on his character) and a lot of Jennifer Lawrence’s performance came out like overacting to me BUT I still think it was a decent film. Expand
  85. May 12, 2014
    7
    Well i finally got around to watching The Hunger Games: Catching Fire and i have to say that it was more entertaining then the first installment of the franchise. Sure i liked the first one but i felt it lacked in a few areas so that's why i ended up giving it only a 6.5 out of 10. This movie improves were The Hunger Games lacked the directing acting, action, plot, Special effect, all better in this one. Its always good when a sequel can out do its predecessor it gives you a sense that the later installments can only get better and were this movie is leading to its looking like its going to be that way.

    Just like the first movie Catching Fire takes some time to get into the actual Hunger Games which i was a bit disappointed by but at least the first half was of the movie was more enjoyable this time around also its more so of a set up for things to come. Luckily the action scenes weren't in "shaky-cam" mode thanks to new director Francis Lawrence so we were finally able to see the kills something the first movie desperately needed. Still though the lack of action scenes was really disappointing i was hoping that there was going to be more of them especially because that was a big gripe for people with the first movie. The Fog scene was really cool but after hearing about the blood rain i wished we could have seen that.

    The main cast was all good as before so nothing really to catch up on them with but i do have to say that i fell in love with Jena Malone's character Johanna Mason she was a awesome kickass chick cussing on camera and getting naked in front of Katniss, Haymitch, and Peeta she stole the show for me really. Sam Claflin as Finnick was also a nice surprise because i thought that he was going to be the big douche this time around but i was wrong. Now we come to the late great Philip Seymour Hoffman his part in the movie is great no doubt about that it just sucks that he wasnt in the film more but im glad to see that we are still yet to see the rest of him.

    Overall i give it a 7.7 The end scene with Katniss crying then getting serious was awesome and definitely a great tone setter for the next movie.
    Expand
  86. Nov 24, 2013
    8
    Catching Fire got me, I liked it A LOT. But Peeta and Katness love story is kind of boring, except for the part that isn't real, that one is really cool. The movie is good, not awesome.
  87. Nov 24, 2013
    9
    A good sequel to one of the most beloved franchises of books and now movies. (I didn't read the books)
    I truly loved the first one. It was a very different experience I had at the movies and I won't ever forget it. After the end, I couldn't wait to see the sequel. I was highly anticipating it for the upcoming year and I couldn't wait to see it.
    First off, with the negatives. I felt
    disappointed though towards the end. The fast-paced scenes that were sometimes filler just felt random and out of the ordinary. On top of that, their were many instances in which I felt why a character would change for just a random reason without thinking. Like it didn't make sense. Such as the part on which the leader of the soldiers when they enter District 12, didn't even know who Katniss and Peeta were upon his arrival. Instead, he just seems as if they aren't big at all. It felt strange these parts that really didn't drag me into the world of the ex-US. Some of the writing was very cheesy and stupid but I quickly forgave these parts for the reasons in which these movies are so popular.
    The characters are a huge part for me in any story. The new and old characters felt stronger than they were before. The writing was on par mostly. The scenary and environment looked fantastic and had that feel of actually what it would look like. The rebellion scenes and the brainwashing government really had me captivated. The action was thrilling and impossible to guess how the story would go throughout the whole movie. It is the definition of a blockbuster hit most of the time. The thing that really got me was the acting of Jennifer Lawrence. She steals the show yet again on top of President Snow who you could never really guess the next trick he was going to pull out.
    So in the end, Catching Fire wasn't as strong as the first one but was a blockbluster hit that everyone should at least watch.
    Expand
  88. Ed_
    Jun 11, 2014
    10
    Briefly: waited for a movie like that one for a long time.

    This Hunger Games film is much more about than killing. It's about love, deception, cruelty, politics, deception and humanity in a great mix. I'm extremely interested in politics and humanity, so this movie is absolutely for me. I enjoyed every minute of it.
    Actors are perfect, they know how and when they have to show emotions.

    Effects are also enthralling.
    All in all, creators had a lot of work with this film but achieved an unbelievably incredible sequel.

    Keep up the good work!
    Expand
  89. Feb 6, 2014
    2
    Catching Fire is set a year after Katniss and Peeta survived the 74th Hunger Games; their actions in the Games sparked the fires of a rebellion throughout the districts. President Snow tries to quell the rebellion by using Katniss and Peeta and re-entering them in the 75th Hunger Games Anniversary alongside other veterans of the Hunger Games. Catching Fire has the premises of an amazing, dramatic and action-packed movie yet seems to fall flat when it’s meant to be at its best.

    Don’t be mistaken, Catching Fire is not a bad movie and is a definite improvement over the Hunger Games. The larger budget and the directing skills of Francis Lawrence greatly improve the overall quality of acting and special effects seen in the movie. Yet dramatic moments such as the apparent deaths of a leading character is made stupid looking by Katniss’ weird crying face and the fact that the audience is not foolish enough to actually believe they would have killed them off. Jennifer Lawrence’s acting, along with some of her co-stars; falls flat at key moments of the movie even during the supposed Katniss actually falls for Peeta scene is stale. Then again I compare actors to Liam Neeson and the whole cast of Lord of the Rings, so maybe I’m setting too high a bar.

    I’ve talked about some of the negatives now onto the positives; Sam Claflin as Finnick Odair is easily my favourite protagonist who competes in the Hunger Games. While he is not the best actor in the movie, that award goes to Woody Harrelson, he is the only one in the Games who you actually see fight other contestants and the mutated monkeys. President Snow the movies main antagonist is an easy competitor to Haymitch’s best actor spot; he may not have many lines in the movie but the ones he does he delivers perfectly and even just the close ups of his face show more emotion then Jennifer Lawrence’s entire performance. The special effects for the movie are a definite and obvious improvement from its prequel, which looked so fake it made Giant Shark vs. Mega Octopus look real.

    Unfortunately I can’t go on with the good points of the movie because there are none left. So I will return to the negatives; plot twists. There is one major plot twist that is probably the most important thing in the entire movie, which I saw coming from a mile away, you can tell who good guys are and who the bad guys are in the movie because of the way they dress. If they look like they fell through Louie Spence’s wardrobe they are most likely the bad guys, the exception being President Snow. The ending of the movie is as weird as the way the people dress in the Capitol; it just seems to stop without any feeling of an actual conclusion. The Grey did the same thing but managed to pull it off because the Grey is a great movie, which just shows that that kind of ending does work and can make a movie excellent.
    Expand
  90. AGK
    Dec 26, 2013
    5
    (kissing noises) sorry I was kissing a girl a million times over which leads me to thew cons of this movie, it's a action sci fi sort of movie but there is so much kissing that it made me nearly fall asleep and it's long as hell but it wasn't all bad, when it actually got to the action it was great! seeing all that fighting kept me from drifting away into sleep, the action was just so good that made halo look like a and the futuristic stuff looked cool too! overall the movie is ok. Expand
  91. Nov 27, 2013
    5
    THE HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE just never caught fire with me. Loved the first film but this just felt like a tepid remake. More of the same and I really missed so many of the intriguing sub-plots. We also totally lost the moral of a society that has children killing other children. Again, CATCHING FIRE is simply tepid. Not bad but just middlebrow.
  92. Nov 24, 2013
    7
    The movie is only decent. The casts are ridiculously different from the novel ones and Francis Lawnrence fails to bring the thrill of the original novel. Still fun and worth the money if you enjoyed the novel
  93. May 10, 2014
    7
    very much darker than the last book and film director francis lawrence knew what to leave in the book it is impressively directed and wonderfully written by the creator of the dark world as well as great acting this is one film the cast and crew were very careful with
  94. Jan 22, 2014
    8
    A pretty decent follow up to the original, with less 'tween-spirit' and more mature themes. Again we see a lot of young kids being killed without really caring about their characters, however it does leave me wanting to see more.
  95. Jan 15, 2014
    8
    this is a great movie that i found followed the book pretty well, i found that it had a entertaining story and an ended the EXACT same way that the 2nd book ended. If you liked the first hunger games movie, you're gonna like this one.
  96. Nov 22, 2013
    6
    The visuals for Catching Fire are amazing, I enjoyed the books and thoroughly loved the concepts but I didn't enjoy the movie as much as I had hoped. The acting from the majority of actors and actresses was bland and lacked personality so the movie seemed to droll on.
  97. Nov 23, 2013
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. When the first movie came out, I knew they would overhype them, and I didn't come out of the movie impressed, but neither was I disappointed. For this movie, I expected it to be about the same or less, as the 2nd book was my least favorite of the two.

    Boy, was I wrong!

    Things aren't well in the world of Katniss. She just wants to live, and that's about it. As a result, she never thinks about the significance of the actions that she makes. As a result, she now finds herself as the face of rebellion, and President Snow is none too happy. She must now act for the Capital or watch everyone she loves die because of her actions in the first movie.

    The movie does a magnificent job of showing how oblivious Katniss was to the problem's she created. Jennifer Lawrence did an excellent job showing how aloof Katniss wanted to be in this whole affair as she slips into insanity. As Katniss comes to realize how shallow and pathetic is, she begins to realize how important Peeta is just like the books. The other character's in the cast developed appropriately, showing how Katniss' actions have changed their lives and shows the cruelty of the Capital and it's extravagances much better than the first movie.

    The weakest part of the 2nd book, the Victory Tour wasn't rushed over, and that came to be a good thing. It allowed them to really emphasis the fact that her train ride is never ending, and that she will always suffer for her actions.

    Surprisingly, the movie was quite funny as well. Caesar's infectious laugh had me going every time, and the nonchalance of the Capital culture to their own cruelty in their gaudy culture was emphasized more than the first, which made the situation of Katniss and her loved ones more significant.

    The arena was very well done, and really helped give life to some things that I couldn't do with the arena she was left in. The movie did a better job, in my opinion, of grasping the tension in the arena that the book did.

    All in all, an excellent movie and better than the first.
    Expand
  98. Nov 24, 2013
    9
    The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. A movie for which the expectations are set high. Yesterday I had the chance to finally see it, after a long wait since part one. From the moment the movie started, till it's end, I was completely sucked into the movie. When it ended, I actually had to realise I was sitting in the cinema... From beginning till end, the movie is full of action, tension with a great story! I thought the movie had just begun when it actually ended.
    I think Jennifer Lawrence Josh Hutcherson and all of the cast created a masterpiece!
    In my opinion I would definitely recommend it to anyone who likes action/scifi movies.
    As far as I know, I just can't wait until the 20th of november 2014 for the first part of The Hunger Games: Mockingjay
    Expand
  99. Nov 24, 2013
    10
    This new installment in the Hunger Games saga volunteers itself as tribute to excellent pace, drama and ingenuity. My experience with the film left me thinking I really knew Catniss and the world around her. This film also has a rare feature in that it speaks to almost all audiences with an emotional resonance not seen in most major motion pictures. The beginning and middle of the film, which do not take place in a fantastically designed and imagined Hunger Games arena are somehow far more emotionally engrossing than the conclusion of the film, which still held to a high standard of pace and drama.

    While I did not read the book, I found the story of this film fairly taught and thought out. The characters were far above expectations, even the new faces and the special effects and CGI of the film gave it an excitement and drive rare in movies like this. Catching Fire is red hot.
    Expand
  100. Nov 25, 2013
    4
    Read the books several times after seeing the first movie for which I thought was slow and forgettable. Best scene was when Rue died (actual tear came). Jennifer was good but really didn't do anything aggressive enough like a Nikita type character. Her co-stars, Josh and Liam, were/are not on her acting level, hell Josh isn't even tall enough or good looking enough to be believable as a "love interest.' So, I ended up watching Battle Royale--the original. Had hopes of changes for Catching Fire. Like ebbs and flows of being caught up in the movie; pulling for Jennifer's character and her relationships. Show more intrigue in the politics with the Capital and the Districts. It's a YA book with depth that's not shown in the movie. Josh Hutcherson's character in the book, to me, is an Artiste with charm and striking flares of independence, but he plays him as "he" sees him: a wuss. He seems a bit insecure about his role (height difference, acting level, looks) which shows in his bland performance. Liam has no big role so it doesn't matter. Which districts did not believe the kids? One day of training? Director's decision: Do it like the book (reminder: it costs too much to add depth and meaning) and the fans will like it regardless. Lionsgate: Let's make monay! The Hunger Games Catching Fire is still forgettable but as boring as the first movie. Advantage: Book Trilogy. Expand
Metascore
75

Generally favorable reviews - based on 47 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 42 out of 47
  2. Negative: 0 out of 47
  1. Reviewed by: David Denby
    Nov 25, 2013
    50
    Yet, despite the good acting, the middle section of the film, set at the Capitol, is attenuated and rhythmless — the filmmakers seem to be touching all the bases so that the trilogy’s readers won’t miss anything.
  2. Reviewed by: Susan Wloszczyna
    Nov 22, 2013
    75
    With each on-screen chapter, the poor girl from District 12 continues to fulfill her destiny as an inspiration and a rebel fighter. She is but one female, but she's the perfect antidote to the surplus of male superheroes out there.
  3. Reviewed by: Ian Buckwalter
    Nov 22, 2013
    79
    Everything that felt clumsy in The Hunger Games has been improved upon here. That's most apparent in the clarity of the action, but it also extends to how efficiently the film establishes so many new ensemble members.