mrnunleygo It's hard to think of a multi-part movie saga with quality that plummeted quite as far as the 'Hunger Games' movies. This is largely due to the source material: the books (I've read them) are just not that good. The most interesting thing in them was the premise--the competition among the impoverished sectors--and the farther the books got away from that, the less interesting they became, as the author was better with plot than with character and not at all skilled in writing dialogue with wit or philosophical depth. The first "Hunger Games" was very good: it emphasized the game; it highlighted differences among the participants; it retained the book's smart ending. Sparkling performances in both small and large supporting roles backed Jennifer Lawrence's luminescent performance in the lead. The 'Catching Fire' sequel was also pretty good, with extra kudos for the special effects. But by the time we get to "Mockingjay"--which must have been split into two movies only to maximize profits--there's not much going on. Particularly in "Mockingjay Part 2," it was sad to watch such an outstanding cast of actors try to make something of a script that gives none of them anything interesting to do or say while they plod on to a predictable ending. All Lawrence can do is look angst-ridden. The few plot developments present are forced and unconvincing. I'll give it a "3" only for the continuing high quality of special effects and artwork. The only reason to watch it is if you feel obligated to complete the saga.

omendata I havent really enjoyed the Hunger games until this episode and have to disagree with all the nay sayers for this conclusion and for once we do actually have a final conclusion with no getout for another franchise.It has oodles of action for the action fans and a fair bit of Silent Hill'esque horror for the gore fans, a smattering of romance for the romantics amongst us and some pretty good acting, half decent script and I really thoroughly enjoyed the dark and sad but simultaneously happy ending.Very happily surprised at this final conclusion and the music was rather excellent too!

pedro_quide I'm almost sure this is not a spoiler as it is a very general description:It is a movie without pace and not many surprises, but gives a powerful philosophical message that a war cannot really be stopped by war (much less with the same mentality of the enemy). Pity it was not fully executed as so by the hero.

riekondoh-116-326404 I've mixed feelings about this, but they're mostly negative. The first two were alright, then they decided to pull a Battle Royale 2 (though Battle Royale 2 actually pulled it off, so far nothing else has come close) for the final book. The Twilight franchise was awful to begin with, The Hobbit franchise I could see making two solid movies (not three mediocre ones), and now The Hunger Games. The first part was pretty weak, and I did not enjoy it that much. At least after seeing the first part of the Battle Royale 2: Requiem finale I knew there was going to be TONS more to look forward to, but for this I just do not see it being anything better than a disappointment. The third book was the weakest too, basically almost a desperate attempt to make it as thrilling as the others, which I find really plausible for the movie to do too. Also, some certain characters are going to die, though a lot of them, one in particular, has had little to no development (but that's not the movies' fault, the books were the same way) which will make their death very awkward for me. I'm already picturing myself in the theater looking around while on the screen the character's death is taking a lot of screen time and I'm thinking "This really has no impact on me whatsoever ". Right now the only thing going for it is that it's got decent actors. But, then again, looking at Fant4stic, this could still It is really bad.