The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes

Synopsis

Watch before President Snow become the selfish tool that he became.

Review

The first half of this movie is solid and sets up an awesome double feature, but then dies in complete and utter failure. Viola Davis is the absolute powerhouse of this movie and everyone else pales in comparison. Honestly, the rest of the cast could leave and she could have been a one-woman-movie and it might have been better than how it ended. Correction, Peter Dinklage also killed it. So maybe the two of them could have done this entire movie.

Ok, lets talk about the story. Overall, I am cool with the idea of President Snow's origin even though I don't understand why would would choose that over the origins of the Hunger Games themselves, but whatever. I think there is a lot of back story that is missing for his character and why he feels certain way that you really have to pay attention to the movie to understand, but you eventually get it all. Tom Blyth does a good job playing the character and I don't really have a problem with him in this movie, but I still don't understand how we go from where he is in the movie to where is in the original Hunger Games other than it being 65 years later. Also, he seem to be a man that just kinda loses it when a girl doesn't follow his plan.

Lets talk about Rachel Zegler. She does a great job, here character is pointless and makes ZERO sense. Why is there one heavily New Orleans accented individual in a place that in the previous movies was a wooded area synonymous with the North West. I know they showed a map in the movies, but that map makes even less sense with the numbers being all over the place. Here is my justification that her character makes no sense. She is an orphan and it is implied that it happened when here family got caught during the war and died. That was 10 years prior to this movie. She is roughly 16 in the movie I believe (around that age is what my wife gave me who read the book) and that make her 6ish. Her accent would not be that thick after 10 years with a bunch of people that doesn't speak that way.

The movie should have stopped at the end of the hunger games. Peter Dinklage drops a banger of a line and it could have faded to black and been awesome, but no. They have to ruin it with the second half of the movie which honestly didn't serve a purpose other than his last line in the movie, which is his answer to "What is the point of the Hunger Games?"

My Rating

If this movie had stopped half way through, it would have been a 7 or 8. However, they made the STUPID decision to tell the dumbest story that doesn't show anything extra for another 1.5 hours. Because of this, the stupid character, and honestly the lazy setting and repeat story from the originals I am giving it a 4. However, today I am Dumbledore and am giving some last minute points. Just one really. Outside of Peter Dinklage, there a few other cast who have physical or mental disabilities that typically would not be involved in movies without it serving a purpose to the story. At no time is there EVER a call out to them and while they might add depth to the disparity between districts, never does a character talk about it. They are just people and I love that. You don't have to be a pretty boy/hot girl to get a part. It is about skill. Because of this they deserve at least 1 more point so I am going to give it a 5.

Parental Rating

I am not sure how to rate this for my parents. It is really just a weird movie for them and so outside what they would watch. However, language is almost none, violence is minimal, and there is no sex or nudity. Based on the rules they both approve, but at no chance would they watch this and like it. So approved and disapproved.