Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  The Hunger Games: Catching Fire  >  Reviews  >  Christian Science Monitor

Peter Rainer’s Review of “Catching Fire” Isn’t Short Enough

In response to Peter Rainer’s 271‑word review of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire on Christian Science Monitor 

http://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Movies/2013/1121/The-Hunger-Games-Catching-Fire-is-even-better-than-the-first-film-video

By ,

Peter Rainer keeps “‘The Hunger Games: Catching Fire’ Is Even Better Than the First Film” short—but not short enough.

Right off the bat Even Better lets readers know that the dopiness quotient of the review is going to be high by starting off with a groan-worthy pun: “Catnip—I mean Katniss—Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) gets more than she bargained for in ‘The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. ‘” Another lame attempt at humorous wordplay rounds out the first paragraph. Somewhere Gene Shalit is delighted.

Rainer really thinks the new “Hunger Games” movie is the Kat(niss)’s meow. Unfortunately, his breezy, silly style substitutes for any kind of analysis of why. Readers will be forgiven for wondering if he liked the movie because of the pretty girl with the bow and the bright lights and big noises.

It remains unclear why Rainer likes the film other than that it features good actors like Jennifer Lawrence and others (as if good actors never appear in garbage movies. “Ishtar” anyone?)

Oh yes, and Stanley Tucci wears big fake teeth in the film and Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s character has a funny name. Those two facts warrant mention, for some reason.

If readers make it to the end of Rainer’s review without clicking away, they’ll find his “Catching Fire” review all wet.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation