The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) Review

The Amazing Spider-Man

The summer of 2012 has proved to be an extremely divisive time for movie fans. “Brave” has had a similarly mixed reaction to that of the first “Cars” movie, “Prometheus” has people debating fervently whether it is ambitiously successful or complete bunk, and now “The Amazing Spider-Man” has split the line between two groups: camp Raimi and camp Webb. Sam Raimi fans hold his original movies close to their hearts (with good reason, barring the mediocre but not terrible “Spider-Man 3”), while many others believe that director Marc Webb has successfully restarted the franchise on more proper footing. As I walked into the theater, I contemplated over which side I would land on, unsure about whether this new film would end up as a successful reworking or tired remake.

While it retreads similar ground in the origin story that the 2002 original movie did, the movie takes on a slightly different tact by throwing in the element of Peter Parker’s parents and by spending more time with the characters leading up to the point of Uncle Ben’s death (at this point, if you didn’t know that, the joke’s on you). Rather than the Green Goblin/Norman Osborn, we have Dr. Curt Conners, a scientist at Oscorp (Osborn is still very much a figurehead in the background) who is working on a formula for regenerating body tissue, especially in the hopes of getting back his lost arm. While Peter is being bitten by a radioactive spider and then exploring his newfound superpowers, Conners must test the formula on a human in order for it to be used on the ailing Osborn. In a desperate move, he tests it on himself, and the lizard D.N.A. in the formula enhances his body to the point where it takes over and turns Connors into a monster.

There are many more character connections, plot threads, etc. that can be discussed, but that would take up more space than needed. Along the way, Peter catches the attention of Gwen Stacy, who is enamored with his good-hearted nature after standing up to a school bully. With Webb’s previous film being “(500) Days of Summer,” it should come as no surprise that the relationship and chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone is exceptionally done. Their sharp and playful banter provides the spark of life that raises them above the pairing of Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.

Garfield does an incredible job of juggling Peter’s impossibly awkward and nice demeanor with the inner torment he holds because of his parents abandoning him. He sometimes lashes out at others, and the majority of the film is about him learning to use his Spider-Man powers for the good of others rather than just his personal vendettas. The theme of Peter figuring out his “identity” and his character arc that runs through the plot provides the compelling backbone for the film that distinguishes it from the original.

Dr. Connors is also searching for something, but it brings him down a more dangerous path. Connors/The Lizard follows in the tradition of the “Spider-Man 2” interpretation of Doc Ock as a sympathetic villain, as his endgame plan is not entirely malicious. In fact, once he figures out how to grow back his missing arm, Connors wants to share his miraculous discovery with others in the world that suffer from defects. Of course, we still want Spider-Man to win out in the end because Connors’ good intentions are twisted and warped, but it fleshes out the character with more intriguing layers underneath his scaly exterior.

Although Webb’s approach to the action doesn’t have the zany energy that Raimi brought to the table, he has an eye for creative angles and spider-like choreography to keep viewers on their toes. There’s still room for improvement though, as a funny but incomprehensibly shot fight in a subway train proves. It also helps that while he takes on an overall darker tone to the material, a sense of humor is maintained throughout thanks to Spider-Man’s quips and the ever-reliable Denis Leary as Gwen’s police captain father.

When taken as a whole, “The Amazing Spider-Man” never reaches the heights that “Spider-Man 2” did. It’s not as smoothly constructed, with multiple points where the editing begins/ends scenes at awkward times, and has sections around the middle that tend to drag. Add to that James Horner’s uneven score, which doesn’t establish a theme worthy of a hero like Spider-Man, as well as being painfully bad in one scene that comes off like a cheap horror movie. However, the elements are certainly there for a superior sequel (comic fans know what’s coming with Gwen and Osborn involved), and I would argue that it establishes a stronger franchise footing than the 2002 movie. With Spider-Man fans split down the middle on their preferred version, this new iteration will have to pull out the big guns with the next installment to win everyone over.

3.5/4

Prometheus (2012) Review

Prometheus

“Prometheus” is a damn tough movie to write about, namely because it’s still jostling in my brain days after seeing it. It’s not a confusing movie to follow, but I want to see it again to make sure I understand certain details correctly. It’s an “Alien” movie that’s also not an “Alien” movie. It wants to combine both the philosophical aspects of its original story with the body horror gross outs that come with the franchise. It wants to get these story threads up and running while at the same time clearly leaving some of them to be explained in a continuing sequel. How do I begin to approach a film that I definitely think is good, but still has me debating about it in my head?

Right from the get-go throws in a whopper of a concept: that the beginnings of human life on Earth originated from extraterrestrials of another world. After scientists Elizabeth Shaw and Charlie Holloway find cave drawings with matching star maps that point to one planet, the Weyland Corporation agrees to fund a space expedition to that planet and possibly learn about humanity’s start. What they find there astounds them, although something more sinister and dangerous is waiting to happen.

It’s heavy stuff, and I won’t deny that “Prometheus” doesn’t address most of these at length as the films divisive reception has pointed out. While some more explanation definitely could have gone down, I’m not sure that was entirely the films intent. There are a couple points where the characters ask whether it’s right to find all the answers to mankind, and whether it is worth answers that may not be entirely satisfying. The android David, who is played by the excellent Michael Fassbender and easily the most interesting character, asks why he was built by Weyland. Charlie replies, “Because they could.” David then further asks, “How would you feel if that was the reason why you were made?” This goes back to that old adventure story adage about cursed treasure that some things were never meant to be found.

This is not meant to be a cover I’m making for all of the movies unexplained pieces. There is a line between ambiguity and vagueness, and “Prometheus” treads over the wrong side of the line at times. Some explanations can be easily inferred (one drastic action of a character gets some light after a late movie twist), while others are just plain ignored. What I love about the movie though, even if things don’t entirely line up, is its sheer cojones within a Hollywood blockbuster. That a modern day sci-fi blockbuster could be made where the focus is more on the big ideas and actual science fiction writing rather than grand action is quite amazing in its own right.

Yes, the second half eventually gives audiences the excitement that they want, but it’s done with such style and panache by director Ridley Scott that the shift never felt jarring or that it overwhelmed the movie. Make no mistake though, while I believe that “Prometheus” is NOT a horror movie overall, there are multiple scenes where I was squirming. The standout surgery scene is filled with tension and suspense, and recalls the classic chestburster scene from the original “Alien.” The famous alien being that most people recognize is not at the heart of the story (although it does figure in the story in some ways), and Scott and his visual effects designers have created some really creepy and inventive looking new creatures to fill the void.

Complaints about the lack of character development honestly perplex me, as I thought the main characters had just the right about of attention. Idris Elba’s Captain Janek has some well-placed comic relief moments, Charlize Theron’s Meredith Vickers is revealed to be a little more than just a cold person, and Noomi Rapace’s Shaw is a very sympathetic protagonist who isn’t just a replica of Ripley from “Alien.” As I said before though, Fassbender is far and away the best of the bunch, proving his worth as one of the most reliable and dynamic actors of this generation. However, there are a large number of tertiary characters that are merely blank faces and should have been whittled down to a reasonable number instead of being figures in the background.

All in all, “Prometheus” is both a pleasing return to form for director Ridley Scott after several duds, but at the same time could have felt more complete with some tweaks and slight additions. As Scott has proved in the past, his director’s cuts of his movie are for the most part improvements on the theatrical releases, and that seems like the perfect opportunity for there to be a smoother, more fully formed film to exist. I wasn’t disappointed in what I got, although my time to reflect has evened out my reaction.

3/4

Top 10 Scariest "Alien" Franchise Scenes

Top 10 Scariest "Alien" Franchise Scenes

Before I pump out my "Prometheus" review (I know, I'm not exactly a timely writer), I have been curious about what I thought were the scariest moments in the "Alien" movies, which really turned into a list of the scariest moments from "Alien" and "Aliens," with a dash of "Alien 3" for some variety. Don't expect anything from the silly "Alien Resurrection" or the shoddily made "Alien vs. Predator" movies though.

10. Infested colony- "Aliens"

This is the point where we learn that "Aliens" is not merely going to be a retread of "Alien" with guns. After a long stretch of walking through deserted corridors in the colony, the marines eventually come across this bizarrely creepy living hive, with bodies adorned all over the walls with petrified screams on their faces.

9. That's Inside the Room- "Aliens"

The numerous monster movies that followed "Aliens" have made this moment rather predictable for virgin viewers, although its hard to top the subtle use of the beeping motion tracker as a suspense device. The moment of silence as Hicks goes to take a peek leads into a wonderful shock moment before descending into utter chaos.

8. Space Jockey- "Alien"

I don't care if everyone calls them Engineers now thanks to "Prometheus," because I still consider them Space Jockeys (as Ridley Scott once called them). Before "Prometheus," the Space Jockey was one of the greatest unanswered mysteries of cinema. That moment where Kane, Dallas, and Lambert walk into the room, accompanied by Jerry Goldsmith's eerie score, and come across this extraterrestrial is filled with both wonder and uneasiness, especially once we question why there's a giant hole in its chest. Now that's how foreshadowing is used to the best effect.

7. First Alien Appearance- "Alien"

The first appearance of the alien in its full form is also one of the best. It's an alien monster of the likes that we had never seen before, with it's phallic shaped head, mutated killer tongue, skeletal body, and mysterious lack of eyes. But seriously, screw Jones the cat. That sneaky kitty deserved it much more than Brett.

6. Cornered with the Facehuggers- "Aliens"

The facehugger was certainly a thing of grotesque imagination in "Alien," but it didn't really have much to do. With this fantastically confined sequence from "Aliens" where Newt and Ripley are locked into a room with two of those things, we learned just how lithe, cunning, quick-footed, and relentless they can be when let loose in the wild. Even when Hicks manages to pry its tough tail from Ripley's throat, the feisty thing is strong enough to fight in his hands.

5. Ashes Speech- "Alien"

There's no alien in this incredibly well-written scene, just the android Ashes troubling fascination with the beast. His description of the monster as a "perfect organism" is both ironic and chilling at the same time. "I admire its purity," he said.

4. Newt Trapped- "Aliens"

The last half hour of "Aliens" is one of the most relentlessly intense third acts in action movies that I can think of, but this moment halfway through the act puts the kabosh on all others. We're already on the edge of our seat from the battle in scariest moment #9, and then James Cameron throws another element our way by trapping Newt underneath a walkway for Ripley and Hicks to cut through, while listening to that incessant motion tracker beeping as an alien gets closer and closer.

3. Face to Face- "Alien 3"

"Alien 3," by and large, is not a very scary movie. It has some great mood and atmospheric moments thanks to director David Fincher, as well as a fine climatic chase, but nothing outright scary...except for this scene. Ignoring the badly done special effects on the alien in the previous shot, the following one where it's right up on Ripley's face is unspeakably terrifying, with the hissing, drooling alien aided by Sigourney Weaver's very believable performance.

2. Chestburster- "Alien"

A classic horror movie scene that I'm sure you've already read a lot about already and needs no further explanation.

1. Lambert's Offscreen Death- "Alien"

This scene perfectly illustrates how the scariest things are often those left to the imagination. After taking out Parker, the alien slowly makes its way over to Lambert, who is paralyzed by shock and fear. There's a very strange image of the alien tail crawling up her leg ("Alien" has a lot of sexual subtext), and then we cut to Ripley running through the ship to save her. As Ripley runs, we hear Lambert's screaming voice and heavy breathing on the intercom, and then a piercing shriek followed by unsettling silence. It's unnerving in a way that few other horror scenes (and entire movies too) have achieved.

Snow White and the Huntsman (2012) Review

Snow White and the Huntsman

Movies like “Snow White and the Huntsman” are the toughest to come to a decision on. There’s nothing overtly bad about them and quite often, as in this case, there are multiple things about them that make it recommendable. What these movies are the kind that rest in the nether region between good and enjoyably flawed. After immediately coming out of “Snow White” I thought, “Nice, I enjoyed that more than I expected.” After being able to mull over my thoughts for a while (and checking back with my ratings criteria page), I’m going to end up going slightly lower than the initial impact.

Despite being updated with an epic fantasy tone complete with dark visuals and elaborate special effects, the plot remains much the same as the story everyone knows so well. The magic mirror says Snow White is fairer than the evil queen, the queen wants the huntsman to cut out Snow White’s heart, the huntsman changes his mind, Snow White eats the poison apple, etc. It follows that basic through-line but with some tweaks to shake things up. The biggest change is the fleshing out of the huntsman character, who now joins Snow White instead of just refusing to kill her. He’s complete with a more detailed backstory, and Chris Hemsworth channels much of his burly “Thor” charisma that makes him such a commanding screen presence.

The evil queen also gets her fair share of extended screen time, and Charlize Theron chews up every piece of scenery and dialogue with icy cold glee. She was the driving force behind the movie’s marketing, and sure enough is absolutely the best thing going on. Whenever she shows up you can practically feel the movie spring more to life. One issue though is that the filmmakers wanted to add more character development to who is essentially a pure evil villain, but couldn’t find an organic way to do it. The two scenes in particular, the milk bath scene that is also in the trailer and a flashback to her childhood, are either weirdly unnecessary and strange (milk bath) or awkwardly shoved in between the Snow and huntsman adventure (flashback).

Meanwhile, Kristen Stewart has a lot to go up against when it comes to sharing the movie with Hemsworth, Theron, and the wide variety of great British actors playing the dwarves. If nothing else, this movie proves that Stewart is in fact a decent actress when not restricted by the melodramatic and stilted writing of her “Twilight” role. She’s definitely trying much more than I’ve seen her do recently; her problem is the same problem with Taylor Kitsch in “John Carter.” They both put in fine performances that get the job done, but are so overshadowed by everything else around them that the main character is comparatively boring. It also doesn’t help that the Huntsman and the queen get more screen time than her, often shoving Snow White to the sidelines in her own story.

Almost everyone I’ve talked to has complained about the pacing and that it should have been tightened up. There were definitely places where it slowed down in the second half, especially once Theron is offscreen for a significant portion, but there was never a point where I thought things should have been cut. The real issue is that the first half is packed with so much action and plot that when the characters finally get to spend real time with each other and interact in the second half, the second half feels slow when it actually hits about the right balance. The first half should have focused on less sword fights and chases and more on getting us engaged with the story.

That said, to first time director Rupert Sanders’ credit, those action scenes are really well executed. Every action bit with the Prince character contains some of the coolest choreographed archery work I’ve seen in a long time. The multiple entanglements between the queen’s creepy brother and the Huntsman have dynamic swordplay, and Sanders’ visual effects department fills out this fantasy world with some very creative designs. The sections in the forest strike the right chord of dark and creepy fantasy that the original Grimm’s fairy tale evokes in its story.

The real issue with “Snow White and the Huntsman” is that, despite all these admirable things to say about it, it never fully leaps to life. Sanders is clearly a decent director, but he’s the kind of director that needs a strong script to carry him through the movie, and “Snow White’s” script is merely adequate. The drama written in to fill in between the action and special effects is serviceable, nothing more. It doesn’t help that there are at least a couple scenes that are blatantly and laughably ripped off from both “The Neverending Story” and “Princess Mononoke.” If a derivative story can make me care about the characters and absorb me into its unique variation of that story, then I could look past that, but “Snow White and the Huntsman” never quite reaches that marker.

2.5/4   Ratings Criteria

Men in Black 3 (2012) Review

Men in Black 3

While I am a huge fan of the original “Men in Black,” I wasn’t particularly clamoring for this third installment. In the time between this and “Men in Black 2,” which was no great shakes but not terrible like so many others think, I had moved on from the franchise to other things. On top of that, the first movie, despite having a franchise-worthy premise, works surprisingly well as a simple one-shot story that didn’t absolutely need to be continued. But, the powers that be said otherwise, and now we have “Men in Black 3,” ten years after part two.

After escaping from a prison made just for him on the moon, Boris the Animal returns to Earth to get his revenge on Agent K, who took away Boris’ arm over 40 years before. Once an attempted attack on K and his partner J fails, Boris gets control of a time travel device and returns to the year where K would stop him. Boris kills K, which screws up the timeline, and now Agent J has to follow Boris back to 1969 if he is to bring everything back to normal. There, he teams up with the younger K, and the two have to track down both the younger and older versions of Boris.

I’m going to go out on a limb and ignore the big plot hole that J can remember K but nobody else can because, quite frankly, I wanted to get out of this part as fast as possible. The first half hour or so before the 1969 segment is terribly done, with limp jokes and a tired Tommy Lee Jones dragging things down. Any previous investment Jones had in the character of K is gone now as he goes through the motions. It’s a chore getting through this segment, but once J goes through the time jump to 1969, in a well-designed and cool sequence through time, the movie gains some traction.

The jokes still don’t hit all that often, but the hit/miss ratio is much more evened out here. The new partner dynamic between Will Smith and Josh Brolin, who plays the younger K, breathes new life into the K/J duo. Brolin nails down Tommy Lee Jones’ mannerisms in a creepily perfect way, although at the same time adding his own touches that flesh out the character. While still stern and serious, Brolin’s K still has excitement and youthful energy in him, much to the surprise of J. Smith, despite being absent from the big screen for four years, easily slips back into his role, bringing the usual charisma and comic timing that people love him for, even when he has to rise above the weak script.

For about three quarters of the movie, I was mostly shifting in my seat as the movie would continually fall flat with the occasional neat element. The sequence at Andy Warhol’s Factory is excellent, and Bill Hader was hysterical as Warhol. This is also the same scene where we meet Grif, played with cheery glee by Michael Stuhlberg, who is easily the best new character in the story (since Brolin is technically not playing a new character). Grif is an alien who can telepathically see all possible outcomes of the future, which adds a new piece to time travel to jazz things up.

And then at the very end, when I thought the movie would merely limp to the finish line, it pulls out a wild card ending that was surprisingly emotional. It changes how we look at K’s relationship with J, and brings the whole series full circle not necessarily for the main series storyline, but for these two characters that we love. It’s too bad that “Men in Black 3” in its entirety could not live up to the way it concluded, as there are some parts that nearly live up to the fun creativity of the 1997 original. I want to give it an extra rating because of the ending, but I’ll have to settle with my gut instinct of the overall picture.

2/4    Ratings Criteria

The Dictator (2012) Review

The Dictator

Since the enormous success of “Borat,” Sacha Baron Cohen has been enjoying an immense increase in his exposure and star power. “Borat” was a comedic tour-de-force, blowing away the expectations of what could be done with shock comedy by using a fake documentary format to catch genuinely horrified reactions from unsuspecting bystanders. It also helped to pull off some unexpected social commentary by capturing these peoples’ prejudices on-camera. While “Bruno” attempted to replicate this formula with less success, it still provided some great belly laughs that softened the blow of a few dead spots (and disturbingly explicit spots) in the movie. Now Cohen is back with “The Dictator” and has eschewed the fake documentary format of his last two movies, but this is not for the better.

One of the reasons “Borat” and even “Bruno” were able to generate laughs was the fake documentary format, because, lets face it, watching real people react to shocking things is much funnier than fake movie characters. “Bruno’s” main failing was that its weakest parts were obviously staged, taking the reality out of the situation. Since “The Dictator” is completely staged like a normal movie, Cohen’s brand of shock comedy loses its effectiveness. There are still some gross-out moments that work (like a birthing scene where the absurdity and hilarity of it drowned out my initial disgust), but ultimately they don’t have the kind of punch that they should. The much-advertised helicopter scene is great, although imagine how good it would have been if the American couple were real people reacting instead of actors.

It doesn’t help that Cohen and director Larry Charles (who also directed Cohen’s previous movies) have an “Austin Powers” like tendency to repeat jokes endlessly. The main offender is the constant appearances and mentions of famous people. The Megan Fox cameo is fine (although sadly missing a funny joke from the trailer) and General Aladeen’s wall of celebrity photos is really funny, but by that point (early in the movie), the joke is done and good.

The constant callbacks to celebrities are irksome and distracting, as if Cohen had to rely on other famous people to contrive humor from situations. That said, I did laugh quite a bit at Edward Norton’s quick part. What really hurts “The Dictator” though is its incredibly sloppy editing, cutting scenes on awkward notes and making seemingly giant leaps forward in the plot. We barely, if at all, see how Aladeen begins to like Zooey (Faris), and many scenes seem to be thrown into a blender.

Aside from Ben Kingsley and John C. Reilly, who are unfortunately wasted in their roles, some of the other supporting actors hold their own against Cohen’s fearless energy. Anna Faris manages to elevate herself above a mostly one-note character (super liberal), and Jason Mantzoukas, as Aladeen’s friend Nadal, frequently steals his scenes with great comedic timing.

There are numerous funny parts in “The Dictator,” mostly in the first half, but for the most part the movie is very uneven. Long stretches went by where jokes fell flat for me, only to be broken up by one very hilarious one. Of course, in some of those times, the joke was one featured in the trailer anyway. While the movie ends with an excellent speech skewering America’s government, I was mostly disappointed with “The Dictator;” not enough to consider it bad, but enough to the point where I wouldn’t revisit it anytime soon.

2/4     Rating Criteria 

The Hunger Games (2012) Review

The Hunger Games

As someone who didn’t get swept up in the hype of reading Suzanne Collins’ trilogy, this film adaptation of “The Hunger Games” was my first introduction to the world of Panem. I didn’t have any preconceived notions of the film living up to expectations, because I honestly didn’t have any. My only thoughts about it before viewing it were: it’s the new big phenomenon that I should see, this could be Jennifer Lawrence’s huge break into the mainstream, and the premise feels very similar to the controversial Japanese novel and film “Battle Royale.”

As punishment for a rebellion, the Capitol of Panem has envisioned an annual ritual called the Hunger Games, where each of the 12 remaining districts that rebelled have to offer up a boy and girl in a fight to the death. The Hunger Games also serve as entertainment for the rich citizens of the Capitol, who can bet on their favored contestant and act as sponsors to help them out in the games.

When Katniss Everdeen’s sister is chosen as the girl representative for District 12, Katniss offers to take her place in the games. Her and Peeta, the boy representative from District 12, get sent off to the Capitol in preparation for the games and are trained by previous District 12 winner Haymitch. During a press interview before the games, Peeta reveals that he has a crush on Katniss, making the games that much more personal for the both of them.

While the basic idea of how the Hunger Games play out is similar to that in “Battle Royale,” the world that Collins wrote around them ensures that this isn’t a flat-out ripoff. The dark political implications going on behind the scenes add substance to what could have been just another kill fest or cheesy love triangle story. The contrast between the gaudy people of the Capitol and the poor, oppressed ones of the districts emphasized the cultural divide between the two and how the luxuries of the Capitol thrive on exploiting the workers in the districts.

There is a definite Big Brother vibe going on with the extent of the Capitol’s control, such as how they are constantly monitoring the progress of the games through thousands of hidden cameras and their ability to alter the trajectory of them for audience satisfaction. The recent influence of reality television in our society is one of Collins’ biggest targets too, and the way that everyone stays glued to their screens watching these children murder each other has a chilling effect.

I was fairly skeptical of director Gary Ross taking the reins on this dark material, considering that the different tone of his earlier works, “Pleasantville” and “Seabiscuit,” wouldn’t indicate that he was the right choice for this. Thankfully, his approach to the story is unique and different than expected, although it is not without some quibbles. I very much liked how Ross chose to shoot the film as if it were an independent property, not a slick blockbuster. His handheld camerawork gives greater intimacy to the characters and grounds the fantastical elements in a relatable, down-to-earth way.

What doesn’t work so well is how he handles the shaky camerawork during the action scenes. Given the huge young adult audience for the film, I expected the film to be contained within the PG-13 rating instead of R, and Ross is occasionally able to convey moments of brutality by obscuring it with his camera framing. At other times, notably in the fights with the vicious Clove and Cato near the end, the choice to go shaky becomes more of an annoyance as the punches become an indistinguishable blur.

The eclectic cast that Ross has assembled here does a magnificent job of elevating the material when the writing and direction don’t always come through spotlessly. My favorites of the supporting cast were Woody Harrelson as the alcoholic and humorous Haymitch and Lenny Kravitz as Katniss’ stylist Cinna. It was a nice surprise to me that Kravitz could hold his own against all the more seasoned actors surrounding him. Josh Hutcherson was great as Peeta too, but the movie belongs to Jennifer Lawrence. Her ability to subtly convey Katniss’ fear and strength, as well as the character’s selfless sacrifice to save her sister, instantly drew me in to her fight for survival.

However, I did have one major problem with how Katniss was written once the games begun. There are multiple points where another contestant comes into her line of sight, but rather than take that person out to ensure they won’t cause trouble late, she would actively avoid the confrontation. It feels as if Collins and Ross avoided having her kill the others unless in self-defense because they felt the audience would lose sympathy with her, which is completely untrue. It would have been much more compelling to show her deal with the pain of having to take someone out, which would contrast with the sadistic nature of someone like Clove or Cato.

On account of these flaws, “The Hunger Games” ended up settling on being very good, but couldn’t push it to the next level of greatness that it could have achieved. The bleak themes and maturity of the material are worthy of acclaim and make sure that “The Hunger Games” is better than many of the other pieces of young adult fiction out there. The pieces are all there for a truly subversive piece of entertainment, and “Hunger Games” remains an involving and accomplished film, although the second installment “Catching Fire” needs to unleash its claws if the franchise wants to show its full potential.

3/4