Catching Fire is NOT the Hunger Games 2!

(It's called Catching Fire. It is the sequel to the Hunger Games, but it is not called The Hunger Games 2.)

Last Friday I finished reading Suzanne Collin’s Catching Fire. Overall, it was pretty good. Much like the Hunger Games, it was fast paced and the story kept going. We got to see deeper into people’s real stories and how wicked the President really is.

I was surprised that they had to go back in the Arena for the Quarter Quell. I had not expected that at all. I kind of felt bad for Katniss; she had to work so hard to get out of the Hunger Games with her heart still beating, and then she is the only female tribute in District 12 that had won. So, she didn’t have a choice in the matter whether or not she wanted to be in the Quarter Quell.

This year was different. Instead of just picking (during the Reaping) like they did last year, the Tributes were picked from the previous winners of the Hunger Games for the Quarter Quell. (Which I believe is the 75th Annual Hunger Games.) The plan was, this time, to keep Peeta alive. Whereas in the first book—as Haymitch explains—the goal was to keep Katniss alive. They had decided that if Haymitch was chosen, (Peeta and Haymitch are the only male winners in District 12) Peeta would volunteer. That’s what happened. I believe that if Haymitch were to go back into the arena, he might have had a chance of winning. He is very smart, despite the person he plays towards everyone. And he did kind of win the Games once...I learned that he drinks because he is trying to get rid of the pain and memories that the Hunger Games brought him. Which makes sense to me; I wouldn't want to remember it either. I don’t know if I would go towards the spirits or other things that numb out the pain…I would probably end of going to a guidance counselor every Thursday and then write a couple novels about it.

Anyway, the characters that we see in the Quarter Quell are unlike the ones in the original Hunger Games. These tributes are much more…seasoned would be the word. As I said, each of them already survived the Games. So they had already gone through it once and know what to expect.

In the Hunger Games, the first novel, all the people that were in the games were children. I think the age range runs from 8-18, although I am not sure. But in this Quarter Quell, everyone is much older. And besides Peeta and Katniss, Finnick is really the only one that is closer to their age.

I won’t spoil it for those who haven’t read it, but the arena was COMPLETELY different from the wooden area last year. It was all sand and water. Harsh jungles and the Game-Makers were relentless: Sending poison and monkeys and all sorts of awful things.

The end was a totally shock for me. I did not see that coming. I knew the President Snow was evil, but I didn't know that he would do what he did…

There were a couple things, like in some Animes, that were in there that didn't have to be there. I mean, seriously, it wouldn't have changed the plot at all if those things weren't there. But, who am I to judge it? I just think differently I guess. And there were like two parts, two paragraphs throughout the whole book that I just thought were weird.

Onto other things concerning this particular topic, Wednesday, I saw the Hunger Games movie for the first time.

I am going to say first, that overall, it was a good movie. I liked the camera angles, Jennifer Lawrence was awesome as Katniss and I liked how—unlike the book—we got different views of the story. The director explained in the extras that they needed to do this because people needed to see. Because in the book, it is written in first person; everything we read is out of the eyes and mind of Katniss. We get no view upon the Game Makers because, obviously, she was in the arena at not with them. So being able to see the Game Makers do all the things to the arena was pretty cool. Seneca Crane has a crazy intricate beard…That was awesome.

I am going to say, secondly, all and the many things my brother and I found wrong with the movie. This was because we were comparing it to the book. (Brother had just finished reading it, whereas I had read it last summer.)

1. First off, the story begins with Katniss waking up and such and then there are the complaints about Prim’s cat. We only saw the cat for one second in the movie when Katniss was threatening to cook it. 
2. Madge gave Katniss the Mockingjay pin. She didn't buy it from the Hob. (This bothered me the most and I don’t know why.)
3. Madge wasn't even in the movie. She was in the second book. If she is in the second movie, how is anyone supposed to know who she is?
4. I don’t think that there was any uprisings in the Districts in the original Hunger Games…There were uprisings in Catching Fire, and even then, the Peacekeepers took care of them…

On a better note:

Haymitch was awesome. He sounded like a cowboy.

I guess I am done complaining, only because I cannot remember what else we were complaining about and my sister told us to stop comparing it…so I guess the thoughts left me. But it did get better once we got the Games.

Effie was amazing. I mean, I hated her in the book because she was so “on time” “this and that” “doodley doo”, but in the movie—and Catching Fire—I liked her. Her Reaping outfit WAS AWESOME and I am totally making one for myself. In fact, all of her outfits were kind of awesome…

Gale, well, he was cool in the book but kinda meh in the movie.

I understand why they needed to do things differently in the movie. Because there was just so much going on in the book, that if they did all of it, the movie would have been hours long. I think, that if I hadn't read the book, I would have thought it great. Ya know, besides the fact that its kids killing other kids for the entertainment of the Capitol...

Overall, I enjoyed it.

The End

~~Natsu~~