If it's crap ... We'll tell you
Do you love 'The Hunger Games?' Do you find yourself lamenting the fact that there are only three books and therefore you'll only get three movie versions? Fear not! It looks like Lionsgate has decided to split the final book in the series into two films. The studio will bring us the first half of Suzanne Collins' 'Mockingjay' on November 21st, 2014 with the second following on November 20th, 2015. Meanwhile, in the slightly nearer future, the Francis Lawrence-directed second installment, 'Catching Fire,' will hit theaters November 22nd, 2013. Jennifer Lawrence will be reprising her role as Katniss Everdeen.
When a studio decides to take a popular franchise, especially those based upon a book series, and split the last installment into two films, the assumption that the decision is purely financial is unavoidable. In the case of something like 'Twilight: Breaking Dawn,' I wholeheartedly agree with this perception; really, you're telling me that story is too complex to fit into one movie? However, I don't think this can be generalized to all instances. For example, 'The Deathly Hallows,' the final book in the Harry Potter series, was far too epic and content-heavy to fit in one cinematic chapter. And though I haven't seen either portion yet, I'm willing to bet Peter Jackson's 'The Hobbit,' given its source material, is well-deserving of a double-movie approach. With the boatload of cash Lionsgate made on 'The Hunger Games,' and having not read 'Mockingjay,' I'm at a loss to tell if this decision serves the content of the final novel or if this is commercially-based ploy. I'll need my more well-read Spillios to help me out here.
Do you think there is enough material in 'Mockingjay' to warrant two films? Or is this a greedy decision on LG's part?