Final Hunger Games book will be split into two films

Release dates revealed for Mockingjay Part 1 & 2

 

 

The Hunger Games was a huge smash at the box office earlier this year, taking nearly $700 million worldwide and scoring largely favourable reviews along the way. With that in mind then, it should come as no surprise that Lionsgate have taken the decision to split the final film in the series into two parts.

It had long been rumoured that Mockingjay, the final book in the trilogy, would be bisected for the benefit of the box office, but this the first time the studio have officially confirmed the move.

One of the lengthier stories in the series, there's enough material in there to justify the split, although it doesn't require too much cynicism to deduce that artistic concerns aren't at the forefront of Lionsgate's thinking.

The first part will open on 21 November 2014 with the second arriving almost exactly a year later on 20 November 2015. Both of those will be preceded by Catching Fire on 22 November 2013, meaning we'll be getting an autumn dose of The Hunger Games for the next three years to come.

Catching Fire is currently moving towards the stage where it's ready to begin filming, with Jena Malone and Philip Seymour Hoffman recently added to the cast as Johanna Mason and Plutarch Heavensbee respectively. Finnick Odair remains the last significant role to be cast, and the studio will hope to have that wrapped up as soon as possible.

Francis Lawrence is in place to direct Catching Fire, although at this stage there is no guarantee that he'll be staying on to helm the final two films. Much will depend on his ability to deliver the goods within a horribly rigid timeframe, which shows no signs of slackening for the concluding parts of the series. Rather him than us...

Do you think the last book warrants a two-film split? Tell us, below!

Comments

    • SiMan

      Jul 11th 2012, 12:56

      Thought the first film was alright, but wonder how well the second will do as the events of the book are pretty much the exact same as what happens in the first (at least, from the structural point of view of what would happen on screen, before anyone has a go at me!)

      Alert a moderator

    • ChrisWootton

      Jul 11th 2012, 13:00

      Sounds like they are milking the cash cow as much as possible. Haven't seen the first one yet but will check it out on doovde

      Alert a moderator

    • alexr

      Jul 11th 2012, 15:50

      This is definitely a case of "milking the public for all they can". Yes, Mockingjay is the longest book in the series, but it has the same number of chapters (excluding the epilogue) as the other two books, and there is less dialogue due to the fact that the last third of the book is almost purely action!!! Seriously, if not for the money, then WHY THE f**k!?!

      Alert a moderator

    • Mia11

      Jul 11th 2012, 22:31

      @alexr I completely agree. I read all the three books before all the hype and movies, and I remember thinking that whilst the books are really great and deserved to be made into film (a lot more so than Twilight!) that no way could they do a split on mockingjay. Since it's the final story, most of it's action. No only would it therefore be stupid to break it in half, but why would you even want to? and how can they even make decisions like this when the sequel hasn't even come out? It seems to me that for a series that's trying to distinguish itself so much, Lionsgate are doing all they can to make viewers link the Hunger Games to things like Twilight and Harry Potter.

      Alert a moderator

    • georgeWW

      Jul 12th 2012, 0:11

      splitting the final book into two parts looks like they are doing a twilight and trying to milk every penny they can out of it as it doesn't in a million years need two movies just like breaking dawn didn't and don't kill me but the deathly hallows could have been one movie(yes a long one) but one none the less splitting the final book in two is just another way to make money

      Alert a moderator

    • QuietLife

      Jul 12th 2012, 1:09

      Doing a Twilight or doing a Potter? Either way, it seems to work. Shameless...

      Alert a moderator

    • trist808

      Jul 12th 2012, 10:57

      It's all about the money, film making is a business at the end of the day and while the punters are willing to pay, this is what's gonna happen. Potter worked, Twilight worked, it makes sense for them to do it.

      Alert a moderator

    • Ali1748

      Jul 12th 2012, 22:51

      Gotta tug those udders for all that cash.

      Alert a moderator