Decker

It showed some stuff that wasn't in the book between Plutarch and Snow that removes a touch of ambiguity from a major plot twist, but I'm okay with it, especially if it gives us more PSH scenes than were in the second book.We visit several of the other districts which we barely saw glimpses of in the first movie. And of course there's a new arena. They shot a lot in Hawaii, so that should tell you the look of this film will be pretty different.

Draven

I've read the books and I saw that. I was expecting a shot of Katniss and Peta and some rioting and that's it. Similar to the original Hunger Games teaser.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Hj797cQYMfc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Instead we got dialogue, scenes, plot, etc. That was a trailer. But let's be honest, I'm not upset about it. I just don't get why they are calling trailers teasers these days.

Defiant1

It's a really good teaser. We don't even get a glimpse of the Quarter Quell.

dex14

dex14

<iframe width="624" height="351" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" src="http://movies.yahoo.com/video/hunger-games-catching-fire-trailer-021017530.html?format=embed&player_autoplay=false"></iframe>

Dr. DVD

Looks good, but I've read the books and everything had meaning to me. Had I not, I really wouldn't find anything other than the visuals interesting. Looks like they've upped the ante in production values for this one, trailer gave off a Ridley Scott vibe. Hopefully it stays that way throughout as opposed to just being impressive for the first half of the movie.

gp1086

I like this trailer (and how it didn't give too much footage away). Excited!

Michael Corvin

I'm finally reading Catching Fire(about 2/3rds done) and just watched the trailer. This may sound silly, but I'm kinda bummed that they gave the dress reveal away in the trailer.

superdeluxe

Natalie Dormer has been cast in the Hunger Games as Cressida

dex14

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/zoKj7TdJk98?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Supermallet

Catching Fire is my favorite book of the three, but I have no desire to see this movie. I'm just not interested in the way these filmmakers have realized the world.

Rob V

I'm curious as to why? It's essentially . I thought book 3 was great and very much adult themed.

superdeluxe

My Wife says Catching Fire was the best book out of the three, so she said the movie should be better as well. I guess we shall see!

bluetoast

My friend and I are of the opinion that Collins had an idea for a book, and after pitching it, her editor put a gun to her head and said "Make it three."

Michael Corvin

I just read Catching Fire over the summer. It was entertaining but nothing more than a retelling of book 1. I'll check out 3 after this film.

superdeluxe

Spoiler for poster due to size.

Dr. DVD

I will say that while book 2 is a lot like a repeat of the first one in some regards, it flows directly into book 3 which is completely different. In all honesty, the overall story makes it looks like 3 was meant to be the actual 2nd book , and the way the movies are being done the first movie will look more like a kind of prologue to a trilogy.

RichC2

Reviews started coming in. Currently at 94% with 17 reviews on rottentomatoes.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_...catching_fire/

Dr. DVD

^ Those will most likely drop as many regular critics will find this too repetitive of the first one.

CharlieK

Are you saying that because you've seen it? The few reviews I've read say that it improves on the first in almost every way with no one really commenting on any kind of repetitiveness. I was kind of disinterested in seeing this one, but the feedback I've read has turned me around.

RichC2

A lot of the reviews also state it's a huge improvement on the source material this time around.

Dr. DVD

I said most likely. Maybe they improved on the source material. The second book wasn't bad IMO, but many don't care for it. I remember the first one registered fresh with most reviews being of the "three star" nature. One thing's for certain, these are obviously registering better with non-readers than the Twilight series.

hanshotfirst1138

I'm about two thirds of the way through the book. It's not terrible or anything, but it basically feels like a retread of the first so far. I think that the movie will suffer as a result, the proverbial sequel that's a remake with a bigger budget.

I quite liked the first film, I thought it was intelligent and well-made, but the shaky cam made me want to beat the cameraman with a stick there were scenes which were literally unintelligible.

Yeah, but the notion of giving a big franchise movie to anyone who's even slightly an auteur is rather uncommon, Christopher Nolan notwithstanding. The studio wants someone weaned on music video and TV so they'll work fast and won't interfere with the studio or have a strong enough vision to try to give the film much edge.

I like Jennifer Lawrence, she's a very talented young actress, but she looks like a centerfold, I do think asking us to buy into her as a scraggly coal miner's daughter requires a bit of suspension of disbelief.

I'm single, so I've never had anyone to drag me to the Twilight movies and therefore know nothing about them. It's kind of nice.

Dr. DVD

1) There is no way this movie will suffer, except maybe that it won't be #1 for four weeks straight.

2) I'm also single, as well as about 90% of the posters in this forum.

hanshotfirst1138

I'm not saying it'll suffer commercially, just in terms of its content.