EA Forums - Banner

Catching Fire. What did you think? NO SPOILERS PLEASE

2Next

Replies

  • ecneralc
    3182 posts Member
    edited November 2013
    ecneralc wrote:
    ecneralc wrote:
    Well the movie is no where near as good as the book. 1 in the book they give a brief history about the time it's based in, it's in the future in North America after plagues, famine, war, and natural disasters have basically destroyed it. From the ashes of North America panam is born with 13 districts the capital is built on the western side of the Rocky Mountains which is why the districts lost the war 74 years previous and district 13 was destroyed. 2 there's a lot more that happens in the arena the injury peeta sustains is so bad that he needs an artificial leg when they win. The dog creatures that attack them near the end are genetically engineered from the DNA of the other tributes that were killed in the arena, they have the hair colour and eyes some facial features so that when you look at this dog that's about to rip out your throat you're like omg that's the girl I killed from district 6. You also find out why the mocking jay is such an offensive symbol to the capital.

    Thank you! The history sounds interesting, and I didn't know the part about the dogs. That's a nice touch, especially if it goes into the emotional side of having to kill someone to survive, and then they're still there attacking you - makes the whole situation seem hopeless. That was one of the parts I liked about the film - though it was less "I think that's been done well", and more, "I WANT one of those". Not the dogs. The magical command centre where you can terraform and throw in animals and stuff. :)

    You're welcome. I like the movies for the simple reason that they did change it from the book but kept a lot of it the same. The books are all from catniss' point of view, where the movies bring in the point of view from the capital kinda explaining some of the things that happens in the book. You can guess that was the reason when reading it, but it's only a theory till proven correct. Also to your point of the dogs Catniss freaks out when she sees one of the dogs looks like rue the girl she had befriended in the arena.

    That makes a lot of sense, I remember that part of the film.

    If I wanted to give the series in general another chance, would I be right in thinking you'd recommend reading the first book over seeing the second movie?

    They did a better job on the second movie I think there's still some stuff that they left out that would've been neat to see but it wasn't really important to the main story. The stuff they left out was a little bit of history for haymitch the mentor of peeta and catniss and other winner from district 12. Then a little bit of history on the arenas. Overall though second movie was pretty close and was worth watching. I personally always recommend reading the book over the movie though, there's always something more you can get out of a book then the movie.
  • MaxxSpider
    5465 posts Member
    edited November 2013
    well i don't think it is possible for it to be worse than the first one
  • Arlandria606
    519 posts
    edited November 2013
    mwdalton wrote:
    I would say the writing in the books were much better than Twilight, but not as good as Harry Potter. If you disliked both of those series, though, you're gonna have a bad time. :lol:

    Twilight never had a chance with me. Writing style aside, the issues with Bella as a character (sexism, self-deprecation, a complete lack of goals in life beyond a boyfriend, the fact that she's clearly a Mary Sue for a writer with zero self-esteem) put me off before I even considered reading them. I did watch the first film though, once, taking notes, purely so that I could more solidly argue against people claiming that Bella is a positive role model.

    I'm not going to touch Harry Potter with a 50-foot pole. I've had quite enough for one week...!

  • MaxxSpider
    5465 posts Member
    edited November 2013
    mwdalton wrote:
    I would say the writing in the books were much better than Twilight, but not as good as Harry Potter. If you disliked both of those series, though, you're gonna have a bad time. :lol:

    Twilight never had a chance with me. Writing style aside, the issues with Bella as a character (sexism, self-deprecation, a complete lack of goals in life beyond a boyfriend, the fact that she's clearly a Mary Sue for a writer with zero self-esteem) put me off before I even considered reading them. I did watch the first film though, once, taking notes, purely so that I could more solidly argue against people claiming that Bella is a positive role model.

    I'm not going to touch Harry Potter with a 50-foot pole. I've had quite enough for one week...!

    Could you please tell me where you got a 50 foot pole
  • Arlandria606
    519 posts
    edited November 2013
    MaxxSpider wrote:
    mwdalton wrote:
    I would say the writing in the books were much better than Twilight, but not as good as Harry Potter. If you disliked both of those series, though, you're gonna have a bad time. :lol:

    Twilight never had a chance with me. Writing style aside, the issues with Bella as a character (sexism, self-deprecation, a complete lack of goals in life beyond a boyfriend, the fact that she's clearly a Mary Sue for a writer with zero self-esteem) put me off before I even considered reading them. I did watch the first film though, once, taking notes, purely so that I could more solidly argue against people claiming that Bella is a positive role model.

    I'm not going to touch Harry Potter with a 50-foot pole. I've had quite enough for one week...!

    Could you please tell me where you got a 50 foot pole

    I got 50 1-foot poles and taped them together. Got the idea from Friends.

    Giant_Poking_Device.jpeg
  • MaxxSpider
    5465 posts Member
    edited November 2013
    MaxxSpider wrote:
    mwdalton wrote:
    I would say the writing in the books were much better than Twilight, but not as good as Harry Potter. If you disliked both of those series, though, you're gonna have a bad time. :lol:

    Twilight never had a chance with me. Writing style aside, the issues with Bella as a character (sexism, self-deprecation, a complete lack of goals in life beyond a boyfriend, the fact that she's clearly a Mary Sue for a writer with zero self-esteem) put me off before I even considered reading them. I did watch the first film though, once, taking notes, purely so that I could more solidly argue against people claiming that Bella is a positive role model.

    I'm not going to touch Harry Potter with a 50-foot pole. I've had quite enough for one week...!

    Could you please tell me where you got a 50 foot pole

    I got 50 1-foot poles and taped them together. Got the idea from Friends.

    Giant_Poking_Device.jpeg

    nice
    i might have to do that as well
  • jacko_9997
    532 posts Member
    edited November 2013
    I was surprised by a lot of the comments here. I didn't think it was that amazing. I though it was OK. That was a bit harsh because I can maybe stretch my vote to GOOD but I left it at ok.

    In my opinion the first movie was better than the second, even though the ending of the first movie was predictable. When the second movie ended though I was just like a mix of: hmmmm..... Huh? And what that's the ending?

    Just my inion of course :-)
  • MaxxSpider
    5465 posts Member
    edited November 2013
    jacko_9997 wrote:
    I was surprised by a lot of the comments here. I didn't think it was that amazing. I though it was OK. That was a bit harsh because I can maybe stretch my vote to GOOD but I left it at ok.

    In my opinion the first movie was better than the second, even though the ending of the first movie was predictable. When the second movie ended though I was just like a mix of: hmmmm..... Huh? And what that's the ending?

    Just my inion of course :-)

    well if you think the first was better then this movie must really suck because the first movie was terrible
  • skippermeh
    296 posts
    edited December 2013
    jacko_9997 wrote:
    I was surprised by a lot of the comments here. I didn't think it was that amazing. I though it was OK. That was a bit harsh because I can maybe stretch my vote to GOOD but I left it at ok.

    In my opinion the first movie was better than the second, even though the ending of the first movie was predictable. When the second movie ended though I was just like a mix of: hmmmm..... Huh? And what that's the ending?

    Just my inion of course :-)

    This is exactly how I felt. In my opinion the first movie had a lot more of the arena in it (which I liked about it), whereas the second one has too much build-up and not enough arena time.
  • ecneralc
    3182 posts Member
    edited December 2013
    skippermeh wrote:
    jacko_9997 wrote:
    I was surprised by a lot of the comments here. I didn't think it was that amazing. I though it was OK. That was a bit harsh because I can maybe stretch my vote to GOOD but I left it at ok.

    In my opinion the first movie was better than the second, even though the ending of the first movie was predictable. When the second movie ended though I was just like a mix of: hmmmm..... Huh? And what that's the ending?

    Just my inion of course :-)

    This is exactly how I felt. In my opinion the first movie had a lot more of the arena in it (which I liked about it), whereas the second one has too much build-up and not enough arena time.

    Is obvious you did not read the books because that's pretty much how the book ends, also the second book is the build up for the third book. The arena isn't as important as what's happening in the other districts. People I have talked to who have read the books all like the second movie more then first movie.
This discussion has been closed.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.