Lionsgate changes ‘Catching Fire’ title to ‘The Hunger Games: Catching Fire’

By Andrew Sims (@Sims) at 3:00 pm, May 24, 2012

Surprising no one, Lionsgate today confirmed that the second film in The Hunger Games film series will be called The Hunger Games: Catching Fire.

The decision was made to associate each film in the series under The Hunger Games brand. Summit made the same choice for the Twilight films. Each one starts with “The Twilight Saga.”

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire will be released November 22, 2013.

View the latest articles in: The Hunger Games

Jason

Repetitive, but not particularly surprising.
Madge

And cue the Twilight fangirls going up in arms claiming that THG is trying to be the next Twilight…again…

Please Lionsgate, this doesn’t have to be done. Everyone would know Catching Fire is a sequel to The Hunger Games if you market it right. Everyone is just going to say Catching Fire anyway.
- RR
  
  It’s not like they’re naming it The Hunger Games saga: Catching Fire.
  - Madge
    
    The only difference is “saga”.
    - RR
      
      It’s still a difference.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Anthony-Rex/100003224841100 Anthony Rex

Not a big deal. Keeps the name attached.
http://twitter.com/eiVega eiVega

Lame. I don’t think it’s necessary. People already know what Catching Fire is. Now the title is too long. I thought it would have been cool if they pulled off a series with the original stand-alone names.
http://twitter.com/SlySound Brett H

Shocking.

People/fans will still call it Catching Fire anyways.
h12x12

I don’t like this. Almost everyone already knows what Catching Fire is. With the right marketing, even people who don’t know what it is could figure it out. What happened to differentiating the series from Twilight?
- CliveRogan
  
  It might shock you to learn that before The Hunger Games film came out, most people hadn’t heard of The Hunger Games, and now while a lot of people will know that it’s a trilogy, a lot of people don’t, and those that do probably don’t know its name.
  
  Also, it would be absolutely stupid to name the series in a way that could confuse the audience just to differentiate itself from a film that it has no need differentiating itself from.
http://twitter.com/aadnama Amanda Douglas

I sort of expected this, but I don’t like it. Only because it seems kinda bulky. Adding ‘The Twilight Saga’ on to the Twilight movies was alright because it had a nice ring to it, but The Hunger Games: Catching Fire? It just doesn’t sound right.
- http://www.facebook.com/people/Maria-Wang/542480760 Maria Wang
  
  i actually don’t like ‘the twilight saga’. It has no ring to it at all. It makes people who don’t like the franchise role their eyes even more and think, ‘oh great, another twilight movie’
Aaron

I actually really support is decision. Sure, there is a wide audience of people that will know that Catching Fire is connected to The Hunger Games. But greater success comes when you can market even more successfully and this is what that does.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Maria-Wang/542480760 Maria Wang

oh please. they are just putting the title of the series in the beginning. What is the big deal??? I don’t get it.
Meur123

Why is this news?
It was like this for the books, or at the least the UK version.
Voldy

Well, expected as it is, it doesn’t have the kind of the title like: Harry Potter and the ___________. It’s for those people (from other countries or wherever) who doesn’t know what The Hunger Games’ sequel title is or doesn’t even know it’s got a sequel. Anyway, I can’t wait for the it!
Jeff D.

I knew this would happen months ago. Back in December and the start of the new year, I predicted they would do this. There’s no way they would do anything but add the main title to the start because it’s for marketing purposes.

Now, having said that, I hope they just use the Catching Fire title when the title appears on the screen during the actual movie, because the Twilight movies did that. They only used The Twilight Saga for marketing purposes, but the individual titles (New Moon, Eclipse, etc) are the only thing that show shows up as the title within the movie at the start.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1045615098 Riana-Tiana Menezes

Well I think we all need to be very grateful that they are not calling in ‘The Hunger Games SAGA: Catching Fire’.

But just for fun what other possible title do you guys think it can be called?
My suggestions are:
1.Catching Fire from The Hunger Games (Series).
2. The Hunger Games Catches Fire.

This is just a random name game so feel free to join in :)
http://twitter.com/Thomassholan Thomas Sholan

Not surprised, but I really hate this. This is the first change from the first film to this one that actually has me angry. Adding an overarching title like The Hunger Games: Catching Fire or the The Twilight Saga: Eclipse is just taking the easy way out when it comes to marketing. Would it really be that difficult to add a title card that says the sequel to The Hunger Games or a voice over saying something along those lines. People would be able to make the connection from the characters alone. Ugh. This just really annoys me.
- Lucia
  
  I can understand your frustration, but you have to consider every form of advertising and that it would be harder to incorporate an explanation than to include the whole title as they’re doing. And besides, my parents, older friends and siblings and even some people my age genuinely don’t follow movies/press/anything to do with it, so if I held up a poster with the 3 leads that said Catching Fire they wouldn’t know it was related to Hunger Games – some of them don’t even know what The Hunger Games is! You can’t underestimate the amount of people who genuinely don’t know/don’t care about that stuff, and informing them straight up is the only way to keep everyone – fan or not - informed in the quickest and easiest way possible, which is what advertising is all about.
NOLArunner

NNNNOOOOOOOOO
http://twitter.com/StarkidSims Simone

Not surprising and it makes sense, I dunno why people have a problem with it
- http://twitter.com/Shaftsword Shaft Almasy
  
  Probably because it suggests that the general movie going public are complete idiots who can’t put two and two together and come up with a whole number as an answer. It is just the sort of dumbing down of society that sometimes people get offended by.
Azeem

I have no problem with this, as the UK books which I have have ‘The Hunger Games’ and below it is says ‘Catching Fire’.
RSCAR

I knew they were going to do this!!!
http://twitter.com/emilyecstasyTM Emily Bryan

Not surprised, I don’t mind them adding titles like that. Certainly helps when talking to those not familiar with the series still.
applepie

Now it sounds lame… :/
http://www.facebook.com/people/Seth-Wells/1130513697 Seth Wells

its for people who wont read the book im fine with it
Shawn

That’s the title for the UK/Australia editions so it really doesn’t bother me.
Jnthn44

obvious move. i could see people getting angry if they tried some “The Hunger Games 2: Catching Fire” but this actually makes sense. fans need to stop trying to be so picky
hpatdh33

I just think it sounds better just saying Catching Fire.
http://www.rebellionradiopodcast.com Hurley

A little annoying, but it could be a LOT worse. (Remember Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief?)
Morsmordre79

At least it’s not Tyler Perry’s Catching Fire, or,
Catching Fire: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire, or,
Catching Fire: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan.

See, it could be worse. XD
- Vajackster
  
  What, you didn’t like Precious?
  - Morsmordre79
    
    Loved it, actually. It was incredibly hard to watch, of course, but it was a good movie. I just don’t think adding “Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire” to the title was necessary. There are so many movies that are based on books, and they do just fine without citing the original novel/author in the actual title of the film.
Mad

I think we all knew this was how it would turn out.
akacj7

the power of the hunger games – a ridiculously unsurprising piece of information still manages to prompt 35 & counting comments (yes, including myself)
- http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1045615098 Riana-Tiana Menezes
  
  Just imagine what will happen when the casting news for Finnick comes in. My guess. . An Uprising. ;)
Ilovellamas

honestly, if you want it to sound word-for-word like the book, then you’d better substitute the word “book” for “movie” from the cover of my copy, and start calling it “The Second Movie of The Hunger Games: Catching Fire”. calm down everyone. and if you didnt anticipate this change, then shame on you…
TheGarBar13

They are doing this so people (casual movie goers) who saw The Hunger Games will know it’s the sequel and go watch it.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000918686388 Peaceful Pearce

That’s a horrible title. In the commercials, it’d be easy to say, “The sequel to The Hunger Games.” I understand that they want people to know that the sequels are connected to the first movie, however, just saying it would an easy connection as well.
Isak

I don’t get why people still have to make a big deal about this. Not everyone is so knowledgable as to what is out when. Some people just go to the movie theater and check out the movies then: The Hunger Games helps give the idea as to what the movie is. If anything, it may help attract casual moviegoers who saw the first movie but know nothing about the sequel.
Meeee

yeah why not..i don’t mind at all
Amanda J Taylor

Hate this.
stjff03

Umm, shouldn’t we be hearing casting news by now? They’d better get moving since they have to be done with shooting this year…
kburford

ugh :/
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1508087481 Jed Joseph Anderson

guys, why compare this to twilight? they did this with the Lord of the Rings…….
- Katniss24
  
  Right. And that turned out really well. Maybe it’s not so bad afterall. Although I wish they had just called it the Hunger Games Trilogy; however, they are not sure whether or not they are splitting one of the movies.
http://twitter.com/twixie09 Lauren Gizzi

Better than “The Hunger Games Saga”. :D
http://www.korracast.com/ Fravit

For brand recognition. Smart move. Casual moviegoers who haven’t read the books will be more likely to see it if they went to Hunger Games.
http://twitter.com/ClaudioCatino CCMASTER_01

‘The Hunger Games Part II’ would’ve sounded better and more epic(and rightly so) but this is good too.
LilyLuna

I kind of wish they’d stop marketing this as Twilight because everytime I note the similarities it makes me vomit a little, but I suppose it makes sense. A casual viewer might not see ‘Catching Fire’ and realize it is a sequel. But as a fan, it’s an unnecessary mouthful. I’m sure we’ll all still call it ‘Catching Fire’ anyways. Everyone shortens the Potter titles too (ex: Deathly Hallows, Chamber of Secrets), no one says “Harry potter and the”.

Hypable encourages the community to use our Comments feature to hold thoughtful, polite, and critical discussions. We do NOT tolerate inappropriate, rude, or downright mean discussion towards the news story's subject matter or towards other Hypable users. We reserve the right to delete or ban comments and users who violate these guidelines.

Lionsgate changes ‘Catching Fire’ title to ‘The Hunger Games: Catching Fire’

More in The Hunger Games (256 of 987 articles)