Tweet
I enjoyed this one. I was favorable towards the first movie, with some reservations, and then thought the 2nd movie was only so-so. But I liked how this movie approaches some depth to the society and greater issues that underly the story that is driving this great fictional world. It would be easy for Suzanne Collins, after having the tournament be the relative focus of the first movie and some of the second, to have a superficial and not-so-serious understanding and presentation of the great civil war that is breaking out in the 3rd. But this film approaches it pretty well, and related issues.
I definitely appreciated the look at "information" and "propaganda" relating to insurgencies and fascist governments. When a government descends into tyranny, singlehandedly making massive sweeping changes through executive mandates, that government believes that if it tells the people something, over and over and over, the people will not only believe that it is true, the line itself BECOMES true. The government treats the people as stupid, and subordinate to the ruling government, and that any problem does not lie with the government or its policies. All problems lie with the people just not UNDERSTANDING and RELYING upon the government, and if only they will listen to the ruler, who just needs to talk even more and tell the storyline again and again, the eventuality must be none other than mass deference to the ruling government and its control. So how do the people fight against this information/propaganda essential to a government turning towards tyranny? When this pushback by the people reaches the breaking point, and enters armed conflict against the government that portends to be caring for its people, how does information warfare integrate into this new face of the struggle?
This disc is also encoded in Atmos. It's nowhere as clear as John Wick, but was still good quality on my 7.1 system. For those with vertical Atmos channels, there were several scenes that would have exploited that full Amos feature.
I'm still very against this trend as of late, in the film industry, to break up latter books/stories in a series into 2 or more separate films, mostly to make more money. Yes, it may make more room to include details from a book's story, but (1) it's not always necessary, (2) some of these films end up filling up the extra time with stuff NOT from the book (i.e. Hobbit), (3) the story pacing does not match earlier films in the series when it's doubled into two films, and (4) really, it's not necessary. There's nothing wrong with epic films, other than often requiring a bathroom break from the viewer in the middle. Can you imagine "Lawrence of Arabia Part 1", to be followed by a totally separate Part 2 film released a year or more later?
Oh, and I thought Philip Seymour Hoffman was integrated well into the film. I'm curious how much had to be shifted or edited after his death. Will be curious about the same thing in Part 2.
Overall, I'll go with :4: out of :5: on this one. Looking forward to Part 2.
I definitely appreciated the look at "information" and "propaganda" relating to insurgencies and fascist governments. When a government descends into tyranny, singlehandedly making massive sweeping changes through executive mandates, that government believes that if it tells the people something, over and over and over, the people will not only believe that it is true, the line itself BECOMES true. The government treats the people as stupid, and subordinate to the ruling government, and that any problem does not lie with the government or its policies. All problems lie with the people just not UNDERSTANDING and RELYING upon the government, and if only they will listen to the ruler, who just needs to talk even more and tell the storyline again and again, the eventuality must be none other than mass deference to the ruling government and its control. So how do the people fight against this information/propaganda essential to a government turning towards tyranny? When this pushback by the people reaches the breaking point, and enters armed conflict against the government that portends to be caring for its people, how does information warfare integrate into this new face of the struggle?
This disc is also encoded in Atmos. It's nowhere as clear as John Wick, but was still good quality on my 7.1 system. For those with vertical Atmos channels, there were several scenes that would have exploited that full Amos feature.
I'm still very against this trend as of late, in the film industry, to break up latter books/stories in a series into 2 or more separate films, mostly to make more money. Yes, it may make more room to include details from a book's story, but (1) it's not always necessary, (2) some of these films end up filling up the extra time with stuff NOT from the book (i.e. Hobbit), (3) the story pacing does not match earlier films in the series when it's doubled into two films, and (4) really, it's not necessary. There's nothing wrong with epic films, other than often requiring a bathroom break from the viewer in the middle. Can you imagine "Lawrence of Arabia Part 1", to be followed by a totally separate Part 2 film released a year or more later?
Oh, and I thought Philip Seymour Hoffman was integrated well into the film. I'm curious how much had to be shifted or edited after his death. Will be curious about the same thing in Part 2.
Overall, I'll go with :4: out of :5: on this one. Looking forward to Part 2.
Comment