Friday, November 22, 2013

This Is Where You Tell Me...

.
... what you thought of Sam Claflin in Catching Fire. Is it the Finnicktastrophe we feared or what? And what about all the rest of it? It's weird how quiet I've been about the new Hunger Games movie for the past few weeks, isn't it? Wacky and weird! It's the biggest thing outside of sliced bread right now and my yap's been set to silent. I don't know why, I suppose it's been so everywhere I haven't had anything to add. I'm not seeing the movie until tomorrow, but I'm sure some of you already have, or will over the course of the weekend, since it's already scheduled to make the GNP of a dozen small countries in the next three days. So have at it in the comments. Thoughts, feelings, so forth. I wanna know!
.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Pleasantly surprised, although I went in expecting him to be awful. I still think others might have been better, but he wasn't terrible.

I liked the movie a lot. Visually different than the first - darker and grittier, as is the tone. The book isn't super fresh in my mind but it felt faithful.

Effie Trinket is everything.

Derreck said...

He was kind of blah, TBH. Didn't make much of an impression to me.

Dustin said...

Wasn't great, wasn't terrible. Better than I was thinking he'd be. He's only shirtless for a the tributes' entrance thing. I always pictured him shirtless through the whole book in my mind :)

Anonymous said...

His mouth in the movie annoyed the poops out of me so much I couldn't enjoy the film. It reminded me of the grinch or a fish or something swirly.

Jenna Malone is great, Ef why eye.

-j

Matthew said...

I have to agree with Anonymous: his mouth was REALLY distracting. I don't know if that's just Sam Claflin's way of talking or if it was some sort of character trait but it was sleazy/douchey/smarmy, and I couldn't stop cringing at it.

He wasn't that bad if you subtract the mouth, but he doesn't have an iota of the charisma that Finnick is supposed to have.

Henry said...

I'm honestly blown away by Jennifer Lawrencd though, is it too much to say that she gave an oscar worthy performance?

Anonymous said...

I totally agree that he was just there. And that Jena Malone stole the show as Johanna.

Anonymous said...

He wasn't nearly as bad as I thought, but it wasn't convincing that everyone would be just drooling and dropping their most intimate secrets to get him like in the books. Actually a lot like John Malkovich in Dangerous Liaisons-read the lines fine, but still completely miscast as a sex god.

Other than that though the movie is fantastic-I thought the 2nd book was a let down, but I liked this movie better than the first. I didn't really get the clock thing of the arena-couldn't picture anything of the 2nd games in my mind-this brought it to life. And Jennifer Lawrence was great.

timothy grant said...

It honestly seemed like he had gained weight or something, because they seemed to shoot around his gut. You never saw below the nipline. Lots of long shots of him where his posterior looked, er, roomy. Maybe it was just me, but Finnick is supposed to be kind of douchy hot, no?

And yes, Jena Malone for the win.

Anonymous said...

He struck me as a combination of features -- someone's eyes, someone else's nose, a third person's mouth -- that someone photo compiled to make the perfect man, and then the whole thing is just kinda...off. No visible charisma or chemistry, either.

I also don't know why the filmmakers squandered some of the most powerful imagery from the book, Finnick in his netting. The movie's intro of Finnick was underwhelming. It was like some sleazy, over-permed guy hitting on you at the Honolulu Holiday Inn happy hour.