The Hunger Games: Mockingjay-Part 1, follows Katniss Everdeen as she wakes up after the events in the arena and finds herself in the broken district thirteen. Katniss struggles to become the rebellions mockingjay figure that she feels she can't be. Mockingjay-Part 1 may seem boring at first since there's not much to this film. The film is not as suspenseful and thrilling, though the events in the film are shocking and the decisions made will get you thinking. As you watch the film it will get interesting and will have you hoping for a good outcome from the whole situation that the characters struggle to come out of as they are constantly reminded that its the things we love most that destroy us."I have a message for President Snow. You can torture us and bomb us and burn our districts to the ground. But do you see that? Fire is catching... And if we burn... you burn with us!"-Katniss Everdeen, The Hunger Games: Mockingjay-Part 1

THE HUNGER GAMESMOCKINGJAY PART 1why? people really don't like this film i'll tell you why. people didn't like the mocking jay films, because of the lack of action katniss being less powerful then in the first 2 and a lot of propaganda BUT mocking jay is a war film and would have stuff like torture, PTSD and propaganda that is what the main theme of the mocking jay films are about. anyway, i'll tell you my opinion. its gritty tone and music suits the film perfectly 10/10its action is a little bit lacking but like i said the film is about propaganda and the uprising of the Districts. 7/10its direction PERFECT! Francis Lawrence is an amazing director and all ways will be. 10/10the acting in the film is also really strong just like catching fire and hunger games i really mean it, its the best acting i've ever seen and the films have some of the best actors i have scene in other films! so anyway i give this film a 9/10 its very realistic and gritty and violent.now go see mocking jay part 1 now! its brilliant!

As said with the first two 'Hunger Games' films (which had its plus points but didn't do much for me), the books are fun, scary, thrilling and moving though because being so rich in detail and characterisation they are difficult to adapt.Generally the films, while all with their good points, don't do them justice, following the basic details but with the spirit watered down to blandness and the characters nowhere near as fascinating. Judging the films on their own terms is to me a fairer way to judge though, and will be done here because they are problematic on their own. Of the four films (which all have good points but just as enough problems that stop me from caring for them much), 'The Hunger Games: Mockingjay- Part I' is the weakest, it feels too much like set-up and set-up that's very tame and really struggles to justify its length.There are certainly good things. The production values, some dodgy special effects aside, are very well done with the nightmarishly dystopian production design faring best, it's lit with atmosphere and luckily the cinematography and editing is not the sloppy and frenetic kind seen in the first film. The score is thrilling and emotive, and there are some good performances here. This is particularly true of a terrific Jennifer Lawrence, dastardly Donald Sutherland, moving Philip Seymour Hoffman, smarmy Stanley Tucci and classy Julianne Moore.Not all the cast work. Liam Hemsworth and Josh Hutcherson are still lacking charisma and expression, while Elizabeth Banks (a high point of the first film) and Woody Harrelson have nothing to do.Lack of character development and halfway-decent writing plays a large part here. The characters had a lot of meat to them before but here are pretty bland stereotypes with non-existent development or direction, Katniss excepted. Didn't find myself caring for the relationship between Katniss and Peeta, mainly because of Peeta being written and played so blandly but also the chemistry didn't seem to be there. The writing does feel under-cooked, with some cringe-worthy moments and lacks edge or any kind of emotion a lot of the time.'The Hunger Games: Mockingjay-Part I' could have easily been shorter, because the story feels far too thin and over-stretched which makes some scenes interminably dull and dreary. The film is basically set-up and after finishing on a note every bit as abrupt as the ending for 'Catching Fire' it feels like set-up that doesn't lead or go anywhere. Atmosphere-wise, it just feels rather tame in alternative to tense and leaden rather than edgy. The direction is pretty pedestrian here.In summary, bland and over-stretched despite some good performances, production values and music. 4/10 Bethany Cox

Many have said this before, but I'm afraid I have to repeat the opinion on the account that a surprising many have decided that The Hunger Games is worth of anything more than 1 star in IMDb. The Hunger Games is a unscrupulous photocopy of the masterpiece BATTLE ROYALE 2: REQUIEM, and should be avoided, if not boycotted.Some will claim that The Hunger Games is a 'tribute' or a 'remake' of the BATTLE ROYALE. To them I ask one question: "What kind of filmmakers make remakes of a movie when the original came out two years ago and has been selling DVDs very well internationally?" It seems that this particular brand of Indian cinema has decided that it is quite content making money off of other people idea for free. And though it is impossible for the original filmmakers to sue the filmmakers of The Hunger Games (on the account that US copyright laws does not allow for such suit), The Hunger Games should be remembered as a true stain on the development of American Cinema.Because it has photocopied a great movie, The Hunger Games avoids being an absolute terror of a movie. However, this does not excuse Gary Ross and the section of 'Bollywood' that has involved itself in The Hunger Games's production. Because of the blatant plagiarism, and the The Hunger Games's makers absolutely refusing to apologize and reimburse the original filmmakers, I must say The Hunger Games deserves 1 star, if not 0.