The Hunger Games: Catching Fire Reviews



  • The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
    • Genre : Action, Drama, Thriller
    • Release Date :
    • MPAA Rating : PG-13
    • Duration : 146 minute(s)
    • Production Budget : -
    • Studio : Lionsgate Films
    • Official Site : http://catchingfiremovie.com/
    • Reviews Rate
      Go! Watch this movie. You'll regret if not seeing it.

    • Readers Rate
      5 of 5

Movie Reviews

  • there's never quite the sense of satisfaction that the first film provided. You can feel the franchise dynamic chugging beneath, with the result that Catching Fire is not quite a full course, more of an amuse bouche
    3 of 5 by Paul MacInnes [The Guardian ]
  • the book literally put onscreen, which will delight fans to no end
    by Todd McCarthy [Hollywood Reporter ]
  • it strays too often into unearned melodrama and by-numbers plotting, with even Lawrence struggling to sell some of Katniss's more abrupt emotional shifts
    3 of 5 by Emma Dibdin [Digital Spy ]
  • in director Francis Lawrence's steady hands (gone are the previous film's needlessly spastic camera moves), "Catching Fire" makes for rousing entertainment in its own right, leaving fans riled and ready to storm the castle
    by Peter Debruge [Variety ]
  • Catching Fire is so committed to carrying on the fine work started by its predecessor that the applause flows utterly naturally. Is it too soon to say I can't wait for the next one?
    4 of 5 by Robbie Collin [Daily Telegraph ]
  • Review rate : B+ Reviewed by Tom Long [Detroit News ]
  • 4 of 5 Reviewed by Charlotte O'Sullivan [Evening Standard ]
  • 4 of 5 Reviewed by Larushka Ivan-Zadeh [Metro News ]
  • 4 of 4 Reviewed by Colin Covert [Minneapolis Star Tribune ]
  • 4 of 4 Reviewed by Bill Goodykoontz [Arizona Republic ]
  • 4 of 5 Reviewed by Joe Neumaier [NY Daily News ]
  • 3.5 of 4 Reviewed by Peter Travers [Rolling Stone ]
  • 3 of 4 Reviewed by Peter Howell [Toronto Star ]
  • 2.5 of 4 Reviewed by Claudia Puig [USA Today ]
  • Reviewed by Kenneth Turan [LA Times ]

Reader's Reviews

  random image