I saw the first two movies and read all the books prior to seeing any of them. I am not a fan of the first movie, to the degree I did not rewatch the first movie except as preparation for seeing the second one. (I've also seen most of the other YA movies out there, except for Twilight stuff....) I felt like the director did not know how to film action scenes effectively, nor knew how to accentuate real drama. (I think he was the writer for Big and Dave... which are actually very favorite movies of mine, but the tone is very very different than what was needed in Hunger Games. There are some scenes in Hunger Games that are blatant tearjerkers, and I just felt like they were regularly mishandled... or at least not handled in a way that brought them out. Or things that there is no real context provided for in the movie, so that the movie itself sets up resonances; basically if you've read the book, the scenes will mean more but if you haven't read the books, the scenes lose power.
I remember while reading Catching Fire that I thought parts of it were lame, since the second half of the book seems to be a retread of the first to a large degree in terms of plot.
Well, I saw the movie Catching Fire yesterday... and thought it was pretty amazing. I didn't outright cry, but there were a lot of moments that I watered up. The movie actually stands alone without you needing to read the book first, and the new director actually knew how to set up all those resonances. Much of the movie is OUTSIDE the arena, and it was still very engrossing. it dealt with the PTSD of the survivors. There is a valid triangle among Katniss, Gale, and Peeta (they all manage to be "adults" about things while each is still trying to find their own way in life). Sutherland is just menacing without having to overstate anything. The revolt is actually pretty believable; katniss as the "unwilling face" of the revolt is believable; and I like how all the characters have lives of their own (and decisions of sacrifice to make) without katniss, they don't revolve around her. She really is "just the face" of the rebellion, but it's all the other people in the rebellion that really are making it work and happen.
I think Kravitz as Cinna is one of the few parts of the first movie that I really enjoyed, and while Katniss locks everyone out, his sincere, no-bullshit, but compassionate engagement of her makes him one of the only people she's ever left inside her guard, and easily the fastest. The guy melts me. it makes this second movie even more poignant. It's so easy to screw up a character like that, but he struck all the right tones. That scene where she comes out in her bridal gown and what happens when she shows it off really did hit me hard; it was very clear what a decision like that would cost the designer.
And Effie Trinket as well. She's a character that very easily becomes cliche (in her constant Fe twittering), and she can also be as annoying and shallow as shit. But she has more texture than that, and you can see it especially in this second movie. She doesn't have the vocabulary to speak deeply and directly, but I think Elizabeth Banks really captures her well -- it's very clear, despite her preoccupation with the superficial, how much she loves Peeta and Katniss in her own odd, affected way and what role she plays in their success.
There's also a lot of great work by the less-showcased supporting actor staff... even Amanda Plummer shows up briefly.
I was really happy with this adaptation. it seems to strike all the right notes and actually evoked the emotions it was reaching for. I'm glad the director signed on for the last two movies.