Igrzyska śmierci: W pierścieniu ognia

Catching Fire is more mature and bearable than the first installment, which I had to suffer through. It’s too long and brings no satisfying conclusion (it only compels you to watch the next part), but it’s entertaining enough. It’s not a bad adventure fun for young audiences, and Francis Lawrence’s directorial craftsmanship shows no flaws. The best part of the movie is the epic scenes à la Cleopatra on the Capitol square. (22.11.2013)

It’s quite a paradox that the second Hunger Games was accused a priori by critics of being a teenage romance like Twilight, and yet, there’s hardly any romance in it, or rather, there is no more than in any other Hollywood blockbuster. In short, the romantic line between Katniss, Peeta and Hurricane has now been put in the background and serves only for a deeper portray of the characters and the emotional state of the heroes within the reality of a totalitarian system, instead of being the centre of it all. Other than that, it’s pretty brutal dystopian sci-fi. The leaders of the Capitol have turned from funny colourful clowns into unscrupulous totalitarian douchebags worthy of respect. The first half has excellent pace and tells us more about how that world works, while the socio-medio-political line doesn’t feel stupid. The weakest part is the one in the Arena, which needs to have several scenes with more action (up until then it’s mostly a conversational film) and it’s only a slight variation of the events of the first part. I understand why it had to be there, but it was more fun when the heroes were on the victory tour as mediators in the relationship between the oppressed public and the governing class. The ending, on the other hand, comes too suddenly; that which was only said would have probably been better shown in a couple scenes more. In any case, I’m looking forward to the next sequel. (21.11.2013)

I was really terrified of the two hours and a half of runtime, as I should’ve been. The first 30 minutes passed awfully slowly, I almost thought that I wouldn’t make it through and just give up on the movie. But I still thought that it would somehow get better and I’d start liking it, which happened in the end. Since Katniss made it into another arena, things started to get really fun. Maybe even more fun that in the first movie. From that point on, the remaining two hours flew by like a breeze and the movie suddenly became a successful blockbuster. That’s what made me so skeptical of the final two-piece movie. Because so far, the only thing I found fun about Hunger Games were the arena fights. Everything else from the politics to the war went completely over my head. (22.06.2015)

Unarguably better, but still not good (enough). Lawrence realizes that stiff, paper-rustling dialogs full of life wisdom and great truths can only be saved from ridicule by actors with a big A and so tries to sideline non-actor “J-14"-type heartthrobs like Hemsworth and Hutcherson as much as possible. And he manages to do this in the first half. However as soon as (upon entering the arena) he loses the chance to rely on Harrelson/Hoffman/Tucci//Banks and mainly Sutherland (earning great respect for giving such a fine performance one of the dumbest villains), he is lost and the entire movie with him. Suddenly he is left only with beauties with no talent and he is unable to hide their lack of talent even with emphasis on the solid action ingredient which fails because everything important (and interesting) happens off screen. (26.01.2014)

Greater emotional richness, surprising creative courage, and a healthy self-confidence behind and in front of the camera. In most aspects, it's just as complete an explosion as the original (and even my favorite installment). In the wrong hands, it could easily have become a tearful prologue from the first half on, but fortunately, that did not happen. The spark slowly turns into a flame, and when Peeta becomes a clear leader and Johanna steals all the scenes in such limited space, Catching Fire is a winner. Although there isn't too much space devoted to the history of the Quarter Quell or the individual veterans over the extra fast-paced half-hour, thanks to a more coherent picture, it is almost the best film installment. But there would still be more to come. (15.12.2013)

The continuation of Hunger Games has enjoyed much greater viewer favor, but my impression is exactly the opposite. Among the positives, I can include more reasonable editing and a larger budget, which was not just consumed by Jennifer Lawrence's and other participants' higher fees, but also contributed to better (more bombastic) effects. However, that is where the list of positives ends. The second installment needed to further explore the world of Panem and honestly, it only revealed greater shallowness and, I dare to say, stupidity. Creating dystopias that could be taken seriously was never Hollywood's strong suit, and here, given the target audience, the effort was not significant. The story does not bother with logic, and the dialogue seems even dumber than in the first film. President Snow, who was supposed to embody sophisticated all-powerful evil, instead appears as a stubborn old man in the early stages of senility, who adds fuel to the fire with primitive violence and demonstrations of tyranny, where he should manipulate and corrupt through intrigues, cooling down passions. Apart from Philip Seymour Hoffman, nothing really interested me about the second installment. Overall impression: 35%. (31.01.2022)

Better than its predecessor in every way. Instead of a positive shock from something unprecedented and new, there is only pure quality, supported by a juicy budget that brings excellent visual effects, a good dramatic storyline, and fantastic performances, especially from Jennifer Lawrence. It may only serve as a connecting bridge to the next installment, but if the quality continues to rise at this pace, there is nothing to be afraid of. An exceptionally dense and original experience. (23.11.2013)

A pleasant surprise. With the arrival of Francis Lawrence and the new screenwriters, the quality of Hunger Games has gone up a step, and suddenly it's an impressive and thrilling spectacle with pretty interesting characters and an ending that will simply make you want to watch the next films. Almost everything I complained about in the first film is better here. Although the plot heavily relies on reliable acting aces (I found the biggest joy from all the space Donald Sutherland got), and even Jennifer Lawrence and her group in the arena aren't bad at all. (01.01.2021)

Unfortunately, the bar set by the first part also characterizes the second part, although the story could and should have been more interesting, and the names of all the actors are still more than pleasing to hear. Formally almost at the level of the first film, still without much emotion and credibility of the sketched society – everything sounds cold and mechanical, in some passages too spectacular and, in particular, unnecessarily long. The scenes from the arena, which should have been the highlight of the film, act more as a necessary element to fulfil expectations and to create a strong enough stepping stone towards further sequels. And whereas in the first film the romantic chemistry between the central couple worked very well, here their relationship is hindered both by the constant presence of a third party and by overused phrases like "threat to the state" and "embodiment of independence". Fortunately, the visuals and sound design are almost flawless and the final twist is satisfying and hopeful enough to make me respect Catching Fire as a mere prelude and look forward to the coming of the great revolution. But they will need to work a bit harder :) 60% (10.12.2013)

As expected, Catching Fire doesn't particularly stand out from most of the high-budget ballast of the last year, mainly because of how terribly unambitiously the whole thing is directed, and its fundamental problem is that it's split into two different parts of completely different genres, whereas the switch doesn't surprise anyone because it's been expected all along. The flat revolutionary storyline is probably most amusing in how the oppressed working class achieves its greatest successes by being given a reality show and using its means of expression. Otherwise, though, top-notch casting, especially of the supporting roles: I either want to marry or kidnap Jena Malone. Despite all this, somehow, mysteriously, I think I want to know more about that world and I’m relatively interested to see how it develops. (01.03.2014)

After watching the first part of the Hunger Games quartet yesterday, I had minimal expectations today, so I was pleasantly surprised that the story made slightly more sense to me. What I also liked was Philip Seymour Hoffman's performance, as well as Donald Sutherland who was convincing as the ultimate bad guy. I’ve pretty much summed up all the positives. And now for the rest. What I’ve already noticed in the previous film was even more apparent this time around. Whenever Jennifer Lawrence was made up to look like a kind of Cleopatra, she stopped showing signs of life because the motionless thing she wears instead of a face took on a definitive (plastic) form. The film also included many exaggerated gestures, tons of speechifying that almost made me throw up, overblown romance, and errors in logic which I've already gotten used to. Still, I’m confused as to why coal was mined in District 12 when it was of no use to anyone. And if it was of any use, how could District 12 have been destroyed? That's a tough one. Yeah, I know, I'm too much of a nitpicker and I quibble over nonsense when it was really about love. I guess that's just me. Katniss Everdeen aka She Who Dances with the Lightning didn't win me over this time either, but I was intrigued by the water that could almost replace plastic surgery. I’m saying almost because I don't think it could replace collagen or silicone. / Lesson learned: if you want to take up archery, get a magnetic quiver; it's the only way you won't lose your arrows even during a breakneck fall. (09.09.2022)

Whether I want it or not, the movie is simply above average, visually it is a great spectacle, which, compared to the first part, manages to convey some idea quite consistently. All scenes fit together better, as if the creators made the first movie just so that we could build a proper relationship with the characters and sympathize with them when things get tough. I'm not particularly excited or impressed, but I have to say that in the end, "Vengeful Revenge" pleased me. (29.11.2013)

Considerably better than the slightly infantile first installment. Despite its length, the movie does not cease to entertain, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. If I hadn't seen these two movies, I would have had the same opinion of this teen series as of the similarly presented Twilight. But not only is this series more sensible, epic, mature, logical and, most of all, watchable, there is also an essential differentiating factor: Jennifer Lawrence - the best actress of the current young generation, because the moment Lionsgate signed her on, they basically hit the jackpot. (31.01.2014)

It isn’t very often that I love a sequel so much more than the first part. It fell only very slightly short of perfection; shame about the rather bodged ending, but even so I give this a full set. The atmosphere and special effects were A+ standard. Both the story and the arena are better than in part one, although I liked them both more or less the same, but the sequel really was a little bit better. 5* (19.05.2014)