Sequel=Original

Rating: 6/10 (30 November 2013)

First off, I'm going to review the film, not the book seeing as how this is a film page discussing the merit of a movie, not a book written for children.
As far as doing a sequel to the Hunger Games, it is a money grab. However, in sequence this film expands on the original and defines the conflict between the protagonists and the antagonists fairly well. The actors in the film seem engaged and poised to allow the characters to somewhat "buy in" to the story and presentation of Katniss and Peeta's journey into the new year of the games. The script and screenplay aren't overly complex, but they do a fair job of not bogging down the action with overstated themes or subsequent plot lines. The focus seems drawn on the main character, which is, to an extent, a good choice. Katniss as the "chosen one" heron is overly used in the Hollywood hack circuit, but hey, most people don't mind formulas given the films blockbuster success.
The original film was not overly impressive. It was successful because a lot of people watched it, and it was based on a popular book at the time, but it wasn't a cinema masterpiece. The build and suspense written into the actual games in the original was unimpressive and the followup does a better job at building intensity and suspense. In that way the sequel surpasses the original. The tone of the film is less bland than the original even if some of this films most heartfelt moments felt like I was at a High School dance, which is authentic and meaningful, if you can somehow separate the gush from the fact that in the Hunger Games world people are being flogged and executed daily. The Hunger Games and Catching Fire both suffer from in my opinion the same issue. The stakes are minimal if the conflict between the have and have not's in the film aren't overstated. Katniss may be the lead, but certainly in can be made clear that she is but a conduit for the undercurrent of political duress of the masses being oppressed by a monarchy who is punishing and cold. The distance between those two sides, and the creation of that division is how the film has built any sort of credence with general audiences. However, did they go far enough? Did they put enough in front of you to really hate the opposition? Have they convinced the audience that Katniss and her district folk are really suffering? The answer to me, is no, they didn't push far enough. The story is good, but not great, because dramatically they haven't extended themselves to really convince viewers that this is a matter of life and death.
I felt content with this film and don't hate that I put money in Hollywood's pocket. They took a pretty average product, polished it, pumped some needed cash flow into it, and then sent it out in the cold of Thanksgiving, leaving no trace of any other noteworthy films who didn't want to get caught in a tussle with Hunger Games.