Mockingjay I (Film Review)

[selenak]

Spoiler-free version, for anyone curious whether or not the decision to split the final volume of the trilogy in two would come across as "we want to milk this cash cow a bit longer" or would be justified by the end result, it's definitely the later. There is no "post" in Katniss' PTSD, so I'd rather describe her as shell shocked (come to think

Comments

[fallingtowers]

And I think if Katniss were a male character there would be praise about the realism of the story in allowing him to suffer the consequences of being put through so much.

Oh yes, there would indeed. I can understand people being frustrated with Mockingjay (the book): I loved it when I first read it, but on re-reading, I liked the concept really better than the execution. However, I still don't have any problems with the course of events or how the characters react to them - just with the style and presentation.

Unfortunately, I haven't see Iron Man III (I watch the MCU movies just casually and selectively), but if I should see it at a movie night on DVD, I will definitely watch it with the PTSD storyline in mind.

How many people loved Regeneration, both the book and the film?

The book is actually one of my favourite novels, though I think the first volume of the trilogy is also the least interesting one. (And the movie is by far more conventional, so I don't nearly like it as much.) But one of the reasons why I loved it is that it's a pretty obvious meditation on what war and trauma mean in terms of gender.

So it's more than a bit ironic that what is read as trauma in men (Tony Stark) is interpreted as weakness in women (in Katniss's case).

I think that people want to avoid the depiction of aestheticized female suffering / mental pain, and so they insist on Katniss having a degree of resilience that would, frankly, strike me as unrealistic. Considering what she goes through, having a breakdown seems to me one of the sanest reactions.

But they want her as a Strong Woman (TM), so she isn't "allowed" to have shell shock - which is often discussed / perceived as a "loss" of masculinity in the case of male combat veterans. Basically, a "good" portrayal of Katniss in Mockingjay would make her an "uber-male", in psychological terms.

Also interesting: Gale (whom I do like, generally speaking) fits the narrative of plucky resistence fighter heroically holding up despite survivor's guilt much, much better than Katniss. But I think it's very telling that the books don't let him be any kind of hero in the end.

[selenak]

Speaking of gender and breakdowns, both Collins in her book and the movies treat them gender neutral - I mean, Haymitch never got over his Hunger Games, or the fact he had to mentor kids into their deaths year after year - he's an alcoholic who if motivated enough pulls himself together to protect people but otherwise deals with his pain by drowning it in a bottle, and nobody sees him as weak. Finnick in Mockingjay I is as shattered and worried as Katniss, but nobody asks him to be a rebel symbol or make speeches (until the end), and he's not seen as weak, either. Among the female victors, you have Annie who's barely functional until the later half os Mockingjay, yes, but you also have Johanna, who is a mess but channels it via aggression. Prim and Rue are both girls acting far older and wiser than their age and in lethal danger, too. It's not like Katniss carries the burden of being the only female character, or the only character reacting to all the horror with breakdown. But because she's the heroine (tm), there seems to be the perception that any emotional reaction like breaking down and crying makes her weak. Bah.

[fallingtowers]

Yes, this list really drives home the point. Also, Peeta is another person whose sanity and personality are utterly broken at some point, though the hijacking plotline is more like external reprogramming than something more realistic like Haymitch's alcoholism. (Though he does have issues long before that - see his "it's okay, I get nightmares, too" comment.)

Is there anyone in the books who is not emotionally and mentally fucked up?

Speaking of Johanna: I really hope that the next movie is going to show her and Katniss as traumatized and pissed-off roommates. I liked the prickly friendship among survivors they had going on there.

But because she's the heroine (tm), there seems to be the perception that any emotional reaction like breaking down and crying makes her weak.

To be fair, I think some of the criticism might be due to the structural issues of Mockingjay. She's the heroine and the first person narrator, and she spends a lot of time in the books being trapped and breaking down while the war is going on elsewhere, and we don't get the glimpses we had in the film.

So if you want to know more about the state of the rebellion, this limitation would be frustrating. I was less interested in that aspect, so that was all right with me, but I also think the snippets from the various districts worked very well on screen.

[lady_songsmith]

I strongly agree with that last point. Most of the criticism I hear leveled at Katniss in my circles is really more of a criticism of Collins: to wit, that she spends the whole book thinking about herself and every time something major happens she goes off to cry. Which is really just a frustrated audience looking for more focus on the things that happen off-stage. I think Collins' dedication to maintaining the single POV really hurt both the story and reader perceptions of Katniss in Mockingjay. It will be interesting to see if people coming fresh to the movies have a more sympathetic take, getting both the depiction of shellshock and the action the book sidelines.

[fallingtowers]

I think Collins' dedication to maintaining the single POV really hurt both the story and reader perceptions of Katniss in Mockingjay.

Well, I think she's not a good enough writer to pull off the story I assume she was trying to tell. Maybe I'm reading too much into things, and she just decided to stick to the first person POV for the sake of consistency, and everything spiralled from there.

But I suspect that the decision to keep many events offstage was in some ways a deliberate choice. Personally, it was interesting to me because I like narratives about the effect of combat, but not so much about the battles themselves, if that makes sense. But such a thing is very hard to pull off in writing because the prose was too simplistic and lack the nuance to give it resonance.