Lionsgate has announced the film version of Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games prequel, The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes.
Just from the press, Lionsgate has just announced plans to look away Suzanne Collins‘Will come Hunger Games prequel, The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, to the next Hunger Games film. Director Francis Lawrence, who took over for Gary Ross after the first Hunger Games and help the next three installments (Catch Fire in 2013, Mockingjay part I in 2014 and Mockingjay part II in 2015), returned to the director’s chair, with Michael Arndt writing the screenplay and production of Nina Jacobson and Brad Simpson. No, I don’t know when the release date is, but pay attention to the pre-Thanksgiving slots available.
The book, which is due May 19, is thought to be a tale of the abominable origins of Coriolanus Snow, featuring a tyrant who was finally 18 years old before he became the genocidal President Panem. Yes, there have been several online chats about the potential “problematic” idea of highlighting a handsome white man who eventually became a baddie, and it’s no secret that I think Hunger Games The property must stop while ahead.
At the very least, I would argue that people appear for tent characters (Jennifer Lawrence’s Katniss Everdeen) as much for source material, just as they appear for Harry Potter FOR Harry Potter and for Dusk specifically because of Bella and Edward. That is the main reason why Harry Potter and Dusk turned into a temporary cinematic sensation (among others) The Seeker: The Dark is Rising, Mortal Machine, Mortal Instrument: City of Bones and Giver no.
People appear for more tent characters than IPs or plots, although the plot is easily explained (“children are forced to kill other children for television entertainment,” “a vampire and a teenage girl fall in love,” “a boy men go to boarding school for witches “) translate better than convoluted plots Different and Labyrinth runner sequel. In addition, they want to see Katniss kick and save the proverbial day, to the point where viewers decline when films move away from the real “hunger game” and begin to really dig into politics and entertainment / media criticism that is only implied in the first two films .
Mockingjay part I ($ 337 million domestic and $ 767 million global) and Mockingjay part II ($ 282 million / $ 648 million) experienced a comparative decline from the first two films when the films moved farther than the whole “beautiful girls and cute boys who looked stylish and then killed each other for sports on television” gimmick . Many cinema audiences clearly do not care about politics or thematic contexts and only want to watch hot people involved in bread and circus disruptions that the films try to criticize.
It’s descending from the theater Hunger Games ($ 408 million domestic and $ 654 million global) and Catch Fire ($ 424 million / $ 865 million) along with the actual presidential election of a wannabe dictator, seems to imply that the audience did not get the point (or took the fourth film twist as the parable of “Hillary Clinton is evil”) or did not care beyond the sensation the surface, which frankly is partly why some of us actually talk about property a lot more. However, source material is not always responsible for consumer reactions, and The Hunger Games remains the last “new to the cinema” franchise that attracts top-tier blockbuster numbers.
As I feared in 2015, everything that has printed in the range of $ 750 – $ 1 billion (or more) has been animated or modified / resumed from properties that were previously successful or (in the case of MCU and DC Films) brands. You can argue with that Jumanji: Welcome to the Forest (sequel 22 years later for a film that made $ 365 million which jumped to $ 962 million globally) is the closest exception to the rules we have, and maybe John Wick: Chapter 4 can go supernovae abroad when the time comes and thus debate together Mission Impossible and fast and roaring, but it is entirely speculative.
Everything that jumped to infinity since the end of March 2012, only six weeks before Avenger change everything, has become a “new” comic film (Black Panther, Aquaman, etc.) of the universe and the cinematic reshuffle or continuation (Jurassic World, Star Wars, The Hobbits, Fast & Furious, Fantastic Beasts, etc. from previously successful cinematic properties.
And Lionsgate hasn’t had anything close to the level of success since then, except for the fifth and final Dusk the film ($ 819 million) at the end of 2012 that they shared after buying Summit Entertainment. That Now you see me the film earned $ 350 million and $ 334 million in 2013 and 2016, meanwhile John Wick: Chapter 3 jumped to $ 322 million last year and the original, non-franchise La La Land dance to $ 441 million in 2016/2017. Of course there is nothing on a total scale of $ 650- $ 865 million from all four Hunger Games film.
That is not a criticism, because Lionsgate is generally not known for large mega-blockbuster poles, and that is not a standard they must maintain on a regular basis. The Hunger Games arrived just at the right time, with Jennifer Lawrence at the peak of fame, the media all licked “strong, fierce” Katniss Everdeen as a match for Dusk“Weak spirit, passive, attached to a boy” Bella Swann.
None of the descriptions are fair, and Hunger Games his films are very interesting when Katniss’s portrait struggles with the mythological version created by the media, just as Lawrence deals with balancing his true self with the persona “cool girl” the media creates. Katniss is not the greatest American hero just because he occasionally fights and shoots arrows here and there, and Lawrence is not the ideal “cool girl” just because he eats burgers and stumbles down stairs.
The fourth and final Hunger Games The film shows cruelty for what it really is, which is why I am disappointed to see it appear (only compared to its predecessor) which is relatively bad. Of course, this was previewed by my audience’s reaction to the first film (cheering when kidnapped children killed other kidnapped children) and the ironic red carpet prime premiere for the second (and possibly others) film that resembled a Capitol propaganda show top-tier.
Like, relatively speaking, reaction (minority vocal) fans to Iron Man 3 and The Last Jedi, a more political and deconstructionist relative rejection Hunger Games films (and that’s not like the first two in terms of their politics) highlight audiences who really only want bread and circuses and / or entertaining fantasy figures. So I wondered, even thinking of the book as strong and powerful reading, how new Hunger Games will be accepted.
To be fair, there is a difference between “This is new Hunger Games prequel “and” This is new Hunger Games franchise, “as I imagined curiosity would do the trick for at least the” first “movie. After all, Fantastic beasts and where to find them earned $ 817 million worldwide before The crime of Grindelwald down to (total domestic that is still dense, poor and a poor audience set aside) $ 659 million global cume two years later.
I am sure we will have more information after people actually read the book. And only because I was reluctant to consider the actual thematic inheritance of the four original ones Hunger Games the film does not mean the film itself is bad, or their intentions are immoral. Sometimes you make it Fight Club and people came out thinking Tyler Durden was a hero and “Project Mayhem” sounded like a good idea. As for humanizing bad people, that might turn out to be less “problematic” and more “culturally irrelevant.” As we have seen over the past four years, sometimes bad people get closer to Commander Cobra than Anakin Skywalker.