Reviews

Quite a few reviewers seem to be taken by the historicity of this movie. It's true that many of the details are correct - but it is also true that many others are wildly incorrect. The most egregious one is the romantic liaison between Justice Jackson and his assistant. I guess that the producers introduced the romantic element for the sake of a wider appeal, but the fact is that, in light of the actual events, this looks ridiculous. Which is a shame, for the movie would have been far more valuable without that silliness. It's mostly because of this that I don't think that it deserves more than 5 points. The bright sides are Brian Cox's and Michael Ironside's performances, and also, but to a lesser extent, Christopher Plummer's and Matt Craven's. Alec Baldwin delivers the same kind of underwhelming performance that he usually does, and Jill Hennessy does whatever she can with her inane and fictitious part.

In summary, it could have been a good movie, but it is just a decent one.

I am assessing this as a standalone movie. As such, it is clearly unfinished and underdeveloped. It's not that we are left with a foretaste of things to come; we are literally left in the middle of it. If this were the pilot episode of a new series then I would be giving it very high marks, for it looks promising. As a standalone movie, the end is utterly underwhelming and intolerable. Other than this, the notion of parallel universes where the people are the same, but their personal circumstances are wildly different, depending on each universe, is just not believable. In universes that have evolved even slightly differently, and continued to do so for some time, individuals in one universe would most likely not be present in the other. Still, it's an interesting concept, and this has the potential for a good, entertaining TV series. As a movie? I don't think so.

Let me qualify my summary: It's not any worse than the movie that launched this series, period. Trapped in a plane in an intercontinental flight, the choice was THG:M1 or movies I had already watched. So I selected it. I had not seen THG, but I had heard good things about it. I was not expecting a life- changing experience, but something entertaining. Boy, was I wrong. This movie is a life-changing experience, in all the wrong ways. Not only was it unable to relieve the intense boredom of a long haul flight - it made it worse. This movie has not plot, makes no sense, is ridiculous from beginning to end. There is no saving grace to it, not even Miss Lawrence, who seems to be lost in the movie herself. As for actors like P.S. Hoffman, J. Moore and D. Sutherland, one wonders why they acquiesced to get involved in this brainless trash - I doubt they need the money (albeit you never know.) In order to make sure that it was not the lack of knowledge of previous films in the series that was spoiling the experience for me, I made a point of watching them, even if cursorily. I watched the first one, and that was enough. The Hunger Games is the most ridiculously hyped and overrated series of movies ever. Addressed to teenage public, this series seems to assume that teenagers are collectively brainless and stupid. This series is an insult to intelligence and discrimination.

This is, without a doubt, one of the most ridiculous movies I have seen in a long time.

Let's start with the core subject: dystopian societies have been explored in many movies before, and this one does not add anything new of substance. In addition, the society depicted is thoroughly inconsistent internally - advanced technology, but still digging for coal?

The imagery: It's easy to believe that many members of a society are brainless and ridiculous, but assuming that they would control the society is preposterous. Not at all believable.

The dialog: Quite silly, especially at the beginning.

The naming scheme: Giving Roman empire names to bad guys comes across as juvenile and unsubtle. The names of the downtrodden masses are just silly. Peeta?

The camera: The director seems to be one of those under the impression that shaking the camera during action scenes contributes to realism. It does not. It just makes many in the public dizzy, gives them a headache, and makes the scenes confusing.

The script: Silly and discombobulated.

The underlying social critique: Come on! This has been done many times before, and far more competently. It's so transparent and obvious that ends up being - yes, ridiculous.

The acting, without being great, is acceptable. Miss Lawrence is fine, and, albeit pleasant to look at, she is not the beauty goddess that Hollywood has been peddling for the last three years. Alas, it is difficult to believe that she would become infatuated with the one-dimensional, boring and wimpish Peeta.

I imagine that, for the most part, this is a movie (like the book it is based on) addressed to naive, immature and shallow teenagers, who will probably leave the theater under the impression that they have watched a deep, life-changing movie. I'm sorry, but it is not. It's puerile, predictable and, mostly - ridiculous.

For a sci-fi movie from the 50s, it is not really that risible. There is suspense, decent special effects, and plot that is not downright silly. There are two items though that subtract value from this movie in a very substantial way. First, the romantic subplot. This is totally irrelevant, adding nothing whatsoever to the movie. In fact, the romantic interludes are big nuisance and a distraction. Second, the way in which the top scientist is portrayed. As it happens all too often in movies, even these days, the guy is nothing but a sanctimonious, arrogant and dogmatic asshole. I can't help but wondering where the Hollywood people got this stereotype; having met lots of scientists myself, I have come across a (precious?) few that were indeed assholes, but not in the ridiculous way portrayed in this movie, but in more subtle and insidious fashions. In addition, the scene in which the secretary/girl reads the notes of the scientist in front of everybody is utterly ridiculous, bearing in mind that the scientist himself was present, but apparently too tired to do so himself. Oh, and finally, that of the idiotic journalist is a character that would not had been missed had he not been there.

After reading the reviews, all of them uniformly condemning the movie as one of the worst films ever, I felt curious. Surely it can't be that bad? Every movie has a saving grace - anything. So I decided to watch at least bits and pieces of it. And, you know what? The reviewers were absolutely right. This movie is so bad, that I find it difficult to believe that anyone could have devoted any time to making it. I mean, had you gathered together a few of your friends and started shooting with your home camcorder at your neighborhood's pond, without any planning or foresight, you would have come up with something better than this piece of garbage. There is absolutely NOTHING about this movie that can be, even remotely, recommended. It's not even in that it's-so-bad-that-it's-good class. If they took it seriously, I feel embarrassed for all those who participated in making this movie - just as I felt embarrassed watching it for, how can anybody make something so entirely devoid of any redeeming qualities?

After reading the reviews, I was expecting for this movie to be an epic bore to match The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I have to say I was very pleasantly surprised. This is a very enjoyable, very well made, movie. I don't think it will ever become a sci-fi classic, but it is, without any doubt, a movie to be recommended.

I won't go into the special effects, for with a $200M budget, special effects are bound to be top-notch - as they are. I found the acting competent all right, and watching a gorgeous woman like Lynn Collins on the screen is a feast to the eyes. Unlike many critics, I thought that the story was cogent and easy to follow; I fail to understand why so many of them seem to think that it is somewhat bewildering.

All in all, this is a highly commendable family movie, which I expect to watch every so often over the years.