It’s rather interesting, as there really isn’t much for me to say about “Catching Fire”. It was a good film, it was extremely enjoyable, and had fun and more mature performances from its leads, but it just ended up feeling artificial to me. The post-apocalyptic nation of Panem is nightmarish, and the ideas behind the “Hunger Games” are wonderfully inventive, but to me, any teen-centered film series based on books after the “Harry Potter” films have a huge weight on their shoulders. Films like the “Hunger Games” are challenged to remain loyal to the books they were based on, while also making the films fun to watch over and over again. J.K. Rowling’s series was able to do this; I don’t feel the same way about Suzanne Collins’. With each successive “Harry Potter” film, I was able to re-watch each picture multiple times, discovering something new on every occasion. I have now seen the first “Hunger Games” three times, and it offers nothing more to me. It’s a shame that I have to compare these two film series and I can’t just let each stand alone, but that’s the way it is in the world of movies. Next week catch my review of “Dallas Buyers Club” right here at wcyt.org. Until next time, I’m Matt Hamilton and I have a severe aversion to books.