Catching Fire - A Superior Sequel.

I'll start off by saying that I've never read any of the novels from the Hunger Games series. Their similarity to the films is something I cannot comment upon. However, after watching both of the released films so far, I can confidently say that this sequel improves upon its predecessor. Apart from some obvious exceptions, inferior sequels seem to be the norm when it comes to filmmaking. Here I detail just why I feel this particular sequel bucks that trend.

The focus in Catching Fire shifts quite dramatically from the first. The core of the story is dedicated to showing the disparity between those living in the Capitol and those slumming it in the Districts. Less time and importance is given over to the actual Hunger Games and in turn we learn more about central characters, their relationships and the state of Panem.

There is no denying that this instalment of The Hunger Games is darker, grittier and more grown up than it's predecessor. The bleak atmosphere, coupled with shots of poverty and desperation depict a much clearer sense of the world in which the film takes place.

Another noticeable difference in Catching Fire is its villainous tone. President Snow (Donald Sutherland) in particular comes across as fiercer and more powerful, something which was lacking in the first instalment. The creepy nature of Caesar Flickerman (Stanley Tucci) is ratcheted up here too and his character comes across particularly erratic, provoking unease from the audience. In fact, the whole cast seem more confident and at home in their roles here, which ultimately delivers a stronger film.

The use of camerawork has been altered from the original too. The Hunger Games deployed a lot of shaky camera work during the action sequences where as Catching Fire has much smoother, more fluid style. Gone are the nauseous inducing jungle chases and in their place are controlled, yet detailed shots. This is mostly down to a different directorial style, something that was noticeable throughout.

With all the good that Catching fire has to offer, it is unfortunately bogged down by occasional flaws. While these aren't crucial enough to ruin the film itself, their presence tarnish an otherwise fine film.

There is no escaping the fact that the film is quite simply too long. Sections do feel bloated and at times over indulgent. Cutting the lengthy 146 minutes back to around the 2 hour mark would seem more appropriate.

There is, as expected, an inevitable sense of repetition too. The film does an excellent job of being independent from the first but, especially during the actual Hunger Games, many ideas and scenes seem recycled. Thankfully, this instalment takes a slightly different turn towards the end, which mostly makes up for some of the repetitiveness.

In short, Catching Fire does everything a good sequel should do. It takes the original narrative, builds upon it and delivers a more in depth look into what lies beneath it's predecessor. It is not without it's flaws, but Catching Fire feels not only better, but untimely more grown up than the previous instalment.

Read my 5 word review of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire here