IMDb > The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2 (2015) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 41:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 401 reviews in total 

226 out of 326 people found the following review useful:

Yes,they managed to do it.Worse than part 1.

Author: Panos Black
9 March 2016

OK,it's not that part 1 was good,you actually knew it would suck,but the 2nd really grinds my gears.

You have in your hands a civil war,the final battle into the heart of the capital,and you spent 2 hours of your life watching your main character taking a walk in a war zone.

And with all that time strolling,you have no character development,for none of them,just a few moments that the movie is like "Ok,from now on,that's how things are".

I watched this for closure,i wish i hadn't.

I didn't expected it to be a great movie,just a good action one,and it failed.Miserably. For goodness sake,London has fallen had more character development than a book based quadralogy,LOTR had less walking..good riddance to the series.

Was the above review useful to you?

166 out of 261 people found the following review useful:

Well padded

Author: Prismark10 from United Kingdom
9 March 2016

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2 is a film without any artistic integrity. It was purely made to grab as much cash from its audience as possible. You can sense this in the film which does not have much of a plot, scenes that are purely filler and the story just crawls because the book that it is based on has been split into two which means more padding than a model wearing a wonderbra.

With Panem in chaos Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) plans to assassinate President Snow (Donald Sutherland.) Snow meanwhile wishes to spring a trap to finish off the rebels. Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) is volatile as he turns his anger towards Katniss. Alma Coin (Julianne Moore) the leader of the rebels who plans to usurp Snow as President has her own agenda. You could say she has two sides to the coin.

Some of the action is humdrum and poorly lit and Katniss's use of the bow and arrow is almost laughable in this film. Given the first film in this franchise was a decent film, it has been disappointing to see the decline in quality to the sequels.

Was the above review useful to you?

23 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

Do not understand of the 10/10 brigade with respect to this film

Author: stephen-ellwood from Brussels, Belgium
14 April 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

-- this review may contain spoilers --

How can a reviewer say "not the best in the series" and then give it 10 stars? 10 stars is perfection, not as good as perfection is not 10 stars... In my opinion it was far from perfect though not terrible.

I have loved the Hunger Games franchise but this film let me down. For much of the film it reminded me of Frodo's (boring) journey to destroy the ring except that Frodo actually does get there in the End. Katniss sets off to kill the president and spends most of the film trying to get there but then doesn't, in fact she is beaten by the resistance, who managed to get through all of those traps that she could not and still get there quicker. She then wakes up to find the war is over. The twist at the end is so well signposted that it doesn't take much inferring leaving the happy ever after.

Special effects and infinite arrow archery skills ultimately don't make up for the lack of story and obvious plot holes. I cannot fault any of the actors, they did the best they could with a bad script.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 25 people found the following review useful:


Author: glix glandon from Alpha Centauri
12 June 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

OK, let's get right to it. This is not good story telling. I need more lines so, the actors, director, and whatnot can only work with what they are given. And, in this case, they weren't given very much.

Almost everything in the movie has been done before except better. I was joking to my wife when I said there will probably be some zombies or similar types attack them when they were underground, and to my surprise (because I really was just joking) a horde of underground "zombie like" creatures appeared and of course started trying to kill them.

This is what you would call an expensive "chick Flick". The hero is a girl. The commanders are girls. The only real leader was Snow (Donald Sutherland), and by the way, I think he did a great job as a villain.

I guess my main complaint is that this is just a bunch of boring, clichéd, yawn-producing crud.

Also, I just asked my wife her opinion of the movie, which we just watched last night, and she said she doesn't remember what it was about, and she doesn't have Alzheimer's. So, I guess that about sums it up.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

★★★ - end on a high?

Author: Elliot-D-George from United Kingdom
26 May 2016

My main concern before seeing this movie was whether splitting the final instalment into two movies would actually work or whether it was just a monetary decision. The answer is unfortunately the latter. I really like the first movie, which was very personal and emotional. Catching Fire upped the spectacle and action brilliantly, but Mockingjay Part 1 just felt like a waste of time which Part 2 couldn't quite reconcile.

As a conclusion to the series, there were a number of points it needed to settle - the battle against the Capitol, Katniss's opposition with Snow, and the Peeta/Gale love triangle - and each one was disappointingly resolved. The four movies have been leading up to these moments, and they didn't pay off. Not only are they emotionally unsatisfying, but they sometimes feel quite out-of-character and unconvincing.

Having said that, some of the action is terrific (although the trailers spoilt most of it). Jennifer Lawrence can do no wrong, and she is possibly more uplifting than ever in this film as a strong, young, female role model. Also it was moving to see Philip Seymour Hoffman's final performance overshadowing the brilliant Julianne Moore, whose character arc was disappointingly predictable.

Although Francis Lawrence is great at directing big, explosive action set pieces, the series is too overstretched and baggy. The characters and audience alike feel weary - had Mockingjay just been one concise movie, some of the problems may have been alleviated. Unfortunately the final product is just a bit long, unconvincing and unsatisfying. Still better than Part 1 though!


Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

Biggest disappointment since Phantom Menace

Author: Jane Doe
23 April 2016

I liked the first, I loved the second, I thought the extended trailer was silly (shoot down high-tech planes with a bow, also called Mockingjay Part 1), but then I was in for an ice cold shower. I haven't felt like this since listening to Jar Jar Binks.

The first two Hunger Games movies prepare you for an epic battle between the rebels of District 13 against the Capitol, which could just as well be the Empire of Star Wars, led by an equally cunning president/emperor.

However, instead of using all the lore that has been carefully built up, especially in Mockingjay Part 1, the producers/writer decided to keep the main cast as far away from action as possible. The heroes suddenly become actors instead of the warriors they had been in the previous movies. Everything is fake and nothing they do (or not do) is supposed to affect the story. On purpose! I have no idea what happened here. Did the writer die and someone else had to finish it? Did they outsource the production to a galaxy far, far away from the first two movies? I simply cannot believe that this was an accident. There has to be purpose to this letdown and I wish I knew what it is, but either way, Mockingjay Part 2 is the biggest disappointment since The Phantom Menace.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

tgchan says NO /

Author: tgchan from Poland
14 May 2016

6.7 /10 from 138,754 users. I would say it is a decent rating for something that is almost like a mini-serial. There have been so many parts I can barely remember what it is all about. Let's see if it will be of any joy.

7 minutes - it starts like a TV-series not a film. I doubt anyone would watch it without previously seeing the first part, but it starts right from the moment where it left off

24 minutes - oh now I remember. This is the film about how propaganda works and how easy is to manipulate masses

1h 14 minutes - there is nothing to complain about really. It feels like any other film from the series, just decent

1h 31 minutes - I do not know if the film intends to insult my intelligence or just the director is missing some of it

1h 45 minutes - and it started to intrigue me a little bit

Meh... the ending was nice, the series and this one in particular not so much.

tgchan's rating: 5 /10

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:


Author: walkingtheoldpaths from Gulfport, MS
28 May 2016

I watched this because I enjoyed the first two. The third was a decline from the Hunger Games 1 and 2 but so much time invested compelled the watching Mocking Jay 2. I was hoping for a great ending for such an anticipated movie and was greatly disappointed.

The plot was almost non existent and just rode on the waves of the other movies. The story line was disjointed and herky jerky. The development of the love story was terrible and did not evoke the emotion displayed in the first two. Very let down...

I did not read the books, but I'm sure that those true fans were greatly let down. I wish they just took out Hoffman altogether than the way they pieced him in with 60 seconds of total airtime.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

A Dull, Boring End To The Film Series

Author: David Arnold from United States
9 May 2016

Wow. I think this has got to be one of the most disappointing ending installments to a film series I've ever seen. The previous films build this installment up so much that you actually expect it to be the ultimate one of the 4-film series, with plenty of action, suspense, and drama, and given the way the previous films unfolded that expectation wouldn't be unwarranted. Unfortunately the exact opposite happened and instead of getting a really exciting & thrilling end film, we get a very slow, somewhat dull, melodramatic experience. I mean the first moment of any thrills is about 75 minutes in and yet only lasts for 10 minutes, and the thing is, those 10 minutes are the most exciting the film gets.

I saw a couple of comments from people where they said this is "Battle Royale II goes all Twilight" and "Battle Royale with cheese" in describing this film and I think those are two perfect ways to sum this installment up, especially with the romance line and the way Kayniss went from Peeta to Gale then back again.

After the completely over-hyped first installment, I found that the series was actually getting better, which was unexpected due to how lame the first film was. Catching Fire was MUCH better and blew the first film out the water. The third installment dipped a wee bit but was still decent enough and I thought it set everything up for a good climactic end film. I thought wrong because instead of a great climax it was more of a damp squib. Even the end scenes were about as exciting as a wet weekend in Grimsby. The whole film was just one big disappointment, especially given the build up from the previous three films and the whole "revenge" theme that was portrayed.

If you want thrills you won't get it here. If you want action you'll need to look elsewhere. If you want a boring melodramatic Twilight type of film with some cheesy romantic undertones then this is for you.

This is definitely not the ending I was hoping for.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

How to destroy a movie.....

Author: i-kokkinopoulos from United Kingdom
25 April 2016

When I first went to watch The Hunger Games, I invited my girlfriend to watch it with me. Her response was "I do not like that kind of movies". She had no idea. We went and watched it and she said this was one of the best that I have watched in a long time. we were waiting for the second Hunger games and it was a good film, but couldn't surpass the first. Now, this is fine with sequels, usually the second one does not reach the level of the first (excluding LoTR, Terminator etc.).

Now both mockingjay movie parts we completely off; Part 1 was a mediocre, to say the least, and actually it was watchable because there was part 2 to complete a half-burned pie. Watching part 2, I must say that they took a very very good story and destroyed it.

Snow was an excellent character (my favourite) since he was a bad guy, but he wasn't making the usual bad guy errors in strategic thinking. The "interim" president did not show her vicious side. And all the other characters were just wrong.

It is watchable but it did not cut it

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 41:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history