This is not to say thatMockingjayis in any danger of underperformingits not.
And quite frankly, the movie is indisputably a good experience at the multiplex.
Yet, therein lies the problem.
Its the exposition-laden first half of a story thats a year a way from ending.
Perhaps it will be the moment that the ratings soured for Blockbuster Television.
The bigger the budget, then the bigger the need to satisfy a larger audience.
However, the basic concept of film being a finite experience has been abandoned by studios in the 21stcentury.
The real architect of this current mode of blockbuster filmmaking is Disneys Marvel Studios.
How else was the studio able to convince general audiences to go see a movie about a talking raccoon?
Marvel is just one factor in the current Hollywood landscape and hardly the most direct comparison toHunger Games.
Yet, the studios unbridled success has undeniably been rubbing off around town.
Warner Bros. was the first to crack the code around the same time Marvel Studios had its kickoff.
In early 2008, WB shrewdly announced that they were cuttingHarry Potter and the Deathly Hallowsinto two parts.
Perhaps more egregiously, however, is the expansion Peter Jackson and WB/New Line made toThe Hobbit.
A slender little thing, J.R.R.
They also were literally structured to pay off each weekends cliffhanger with a new one the following week.
In essence, they were a form of television before the medium existed in earnest.
The other drawback with serials is that frequency can often reduce their distinctiveness.
Strangely, viewers who like stories with a bit more finality and singularity are not lacking in options.
They just may increasingly have to turn to…television.
For some, it at least proves that alls well that ends well.
Hopefully,The Hunger Games: Mockingjaywill, too.
Like us onFacebookand follow us onTwitterfor all news updates related to the world of geek.
AndGoogle+, if thats your thing!
