|
DrVenkman posted:
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
I'm actually really glad that they cut the film into two parts. Sure it was a cash grab, that's unarguable, but it allowed the film to have a lot of slow, contemplative scenes interspersed with the action. The pacing was pretty solid I thought, and a few scenes in particular were very well done, the night raid on the tribute building inter-cut with Finnick's speech was particularly good and incredibly suspenseful. Over all I liked it a lot, and I am excited for part 2.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 08:50
|
|
|
Talorat posted:I'm actually really glad that they cut the film into two parts. Sure it was a cash grab, that's unarguable, but it allowed the film to have a lot of slow, contemplative scenes interspersed with the action. The pacing was pretty solid I thought, and a few scenes in particular were very well done, the night raid on the tribute building inter-cut with Finnick's speech was particularly good and incredibly suspenseful. Over all I liked it a lot, and I am excited for part 2. Yeah that's basically how I've felt about two-parter finales, e.g Harry Potter, Twilight. It doesn't help that last novels are the longest ones, and yesss of course it's also a cash-grab, but I truly enjoy soaking in every single minute detail that are crammed into finales. I like the slow simmer and the suspense that a split-up narrative can afford. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. It's a little too cynical to think otherwise, imo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:It bothered me that Katniss was saved from ever having to kill somebody who wasn't already established to be a bad guy, and that in fact circumstances saved her from ever making a questionably immoral act. If you really want to introduce young adults to the general "messed upness" of the world, then you do that by putting your good characters in a situation where they must do evil. There are so many contrivances in the novels where Katniss is saved from making a truly hard decision that it becomes really distracting. A little late in responding to this, but I just caught up with this thread on the heels of seeing MJ1. Did you read MJ? If so, you missed a pretty important plot detail that makes our herione a little immoral. Katniss kills a woman in cold blood when they are in the Capitol. It's towards the end of the book. It's been a while since I read it, but Katniss does acknowledge that she killed an innocent person.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
Talorat posted:I'm actually really glad that they cut the film into two parts. Sure it was a cash grab, that's unarguable, but it allowed the film to have a lot of slow, contemplative scenes interspersed with the action. The pacing was pretty solid I thought, and a few scenes in particular were very well done, the night raid on the tribute building inter-cut with Finnick's speech was particularly good and incredibly suspenseful. Over all I liked it a lot, and I am excited for part 2. The thing is, Mockingjay Part 1 is a perfectly good ending to the series, and would work fine as a standalone film if it weren't for some unecessary expository recaps of the past two films. ("Remember that time you got stung by insanity bees?" "Oh, right! I totally forgot about that!") They're the only thing really holding it back from total perfection. I liked the last two well enough, but it's almost ridiculous how much better Mockingjay is. If anything, some sort of big climactic battle will cheapen it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 09:35
|
|
|
Then you're in luck, because there is no big climactic battle. There's supposed to be, but nearly everyone dies on the way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 19:01
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The thing is, Mockingjay Part 1 is a perfectly good ending to the series, and would work fine as a standalone film if it weren't for some unecessary expository recaps of the past two films. ("Remember that time you got stung by insanity bees?" "Oh, right! I totally forgot about that!") They're the only thing really holding it back from total perfection. I remember reading Mocking Jay and thinking this would be a great stopping point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
Did anyone who DIDNT read the book think this movie was narratively satisfying? How did you feel this movie was a thematic or narrative conclusion to the gauntlet thrown at the end of the first two movies? I'm just not seeing it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
I read the books before I saw any movies. So I'm not the person you want to answer your question. But why would you expect a Grand Conclusion in the third movie out of four?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:I read the books before I saw any movies. So I'm not the person you want to answer your question. I didn't, I was just responding to this: gohmak posted:I remember reading Mocking Jay and thinking this would be a great stopping point. SuperMechagodzilla posted:The thing is, Mockingjay Part 1 is a perfectly good ending to the series, and would work fine as a standalone film Perhaps it's been too long since I saw the second movie so I've lost track of the characters. But my general issues were: -I don't see much progression in where Katniss ends up at the end. We knew from the start she would join the resistance. -I'm not invested in Gale as an actor or character, and considering his hometown was annihilated it's not surprising he's part of the resistance. -I find the commentary on propaganda ("propos") superficial. Perhaps if Katniss were somehow misleading people for the greater good there'd be some ethical issue? But in act 1 we see mass executions across Panam. There's no moral grey area. Her main concern seems to be it's not what she's good at. -What did work: hoping that Peeta would make it through OK. But they foreshadow the brainwashing when the SWAT team is able to escape no problem, and Gale even says FUNNY THEY LET US GO. That's fine, though. That was my favorite part. Just too little, too late. -I grew very tired of the characters absorbing information either after the fact (visiting ruins), seeing cut-aways, or things happening when characters were asleep / underground. So overall the movie felt very static in both execution and in emotional development. There were some clunker lines and iffy acting but the first one has the same issue. I found the first two movies more entertaining, and never worried too much about the "message." The series seems to be pivoting to deliver a capital-M "message" about politics that it's not equipped to deliver. But perhaps that's fine for a series of YA books.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
Cocoa Ninja posted:Did anyone who DIDNT read the book think this movie was narratively satisfying? I've never read the books. I thought this movie was the best of them so far. I don't really see why you are having trouble accepting the fact that these people need to bide their time and resources to fight The Capitol is a "narrative departure" from the first two.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
I liked Mockingjay: Part 1 a lot myself, and I haven't read any of the books. I didn't expect it to be a movie about a PR campaign but I was okay with that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
I've not read the books and I wasn't too invested in the first two films but I decided to see this for shits and giggles. Did the "shoot a jet with an arrow" actually happen in the book? Because that was probably the stupidest thing in the whole movie, it felt like something that belonged in some cheesy direct-to-video action movie or something. I know, I know, I shouldn't sperg about it but still when that scene happened I was just like "no way, no loving way did that just happen"
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2014 10:41
|
|
|
This movie was pretty good and i enjoyed the political thriller elements. That said, it is extremely forgettable. No one can even find anything to talk about in this very thread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Aces High posted:Did the "shoot a jet with an arrow" actually happen in the book? Because that was probably the stupidest thing in the whole movie, it felt like something that belonged in some cheesy direct-to-video action movie or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Jaramin posted:This movie was pretty good and i enjoyed the political thriller elements. That said, it is extremely forgettable. No one can even find anything to talk about in this very thread. The target audience is a little younger and more female. That, coupled with the fact that it's not a Bad Movie (like Twilight) prevents much discussion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Jaramin posted:This movie was pretty good and i enjoyed the political thriller elements. That said, it is extremely forgettable. No one can even find anything to talk about in this very thread. There is lots of stuff people have brought up that I'd like to respond to--like Katniss's passivity, or the lack of moral grayness people keep bringing up, or the idea that the story line is weakened by Katniss's not having to kill anyone who's not a baddie--but none of it can really be discussed without spoiling the final movie. This movie sets up a lot of themes that will be resolved in the last one, and I think people are starting to pick up on those themes a bit without really understanding where they're heading--but there's no way to really get at the heart of them until everybody's seen the final installment. I think a lot of us just prefer to wait until we can all discuss that stuff on the same page. I don't think Part 1 was a great movie, but once you've read the books/we see the final film, you'll realize that there's a lot of set-up in it that you probably don't pick up on if you don't know what's coming, and that will make more sense in retrospect. In that sense, Part 1 did what it needed to do. aslan fucked around with this message at 01:41 on Dec 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Just took my niece to the new one, having seen none of the others. It was really good! Just a propaganda war during a civil war, little real fighting, it was very mature, given the target audience. Still decompressing it in my head but it's def. a movie worth seeing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
For reasons I don't totally understand, I always end up seeing these films with my parents. I haven't read the books, but I think this movie was my favorite of the three I've seen. Less "insanity bees" and more PTSD. I liked the breathing room and some of the scenes, like the bunker being bombed, landed really well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
I'd rather have a flamboyantly dressed Stanley Tucci tell me about insanity bees than have Jennifer Lawrence say lines like, "hey guys, I just watched a cat chase a flashlight. I now better understand how I'm a mere puppet of the resistance." In case anyone forgot that that was a real line delivered with a straight face in this movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
Cocoa Ninja posted:Perhaps it's been too long since I saw the second movie so I've lost track of the characters. But my general issues were: The beauty of Mockingjay 1 is that it skips right over the standard bullshit of a character gradually realizing that revolution is necessary. At the start of the film, everyone is on that side already, and the conflict is over how best to serve the people. The other refreshing point is that there is no big plot twist where we find out 'the revolutionaries are just as bad' or whatever. That'll inevitably be a big letdown in the next one, unless they handle it very well. Moral ambiguity is garbage compared to a rigorous, compelling unambiguity. There's enough little quirks on this film to keep you thinking (like Gale being digitally erased from the video, even though his arrow also took down the plane - or Effie's look of unease when Coin delivers the final speech) but they amount to Chewbacca not getting a medal in Star Wars. It's not a condemnation, but an example of the type of human frailty these revolutionaries are trying to overcome. The film painstakingly lays out the case that Katniss' love for Peeta is both an enormous liability (because she places his life before the good of the people) and her unique source of strength (because she is able to empathize with 'the enemy' to the extent the others cannot. That's what's perfectly summarized in the last shot: the good sort of ambiguity, sent in by the villain as a weapon to disrupt. It should be embraced as a challenge, and doesn't need a clear answer. See, the real twist is that there are no action scenes. We don't see the fleet deployed, and there's no big shootout at the end. That's genuinely subversive. Rewatch the film and pay attention to how Gale is used. He's in a ton of scenes, but always shot like an extra - fading into the background. That's his character. Mockingjay 1 is really good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 06:12
|
|
|
Cocoa Ninja posted:I'd rather have a flamboyantly dressed Stanley Tucci tell me about insanity bees than have Jennifer Lawrence say lines like, "hey guys, I just watched a cat chase a flashlight. I now better understand how I'm a mere puppet of the resistance." It may actually be worse in the book. “Crazy Cat becomes a metaphor for my situation. I am Buttercup. Peeta, the thing I want so badly to secure, is the light. As long as Buttercup feels he has the chance of catching the elusive light under his paws, he‘s bristling with aggression. (That‘s how I‘ve been since I left the arena, with Peeta alive.) When the light goes out completely, Buttercup‘s temporarily distraught and confused, but he recovers and moves on to other things. (That‘s what would happen if Peeta died.) But the one thing that sends Buttercup into a tailspin is when I leave the light on but put it hopelessly out of his reach, high on the wall, beyond even his jumping skills. He paces below the wall, wails, and can‘t be comforted or distracted. He‘s useless until I shut the light off. (That‘s what Snow is trying to do to me now, only I don‘t know what form his game takes.)”
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
aslan posted:There is lots of stuff people have brought up that I'd like to respond to--like Katniss's passivity, or the lack of moral grayness people keep bringing up, or the idea that the story line is weakened by Katniss's not having to kill anyone who's not a baddie--but none of it can really be discussed without spoiling the final movie. This movie sets up a lot of themes that will be resolved in the last one, and I think people are starting to pick up on those themes a bit without really understanding where they're heading--but there's no way to really get at the heart of them until everybody's seen the final installment. I think a lot of us just prefer to wait until we can all discuss that stuff on the same page. Yeah basically we've all watched half a movie and it's entirely pointless to discuss anything about it until we've watched the second half and seen how it all plays out. Which will be about a year from now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
Drei posted:It may actually be worse in the book. Wow that is some poo poo writing, even by YA standards. As in, I would expect that to be graded harshly as a 10th-grade Creative Writing assignment
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 15:24
|
|
|
Not seen the movie but have read the books. It's highly funny how every interview with Dormer has a question about "MEDIA AND PROPAGANDA IN THE REAL WORLD".
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Natalie Dormer can say whatever she drat well pleases. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 07:09
|
|
|
I couldn't take the movie seriously anymore when she shot down a jet with a bow and arrow. I mean think about that for a second. vvv- give it a few more seconds. The Shep fucked around with this message at 08:00 on Dec 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 07:40
|
|
|
Cmdr. Shepard posted:I couldn't take the movie seriously anymore when she shot down a jet with a bow and arrow. edit: then I thought about it a little longer, and it occurred to me that shooting down a jet with a bow and arrow is actually awesome, in a way that shooting one down with a RPG, for example, wouldn't be. And that matters given the whole propaganda thing. Ersatz fucked around with this message at 07:54 on Dec 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
John Rambo did it in 1988. Hawkeye blew up a helicarrier in 2012
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 10:20
|
|
|
If your main character's only thing is that she's an archer, and the best archer ever in the history of all stuff, then I'd be pretty ashamed if she couldn't shoot down a jet with an arrow. Your young adult fiction main character, no less.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
You should watch Three Kings where Ice Cube blows up a helicopter with a football.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
Also it wasn't a real jet, it was some sort of drone bomber thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:You should watch Three Kings where Ice Cube blows up a helicopter with a football. The football was just the delivery method, but yeah, this happens and it rules.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
Slim Killington posted:The football was just the delivery method So was the arrow it's not like she shot down an f16 going at mach 5, it was essentially a neat helicopter. It's just like hunting a bird, but the bird is huge and can't turn.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
Rocksicles posted:John Rambo did it in 1988.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
senae posted:it's not like she shot down an f16 going at mach 5, it was essentially a neat helicopter. It's just like hunting a bird, but the bird is huge and can't turn. Aah, see now I can buy that explanation. I forgot that the air vehicles act more like an Osprey instead of an F-35 or a Harrier jet
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 04:24
|
|
|
Aces High posted:Aah, see now I can buy that explanation. I forgot that the air vehicles act more like an Osprey instead of an F-35 or a Harrier jet They don't exactly need supersonic bombers when nobody else is even supposed to have weapons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
Martman posted:Yeah, but women lack the upper-body strength necessary to perform similar acts. It's just science. Well i don't agree withy that, but i would like to see JLaw shoot an arrow out of the Rambo III 90lb compound bow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 09:51
|
|
|
the English were killing fully armored French knights at range with 150+ pound bows back in the 1400s, i don't see how that's very impressive. the Mongols shot 100 pound bows from horseback. of course some weakling like Rambo would only be able to do 90
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
Yeah but 150 pounds 600 years ago was less than it is today due to weight inflation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 02:52
|
|