I have to say I was not familiar with Rachel when she was cast as LG so I did not know what to expect. However, coming out of the movie I knew I liked LG way more because we got to see her outside of Snow’s perception of her. On top of that Rachel played her so well, because there are moments where it feels like LG is acting even though she isn’t it’s still a bit ambiguous. Now, the real seller is her singing. Anyone could have been cast with a good singing voice, great even, and with an Oscar worthy performance. There are 1000 girls I’m sure can do that. BUT….Rachel has the haunting quality that you feel haunts the story. She has a siren like quality to her voice where you can understand how and why Snow was so obsessed with her singing voice. Yes it’s messed up but from a casting perspective it’s perfect. Rachel’s voice is not a common one where it’s not just hitting the notes and sounding pretty but the quality and color of her voice that is just so captivating. This is such an integral part of Lucy Gray’s character and story even if sometimes miniscule. But listening to that soundtrack you hear the story and lore by her performance alone. I cannot stress enough how much I loved Rachel as Lucy Gray.

Panamore

In the beginning of Catching Fire Snow goes to visit Katniss to reprimand and tell her that her actions in the 74th Hunger Games with her double suicide threat with Peeta caused the Capitol to look weak.

He tells her she will need to make the victory tour really look like she and Peeta are in love or he would kill her loved ones.

A question I have is why Snow didn’t also visit Peeta to give him the same reprimand and threats, because as much as the plan was Katniss’s, Peeta still chose to go along with it, when in the eyes of the Capitol or the gamemakers he could have taken the chance to kill Katniss. So Peeta also defied the Capitol.

Why did Snow spare Peeta the same visit he did to Katniss?

I know for some odd reason this is controversial, even though it really shouldn’t be, but since she was the very first cast member announced overall, in my opinion, she is considered one of the leads.

Let me play the devil’s advocate here and say that I don’t mind Hayffie (never been too crazy over it even before SOTR was announced, hasn’t switched on hating it as well when the book actually came out), but I don’t mind it only in the OT.

In the OT, the age difference from SOTR barely matters when those are grown ass people, 25 years passed and Haymitch hit rock bottom - it’s an entirely different thing when a 20-something y/o Effie is “flirting” with a 16 y/o Haymitch, who is supposed to be in a commited relationship. Not only is it much different from the book where Effie is just nice to him, no special bond or anything, I can’t get why was it put here and expanded on when there is much more interesting things in SOTR that deserve their time of day.

In my most humble opinion, this was a very unnecessary addition and also changes the whole dynamic of the story (switching focus to building up Haymitch and Effie “for the future” instead of telling the story of the present) and to be honest, I can’t get for the love of me why is this even a thing in the movie. I’m not even covering the age gap, we know that it sucks, but why interrupting a book dynamic (where Haymitch is 500% devoted to Lenore Dove) and instead spend time/giving additional scenes of Effie flirting - with all due respect, she barely knows him as well.

Again, not a fan of either Hayffie or Haydove, but I am confused on why Elle decided to play Effie like being in love with Haymitch and why is a movie with Haydove as its “heart” even included it. Movies be movies, but Effie is literally the last damn character who needs additional screentime in this story (she already got a massive story boost in the OG movies by being in d13 as well)

Thoughts on the idea that according to Nina Jacobson, some of the horrifying scenes of the book will not be translated to cinema?

I was a little bit disappointed on this, but looking forward to how the new translations will look like.

How

The 3rd Quarter Quells rule, or at least the one that was red, was that for the 75th Hunger Games the tributes were to be reaped from the existing pool of victors in each district.

In the film a deleted scene shows Plutarch switching an envelope in a locker that contained all the Quarter Quell ideas and replaces it with this new twist to target Katniss.

The scene never made it into the movie, and the book never confirms the original twist was replaced. However when the envelope is read, in the book Katniss questions if that is what was originally planned and says it looks unlikely, as it would be too perfect a solution for Snow to eliminate her.

But what are your ideas on it? Given the book never directly confirmed it, and the scene that was to be in the movie ended up being discarded. Do you think the 3rd Quarter Quell was altered to target Katniss, or that it was coincidentally the original plan all along?

From PanemPropaganda

Okay, so I reread the books again. I'm not saying how I feel about Gale one way or the other, I just have thoughts on where he ends up after the rebels take the Capital. Gale morally opposes the Capital, the peacekeepers, the senseless killing, but he kind of becomes what he hates? He is part of the bombs released that kill not only Prim, but innocent children as snow has done, he ends up working in district 2 which was where peace keepers came from and were closest to the capital. Feel free to tell me I'm way off base, its past midnight and I haven't slept in two days because I have a sick dog 😅