Robert Knepper signs up for The Hunger Games: Mockingjay

News Simon Brew 12 Dec 2013 - 06:38
Robert Knepper

A new character to the world of The Hunger Games is set to be played by Robert Knepper in Mockingjay...

There's no rest for the team behind The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, which continues to make oodles at money at the box office across the world. Yet there's the small matter of two more films to put out in the next two years, and thus work is well underway on The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1, which lands in cinemas next November.

The decision to split Suzanne Collins' book in two is clearly a commercial one, and inevitably, it's lead to questions over how it can be done, and if there's enough material to adequately do it. The casting of Prison Break's Robert Knepper in the movie, however, offers a clue. For he's going to be playing a brand new character by the name of Antonius.

Given his non-appearance in the source material, we couldn't tell you who the character is and what his importance is. But we suspect a few more new characters may be added in order to bulk out the film's story a little.

The Hunger Games: Mockinjay Part 1 is in cinemas on November 21st 2014.


Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

Ugh. Knew this was going to happen...spreading it too thin,

I think Mockingjay being split in two films can be a good thing. IMO, the book (specially towards the end) felt rushed, as if Collins hadn't had enough time to finish it 'propperly'. So I think making two films will help in terms of storytelling (or so I hope).

If there's one book that doesn't feel like it needs padding when adapting it, it's Mockingjay - even into two films. So I'm intrigued by the idea of adding characters, given the number of characters from the book who undoubtedly won't make it in. But we'll see - it's not like hands haven't been steady with it so far!

Mockingjay is the weakest of the three for me and actually took a while to finish. I don't remember it too well, but I remember there being a hell of a lot of padding in the book. It just infuriates me how they've made a good Hunger Games movie, a brilliant second one, and now are going to drop the ball trying to stretch out source material where it doesn't need it. They could really, truly, make a superb third film here. But no. Money is the driving motivator. Once again. I kind of hope the film doesn't do that well now. You wait: reviews will come in. "Nothing much happens" will be the main criticism.

Love this actor, he made prison break for me

Depending on how significant the name is, he might be a rival of Snow's

Whilst being vague, there are spoilers in my comment that follows for anyone that hasn't read the books and it only following the films.

I wouldn't say it was the weakest, it's just very different from the other 2 as it doesn't focus on tributes in an arena. It's definitely the fitting end to the over riding story that had played out in the previous 2 books.

I'm not ever sure I could agree the book had a lot of padding, in fact I felt the ending seemed quite rushed. Like there was all the build up and then in all just (sort of) resolves itself.

Maybe for the films they plan on making a clear divide in the to parts of the book (the recovery in D13 and the assault on the Capitol) and extend this section to include all the elements towards the end that seemed to get glossed over once Katniss reaches Snow's house.

I can see how this book, of the three, could be split into two, however. The first two were practically told in 'real time', whereas the third covers months at a time in the space of a page or two, IIRC.

Theodore Bagwell

Sponsored Links