Dec 8, 2014 4 min read

Two years ago, my friend convinced me to go see a movie that, at the time, I thought was just another overrated book adapted to the big screen to satisfy young adults and, more importantly, make money.

I say ‘at the time’ because my views changed. I used to rolled my eyes when I heard people talking about a popular series because I didn’t understand the appeal. Now, I make a point to read the books people talk about, that way I’m ready when the movies come out. Two years ago, I saw “The Hunger Games” and, not only did it change my views, it proved me wrong.

I figured since a movie was able to change my mind on things that were hyped and highly anticipated, it deserved a place in my memory.

When it was time for “Catching Fire,” the second installment in the popular series, my excitement was building. After seeing “Catching Fire,” I was hooked. I decided to read the books and find out how the series ended, so I would be ready when “Mockingjay” was finally released.

“The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part I” is the beginning and build-up to the final installment of “The Hunger Games” series. The film, like its prequels, focuses on Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence). After being rescued from the Quarter Quell, a competition that put past winners of the Hunger Games in an arena to fight to the death, Katniss finds herself in the complex of District 13 amidst a rising rebellion – the 13 Districts against the Capitol.

Katniss eventually agrees to be “The Mockingjay” – or the face of the rebellion, all while suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder from participating in the games.

Just as Katniss was rescued by rebels, Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) was captured by the Capitol.

The more Katniss speaks out against the Capitol, the more President Snow (Donald Sutherland) uses brainwashed Peeta against her. With that, Katniss finds herself in a never-ending cycle of struggle and personal conflict that is portrayed throughout the movie in a sequence of action, suspense and sympathy.

I know how the series ends, as does anybody who read the books, but I am looking at “Mockingjay Part I” objectively as a movie and nothing more. With that being said, why? Why would the filmmakers break the movie into two parts, put a year between them, and leave off where they did?

“Mockingjay Part I,” in my opinion, did not disappoint and came out much better than originally expected, despite mixed reviews. The movie left its viewers hanging on a note of suspense throughout the entirety of its 123 minutes with a finale of wonder and anticipation. Except, now moviegoers must wait an entire year before they discover how it ends.

However, I must say the untimely ending of “Mockingjay Part I” is probably my only complaint. Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth and the rest of the cast gave superb performances, and director Francis Lawrence did not fail to bring Suzanne Collins’s story to life.

I am impressed at how well the “The Hunger Games” movies followed the books thus far, particularly “Mockingjay Part I,” which not only followed the books well, but provided viewers with more detail than the original story.

I’ll be the first to admit, I was afraid of how they were going to pull this off, but they did. The people who brought “Mockingjay Part I” to life designed a movie that left people asking questions and wondering what was going to happen next, and I think that was their full intention from the beginning. It is the success of the past that makes me look forward to the future, and “Mockingjay Part 1” was a huge success, in my opinion.

This movie almost makes the year-long wait for “Mockingjay Part 2” worth it.

Almost.