Review: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes strikes, but doesn’t quite manage to sink its teeth in

I went into watching The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes with some hesitation - how do you even begin to try to follow in the footsteps of the four films before?

But the prequel doesn’t just slither, it strikes. Although its messages don't sink in with quite the same venom.

Set 64 years before the events of the first movie, The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes tracks a young Corionalus Snow (Tom Blyth) as he becomes a mentor in the Games, trying to impress the competition's haunted creator Casca Highbottom (Peter Dinklage) and 'head game maker' Volumnia Gaul (Viola Davis).

Blyth delivers a captivating performance as the younger President Snow torn between family and success versus love, playing the divide masterfully, making Corionalus' to-ing and fro-ing hard to predict and more uneasy to watch.

Rachel Zegler's role as District 12 tribute Lucy Gray Baird marks her transition from the breakthrough star we saw in 2021's West Side Story as a more innocent and romantic actor into a much more savvy, self-assured and layered performer.

This suits her character Lucy, a much more calculated tribute than Katniss Everdeen.

And it's certainly nice to see a female character underestimated only to strike back, not heroically but from murky moral depths.

Lionsgate

Over the course of the film, Songbirds & Snakes promotes admirable questioning around what it takes to be human, reminding us there is no straight line between good and evil.

The world and tainted experiences of love can poison us, but ultimately, there’s a songbird and snake within us all - it’s just up to us which skin we decide to shed.

The film questions the lengths we'd go to - or particularly who we'd use - in a bid to survive, swatting at us to reflect inwards on our own principles.

And the brutality in the Games is successfully conveyed, sparking several jump-scares, while occasional laughter also fluttered through the auditorium as a result of some well-delivered one-liners from the Games' host Lucretius 'Lucky' Flickerman (Jason Schwartzman).

Lionsgate

It makes a good effort to keep up with the same energy from the previous films.

Released shortly after the actors' strike in Hollywood reached an agreement, the film's highlighting of the choice of whether to perform for the cameras is a poignant one - particularly significant for Zegler too, who's recently come under fire from Disney fans for not holding back on her take on the tale of Snow White.

But unfortunately, that's as far as Snakes & Songbirds goes.

Lionsgate

Coiled with political charge, it strikes some similarities between Peacekeepers and the UK and US' police systems, Snow and certain platinum-blonde-headed politicians, but it doesn't bite, stopping short of sinking its teeth into the opportunity to really shock, anger or truly inspire and leave a longer lasting impression.

Perhaps, to make the film any more obvious in its reflection of the modern world would prove too torturous - cinema is a form of escapism after all - or maybe we shouldn't expect the same level of punchy politics as seen in Barbie.

Despite the length of the film, I didn't feel like any of the relationships really had time to breathe and subsequently be believed - the only tug of the heartstrings I felt was as a result of a brief moment instigated by one of the tributes.

And without heart, the whole franchise's message of rebellion risks being diminished.

Lionsgate

The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes ultimately strikes a chord with questions about trust, love and the meaning of success, but it slips away from delivering the first movie's strong message of rebellion with the same vehemence.

I’m sympathetic - in a prequel, how do you do something new when you’re setting the scene for the four movies already released? It lashed out with its political undertones, but it could’ve hit harder.

It's been over 10 years since the first film was released, the world's changed, politics has moved on, but The Hunger Games franchise hasn't.

If it’s been done before - which it has four times - something needs to be different and sadly, it’s not as powerful because it’s nothing new.

All-in-all, it makes for an enjoyable two hours and 38 minutes, however, the sea of dry eyes in the theater - and lack of instant chatter upon leaving - was revealing.

It sung, but I wish it had squawked.

The Hunger Games: The Ballads of Songbirds and Snakes is in cinemas from November 17.