Catching Fire
discussion
Is Catching Fire just a sloppy rehash of book 1?
date
newest »
newest »
Dude I love the series, but...I TOTALLY AGREE:) *air hug*. Honestly the first book was the one I really loved, I do love the series because it was a new idea for me and I love the idea of the Hunger Games. But yea the pacing sucked, the plot was thin and expected, the actual Games was just boring because you knew everyone in there was already a winner and idk I just didn't feel it. The ending I honestly didn't really see coming, but Katniss (who I loved in the first book) turned into a total...GIRL in the 2nd book. And you're right, none of the characters developed. Now I'm not trying to make anyone mad, I myself am a fan. And yes there is no point because the book is already written but it is interesting to talk to others about it:) Love the series, and the main idea behind it:) But I also agree with Jocelyn.
Umm... lol no. I love Catching Fire and it's probably my favorite book in the series. I can't really explain why... just is
I've posted similar thoughts on threads here and elsewhere before, but no one in those threads seemed to agree with me. I loved The Hunger Games, and that is the only reason I picked up Catching Fire. Honestly, when I read the description of Catching Fire I was worried that it would be a rehash. It felt to me like Collins had a good thing going with book 1 and someone (possibly her publisher) said, "Hey, you've a good thing going here. Do it again." Then jump ahead to Mockingjay, and we once again have character development and a continuation of the story.I think I have a better angle for book 2. Katniss went home a victor which should have made her a mentor the next year. If they really wanted to get back at Katniss for what she'd done, they should have rigged it so she's have to mentor Prim the next year. We would have experienced the Games from an entirely different angle, there would have been new players. It would have felt fresh and still so twisted.
Thoughts?
S.L. wrote: "I've posted similar thoughts on threads here and elsewhere before, but no one in those threads seemed to agree with me. I loved The Hunger Games, and that is the only reason I picked up Catching Fi..."
Hm, I'd never thought of that.
The pacing was a biggie on this one. I hated, absolutely hated, that Katniss skipped over most of the victory tour. SOOOOO much could have been done with that if Collins didn't do that. We could have the rebellions narrated to us rather than having it offscreen then an info dump about what happened afterwards. It would have been a significant opportunity for massive character development as well.
But now that you mention Prim being a tribute...wow. That would be totally awesome. But I doubt Collins would ever consider that. Prim's main role in the story is her feminity. She is almost literally the embodiment of feminity, as a contrasting foil to highlight Katniss's more overly tomboyish character traits.
Hm, I'd never thought of that.
The pacing was a biggie on this one. I hated, absolutely hated, that Katniss skipped over most of the victory tour. SOOOOO much could have been done with that if Collins didn't do that. We could have the rebellions narrated to us rather than having it offscreen then an info dump about what happened afterwards. It would have been a significant opportunity for massive character development as well.
But now that you mention Prim being a tribute...wow. That would be totally awesome. But I doubt Collins would ever consider that. Prim's main role in the story is her feminity. She is almost literally the embodiment of feminity, as a contrasting foil to highlight Katniss's more overly tomboyish character traits.
That's exactly how I felt about 75% of the way through. It started getting very 'haven't I heard this plot before?'. The first half was some nice build-up, but pretty uneventful in my opinion. CF was definitely my least favorite in the series.
I liked the first book more than I thought I would. But I liked the second one less, and by the third I just wanted to get done. I think she was rushed on the last two, honestly.Somewhat off topic, the The Hunger Games was one of the worst science fiction movies ever made. I say somewhat because I think the two things are related - someone saw a good thing and decided it looked like a cash register.
Matt wrote: "I liked the first book more than I thought I would. But I liked the second one less, and by the third I just wanted to get done. I think she was rushed on the last two, honestly.
Somewhat off topi..."
I personally thought it to be a bad movie as well, but it was entertaining enough. It's pretty good if someone just wants to kill some time.
Somewhat off topi..."
I personally thought it to be a bad movie as well, but it was entertaining enough. It's pretty good if someone just wants to kill some time.
what?.. are your people kidding me? i read this book in a couple of hours because i couldn't put it down. i loved catching fire and cannot wait until the movie.
Rhiannon wrote: "what?.. are your people kidding me? i read this book in a couple of hours because i couldn't put it down. i loved catching fire and cannot wait until the movie."Lol ikr!
I have to disagree,I thought the book was perfectly paced and was extremely entertaining. Katniss and Peeta won The Hunger Games and The Capitol didn't like that,So this story was about The capitol fighting back. I thought it was so good and the twist and turns were exciting.
Just as an occasional reminder...this post is not meant to be an insult to HG fans, so please do not take it as such.
btw, this isn't directed at anyone in particular, just a general statement.
btw, this isn't directed at anyone in particular, just a general statement.
i happen to totally agree with you i read the first book and thought it was incredible. i then read the second book and thought that all the drama and tension was gone. then when i got to the last book mocking jay it got worst everything that was built up in the first book was lost it was completely boring until the last quarter of the book.
Alexandria wrote: "NO. It wasn't sloppy and it added on to the story, If they were just re-reaped and went back into the games that would be dumb, but this is the transition/realization that the districts are falling..."
True, but Collins decided to tell us that, instead of show. Telling instead of showing is lazy, lazy, laaaaaaaaazy writing.
True, but Collins decided to tell us that, instead of show. Telling instead of showing is lazy, lazy, laaaaaaaaazy writing.
I totally agree-- I enjoyed the first book, but I wish that katniss and peeta had actually eaten the berries, followed by a short epilogue about how this led to the overthrow of the government. Book two and especially book three didn't do much for me.
I entirely and completely agree.
I love the series despite all of its flaws just because I love the characters and the story so much. It's somewhat of a guilty pleasure for me. But I thought book 1 and 2 were great. Book 3 had the most issues for me with horrible pacing. I completely agree though about the info dumps being super poor writing, and the telling instead of showing. Does Suzanne Collins think that writing a young adult series means that everything has to be spoon-fed to us? She must think young adults have no reading skills and need everything thoroughly explained to them. She leaves absolutely nothing to the imagination. I wish she would have showed us more I think it would have contributed soooo much more.
Hayley wrote: "I love the series despite all of its flaws just because I love the characters and the story so much. It's somewhat of a guilty pleasure for me. But I thought book 1 and 2 were great. Book 3 had the..."
Exactly, Haley.
You know, when I first picked up the Hunger Games, I was seriously excited. I was confident that I would become just another huge fan, another lover of it. I thought it would be a book I hugged every night with me to sleep. (I don't mean any offense to you or any other HG fans, btw.)
And while I really disliked it, what annoyed me more was that it could have been SO. MUCH. BETTER. I loved the idea, even though it was slightly unoriginal. Then the writing was just....blah. I usually don't notice writing styles all that much, but man Suzanne Collins' awkward and pretentious style practically bombed me in the face. The telling instead of showing, like you said, took away a lot of the power these books might have had...and yes, I agree that she for some reason thinks her audience are idiots and feels the need to painfully spell everything out for us and hand it on a silver platter to the reader. Books that could have been better annoy me waaaaaaay more than books that are complete crap, and HG fits that mold so perfectly.
Exactly, Haley.
You know, when I first picked up the Hunger Games, I was seriously excited. I was confident that I would become just another huge fan, another lover of it. I thought it would be a book I hugged every night with me to sleep. (I don't mean any offense to you or any other HG fans, btw.)
And while I really disliked it, what annoyed me more was that it could have been SO. MUCH. BETTER. I loved the idea, even though it was slightly unoriginal. Then the writing was just....blah. I usually don't notice writing styles all that much, but man Suzanne Collins' awkward and pretentious style practically bombed me in the face. The telling instead of showing, like you said, took away a lot of the power these books might have had...and yes, I agree that she for some reason thinks her audience are idiots and feels the need to painfully spell everything out for us and hand it on a silver platter to the reader. Books that could have been better annoy me waaaaaaay more than books that are complete crap, and HG fits that mold so perfectly.
Yes for sure! I wasn' t happy with her going back in the games. I was hoping for something fresh and new to continue the story. Even her training a new tribute, or something else new. Once this Quarter Quell nonsense arrived I was like Noooooo this can' t be right. And yes it was a lot like the first, but lacked its original luster or effort.
S.L. wrote: "I've posted similar thoughts on threads here and elsewhere before, but no one in those threads seemed to agree with me. I loved The Hunger Games, and that is the only reason I picked up Catching Fi..."That is SUCH an interesting idea! Maybe you could write your own and put it on Fanfiction?
And I thought I was the only one who thought that!
Valerie :D wrote: "Umm... lol no. I love Catching Fire and it's probably my favorite book in the series. I can't really explain why... just is"totally agree. I mostly love Catching Fire from all three books, because it's not as calculable as the first one, and not as desperate as the third. for me, it was fantastic.
but on the other hand, I see what your problem is(:
The truth of the matter is that SC probably wrote a really tight good book but her publisher was like "sorry dear, you'll need to turn it into a trilogy, that's the std these days" hence why ppl feel (rightly) that the last 2 books had lots of filling.
I've just got to say that the last two books completely disappoointed me. They seemed less and less thought out progressively... so... yeah.
ditto-i loved catching fire in the beginning, but now i think of it as a terrible book
i don't think it was sloopy but from the trilogy the book i hated or i didn't like that much was the last one... dk why just i didn0t like themthen i loved this book and the first one too :)
S.L. wrote: "I've posted similar thoughts on threads here and elsewhere before, but no one in those threads seemed to agree with me. I loved The Hunger Games, and that is the only reason I picked up Catching Fi..."
THAT IS SUCH A BRILLIANT IDEA!
THAT IS SUCH A BRILLIANT IDEA!
While I thought it was too similar to the first one to be considered original, I don't think it was particularly sloppy.I enjoyed the game much more in the second book. The mechanics of the game were fun to figure out and I enjoyed being in the arena much more. I also liked the different characters better.
Having said that, though, I really felt like it was a "filler" book. Someone said above that it seemed like it was stretched to a trilogy and that's how I felt, too. I got the feeling she was writing Mockingjay as a second book and was asked to write another, so she filled it with another games book.
I think I liked it better than the last book and better than the first game, but I don't think it was horrible or great.
How's that for indecisive? haha
I have to agree. I guess that I liked the games in Catching Fire more because its muderers killing murders, and not innocent teenagers killing each other off. But the story itself I didn't enjoy.
Jocelyn wrote: "I happen to be in the minority of people who dislike this series, but anyway, that's not the point.I posted some similar posts on the Hunger Games forums, and I realize that some of my wording ca..."
AHHHHHHHHHH no, it was perfect, so perfect, i loved it. :( im sad now
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
I posted some similar posts on the Hunger Games forums, and I realize that some of my wording can be offensive. So please, HG fans, do not take this as offense, because I do not mean this as a slight on anyone.
So anyway...I read Catching Fire recently and I thought it was extremely sloppily written. See, I look for five things when rating a book:
1. Plot
2.Characters
3.Writing
4.Pacing
5.Entertainment value/thematic development.
And for me, Catching FIre failed on all five. The plot didn't pop up until the Quarter Quell; everything before that seemed to be total filler and mostly comprised of Katniss's whining and traumatic nightmares. There was an extreme lack of character development. Collins seems to think that external trauma plus whining and crying equals character development, which is not true in any work of fiction EVER. The writing was sloppy, telling instead of showing, and the sentence fragments make the narration extremely choppy and uneven rather than quick an exciting like it's obviously supposed to be. The pacing was awful; entire months would be skipped over, and scenes utterly irrelevant to the plot would be needlessly dragged out. It was not entertaining for me at all (I'll admit this is personal, which is why personal enjoyment only accounts for about 10% of my rating) and as for thematic development...the morality of this book, this series, is extremely black and white.
And most of all, this book felt like a rehash for book 1 with all horror and tension removed, all character development removed.
Does anyone feel the same way?