A thing to remember is that this movie is adapting the longest book in the series, of course they had to cut through the story and the pacing may seem weird. The movie hadn't really the time to develop on that but the point of the book is pretty clear and important for our society. Are human beings inherently bad and need a superior power (the Capitol) to prevent them from falling into chaos, or are them naturally good if they stay on the right side of moral ? That's the point of the Hunger Games. If you put children, the most innocent people, in a condition without rules (the arena), they will ultimately choose violence in order to stay alive. It is a reminder to the rebels they need the Capitol to survive. Also in the first years of the Games, the point wasn't for it to be an entertainement or a demonstration of the Capitol's generosity, but a punishment for the rebels. And Snow's ideas go way further than the sponsorship, for future editions, he's the one to think of Victor's villages and money and food for the district of the victor to attract better volunteers. Setting up slowly the Games as the version we know 64 years later. The songs in the movie seem random, I agree. They made perfect sens in the book I think. The hanging tree is way more meaningfull than Katniss interprets it later. And the whole Lucy Gray ballad was fricking genius from Suzanne's part. I know the main critics here are about the movie and not that much the story but I wanted to clear those things up. Also I am from the ones who believe in the theory that in the next book and movie, Haymitch won't be the main character but Plutarch will.
This might be a weird take but i feel the same way about songbirds and snakes as i do with arianas new album eternal sunshine. Eternal sunshine came out and everyone is saying its her BEST album shes put out like they all forgot about positions, sweetener and thank you next. Like seriously? Eternal sunshine is good but not as good as positions or thank you next. So when people say songbirds and snakes is the best hunger games movie im like what?? Really?? Oh so catching fire and mockingjay dont exist anymore...? I also cant STAND the acting from the other school students, their words are so exaggerated it sounds like they're trying to talk rich and elegant but it comes off sooo bad. The talking/acting took me out of the movie so fast and reminded me that im watching a movie in a theater instead of being immersed in the story.
I think people are nostalgic for that era and that's making them see this movie with rose tinted glasses. I also found the dialogue of capital school students unbeatable, I don't think it's the acting but the writing itself that was the issue, trying to hard to make the characters sound both youthful and elite and from an older time period. It just didn't work.
I am so baffled at how many people say that this is one of the best hunger game movies/books. I do not understand what the fuck they are smoking. And no disrespect to the actor, but i do not get all the fangirls thirsting after this character. He is not charming nor is he particularly attractive in this movie and he is a hollow void of charisma. The actor might be able to pull off dashing heart throb in some other movie where they actually know how to style him and direct him, but this movie is not it. At all.
I think the design of Young Snow gives off serious Draco Malfoy vibes (rich, blonde, on the bad guys side) and that could explain why he's garnered such a fandom. I think the actor did good with what he was given (same goes for all the actors) but the script was so bad that it comes off as super cringe overall.
@@msbte49Hi, please don't be patronizing to fellow viewers, especially since you've commented this twice and haven't given any reasoning for your statement
The way the Capitol students speak reminds me of Effie or Caesar. They are pretentious, snooty, rich teenagers trying to act mature and constantly trying to one-up each other. I didn’t find it cringey or out of place. Also, I think Snow had enough ideas to boost viewership that were necessary for this specific story. He only had those ideas in order to win the prize. That was his primary goal. There's a 64-year gap between this movie and The Hunger Games, so it’s not a stretch to assume he came up with more ideas later, like the Victor’s Village, as they became more relevant to his rise to power. I do wish we got to see a middle-aged Snow, closer to the character we see in the later films, but considering tbosas is set 60+ years earlier, I think this movie did a good job of showing his early history and the roots of his mentality.
The dialogue of characters like Effie or Caesar in the original films felt really natural while this film's Capitol dialogue is super contrived and doesn't feel in-universe, it feels like someone tried really hard to insert our world's dialogue into the film and then brushed it over with some weird amalgam of 1950s dialect and how older people think "young kids" talk. The story should have shown Snow taking an active role in shaping the games rather than handing off an assignment to Gaul and having her implement stuff. The stuff he came up with felt so bare minimum because of the way they were portrayed. It's not about volume, it's about execution. Also, the concept of the prize was unnecessary to begin with, and feels more like a shoehorned plot device because they couldn't figure out how to tell the story organically. I do believe a middle-aged Snow will be present in the next prequel, the one about Haymitch's games, so it'll be interesting to see how he's written there. But I disagree with the choices made for Snow's backstory and mentality. A story like this has more impact when the people in power are already in power to begin with because it emphasizes that those without power can't simply climb to the top. His origin story would've been stronger if the Snow family wasn't fallen from grace, and if his character arc wasn't simply him doing anything to gain power. The original series isn't about people doing anything for power, it's about propaganda and control, and how the Capital remains in charge by turning the districts against each other. This film does absolutely nothing to tie in with that or develop that theme apart from the very surface level decoration of them trying to get people to watch the games.
I do like TBOSBAS but I don’t think that a younger president snow and specifically his interactions with Lucy Gray as a love interest work in this movie. The only commentary I would get as a movie only viewer of this movie specifically with the full backstory of the original trilogy is that snow descended into darkness following his childhood and was willing to follow anyone (Dr Gaul) and step on anyone (Lucy Gray) to ultimately get what he wants and that is his downfall later in the series.
The romance in this movie was definitely a huge misstep. It came off like bad fanfiction. I think there was an urge to create a primary female character to remind the audience of Katniss and giving the main character a love interest in keeping with YA tropes and it just didn't play well with what the story should have been.
To the best of my knowledge, the tropes in YA dystopian are typically used for a reason because they work well and establish good commentary if used correctly. For example having a headstrong protagonist Katniss/Thomas being followed by a supporting character to help calm them from overwhelming themselves and getting killed Peeta/Newt and the character designed to further push the main character from the extreme they are trying to go away from Gale/Teresa/Brenda. They are usually paired off as a love triangle in the sense that it’s not necessarily a choice of love interest but internal struggle within the protagonist and how they learn from the interactions with these so called love interests. I know that Thomas/Newt is not confirmed but I am working with some assumptions from fan theories and comparing them to the tropes they are tied to.
Yeah I definitely understand the thematic purpose of these love triangles, but the same character struggles can exist without it being romantic. I think having Gale as a love interest for Katniss was pretty unnecessary since they already had such a long history together and he was practically family. Teresa I think would've worked better for Thomas's struggle if she literally was family. It seems to me that the reason these were crafted as love triangles was basically to pull in audiences who get super into shipping.
@@TrashTalkReverse that is fair and I think that’s why the idea of Katniss “choosing” Peeta takes the whole series because she has to decide that herself and she starts to see it and the end of Catching Fire and throughout Mockingjay both pre and post hijacking. I think that’s why theories exist in a similar vein for Newt/Thomas and how Katniss might have ended up with Johanna Mason if both Peeta and Gale had died. Such is what happened to Thomas when Newt/Teresa finally died off, he eventually accepted Brenda because she was the only one left that cared for him in that way (also TDC book ending I think) Similarly to Peeta/Katniss, my understanding is that Thomas would have eventually accepted feelings for Newt if he had not died much like how he ultimately accepted Brenda in the epilogue of TDC. I do compare these combinations because I have seen in fanfiction and even came up with a thought experiment of my own where if the main characters of hunger games and maze runner were swapped to their counterparts (Katniss/Thomas Peeta/Newt) the plot would be mostly unchanged and that is why these tropes work so well when done right imo
