The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes

I understand that many people highlight how faithful they were to the books. That's brilliant but this is a movie made for the mass audiences now.

First of all, there's way too much of singing, it gets cheesy and annoying. Secondly, they've tried too hard to remind us our "Katniss Everdeen" it's does not feel natural. I don't like Rachel Ziegler's performance at all she is way too theatrical her accent is too comedic. They have tried to make her Katniss.

There must be a Part II for this movie as well I suppose because it left many questions unanswered. I don't want to include spoilers so I will skip those questions.

Moves at an unnaturally fast pace and had visibly been condensed, nay, tortured, into a 3 hour film, leaving no time to convey any kind of emotional complexity to any of the characters nor connect with them. As a result, a relatively boring movie. It felt as though there was so much context to provide there was no time to make it enjoyable. Some exciting parts but this was only attributable to Suzanne Collins' writing; I believe the directors heavily relied on the plot already written for them. Rachel exaggerated jaw acting made this not only a boring watch but a difficult one. Lucy Gray was a textbook manic pixie dream girl - I thought cinema would be more self aware by now.

As someone who read the book days before seeing this film, I can tell you it should've been in two parts. I did thoroughly enjoy it! However, there are so many things that they left out that I felt were integral to the story. In order to properly see Snow for who he is-a spineless boy who only does things that look good to others-I think they needed to spend more time with the character. I'm not usually a fan of two parters, but this one really should've been. The characters fell flat to me because we didn't get great looks into them.

My boyfriend, who didn't read the book, really liked it and said he felt he understood the characters well enough though. So maybe it's just a me problem.

Because so much of the book is Snow's internal monologue, I know it would've been hard to capture that properly on film, but I think they could've. Also, it's SO much darker in the book, and I think that was necessary for the audience to see.

I will start by saying I don't think it's an 8, maybe a 7.5-7.7 so I rounded up.

However, I went in with low expectations, expecting a big budget movie with a poor storyline but otherwise reasonably watchable. Well, I was pleasantly surprised to find myself hooked! And I daresay it was one of the better Hunger Games movies.

The bad reviews I've read seem to miss the point. This is not a story about the origin of the games, it is not a story about 'Lucy Gray" (even though her name is said about 1000 times)... It is a story about Snow and why he became the psychopath we know from the original stories. I found the not-so-happy ending refreshing and if you enjoy and understand social economic/philosophical dilemmas in terms of human psychology then it adds a notch of appreciation.

Viola, Tom and Peter were excellent in their portrayals. Zegler was fine, a little theatrical but given her background I suppose understandable.

I don't understand the hate. Especially the 1-3* reviews. Like, what were you watching!?

I came into this movie with low expectations hoping to have my socks knocked off. But they are still very much on. Ziegler's acting and accent was bad no other way to put it just plain bad. The story was hard to buy into. The chapters almost felt like loosely connected but widely under developed stories that to do properly could have each been a movie on their own. It's a very basic see it once and say you have seen it. Several parts of the movie felt like they wanted to be rated R but were dumbed down to make a pg13 movie I'd also give a parent warning my daughter wanted to see it which is why we went and it was VERY dark for PG13.