I just listened to the fourth and last movie in the “Hunger Games” series and now want to reread the trilogy’s last book again, or at least skim it . Like most readers, I didn’t love the third book, and I think this is generally true of trilogies. Writers often submit a book and are asked by publishers to make it a trilogy. This is a dream realized, of course, but often the writer has painted herself into various corners that are difficult to escape. Or fans are so hungry, excuse the pun, for the sequel that they force the author to rush a book to press before it’s ready/worthy.
But I do think the movie truly rushed this film because I generally liked the earlier films. I mean, the books themselves angered me in their obvious pander, appealing to the ubiquitous cliffhanger…allow the action plot to end, but do not resolve the emotional one till the last rebel battle. But formulas aside, the first two books and film adaptations at least didn’t direct me into mock mode.
Talk about lack of nuance….”I’m more humane than you are.”
I recently read an interview with a poet, Mary Jo Bang, in the April issue of the writer where she recommends reading in all fields, endlessly, in science, psychology, history, religion. She feels that that improves her poetry, the learning of specifics, but also the acquisition of language in those subjects. She feels it gives her poems speakers and insights that are deeper and more substantive, and always more nuanced. Wow, could the MockinjayIv have benefited from that approach!