The "Harry Potter" movie series has come to a close and the "Twilight" film finale is this November. So inevitably Hollywood needed a new blockbuster franchise based on a popular book series to latch on to. Enter "The Hunger Games" - part one of a three-book series aimed at a similar audience. This first film certainly has more substance to it than the "Twilight" movies, and a more serious tone than the "Potter" series.

"The Hunger Games" is set in futuristic North America (called Panem), which, following a catastrophic war, has been divided into 12 districts. Jennifer Lawrence (Oscar nominee for 2010's "Winter's Bone") stars as Katniss Everdeen. She lives in the poorest district, #12, with her younger sister, Primrose, and her mother. She also has a boyfriend named Gale (played by Liam Hemsworth). Each year Panem conducts "The Hunger Games", in which one boy and one girl from each district between the ages of 12 and 18 are chosen at random to compete in a fight to the death in an arena, which is televised live across the nation. There are 24 contestants (called tributes) and only one can come out alive.

Primrose gets selected, but Katniss volunteers to take her place and be the female tribute. The male selected is Peeta ("Journey 2"'s Josh Hutcherson), who's anxious to fight, but believes that he's not going to survive. Each of the tributes gets special training for a few weeks, so they can be prepared for the competition. Woody Harrelson is quite good in the role of Haymitch, the District 12 mentor. He does what he can to try to prepare Katniss and Peeta for...The Hunger Games.

The first hour or so is very good. We meet a lot of characters, including Stanley Tucci's over-the-top talk show host (though Tucci's likeable in pretty much every movie he's in from "Julie & Julia" to "Captain America"), District 12's wacky head official, played by an almost unrecognizable Elizabeth Banks. And singer Lenny Kravitz is good as Katniss' stylist. The early scenes at the Reaping, when the two candidates are chosen, and star treatment they receive leading-up to the games are well done.

But this is one of those movies where the set-up is better than the pay-off. Once the actual fighting competition begins, "The Hunger Games" slowly loses its appeal. After one nice surprising touch, the movie becomes a long, drawn-out, deadly version of "Survivor", with no twists or surprises. And unlike most of the rest of the world, I didn't read the books so I didn't know what was coming. Some of those who did are likely to be even more disappointed with obvious way the story plays out.

If "The Hunger Games" was a stand-alone film, I would be blasting the ending as a cop-out. And yes, series writer Suzanne Collins also co-wrote the screenplay. But that's always the problem with a movie version of part 1of a book series. If the writer actually had the guts to make some serious decisions involving main characters, which would make the movie much more interesting, those characters wouldn't be around for the next book or the next movie.

Along with "Survivor" it's impossible not to see plenty of "The Truman Show" and even "American Idol" in "The Hunger Games", which allows for a fair amount of social commentary on reality TV and celebrity status in our society. And, for the most part, the message is very effective.

The plot does a few holes in it, especially during the games when characters do things they would never do in similar situations in real life, but the film is well-shot and nicely directed with an authentic look by Gary Ross and the performances, led by Lawrence and Hutcherson are pretty outstanding.

"The Hunger Games" is rated PG-13 for some intense action/violence, mostly involving teens killing other teens. There's a good amount of blood and some inappropriate images for younger ones. In fact, because of it's theme and violent images, this is about as close to an "R" rating as a movie can get without actually getting one.  Most fans of the books are sure to like it and it will be a tremendous success at the box office. For those not caught-up in the hype (like me) this is a good, but not great film.

On The Official LCJ Report Card, "The Hunger Games" gets a B-.

The second film in the series, "Catching Fire" is scheduled to be released November 22nd, 2013. Until then, as they say in the film (over and over and over): May the odds be ever in your favor.

The build-up to director Steven Spielberg's "War Horse" was huge when the film was released late last year, because of the popular novel it is based om and the Tony Award-winning play. And while this version does provide a nice story and engaging characters "War Horse" goes down a familiar path and therefore fails be to extraordinary.

The plot centers around Albert (Jeremy Irvine), a teenage boy who lives on a farm in Britain with his father and mother. The family needs a new plow horse. But at the auction Albert's father decides to buy a young, energetic horse that catches his eye instead, and he spends all the family's money on him. Albert immediately becomes attached to the horse, who he names Joey, even though his mother wants to sell him back. Albert promises he will train Joey and teach him to plow so they can make enough money to keep the farm.

But then World War I breaks-out and Joey begins an amazing four year journey in which he in involved in war - on both sides - and has several different owners. His impact, as a horse, brings out the best and the worst of everyone he comes in contact with.

The "War Horse" story is simple and straight forward. Once the set-up is in place there are no surprises. It's rare for a film that's nearly 2 1/2 hours long not to have one single twist. What keeps you interested is Joey. Spielberg has done a nice job of making a horse the star of the film but not making it corny. Joey has human qualities and more personality than all of the other characters in the movie combined.

Irvine does fine work as Albert, especially later in the film when he becomes a soldier and joins the war. The rest of the cast, including Emily Watson and Peter Mullan, who play Albert's mother and father, give effective performances.

The biggest surprise for me is the directing, which is pretty ordinary. Where are the typical Speilberg touches? There are way too many close-ups and a couple of bad edits. This was Spielberg's first film to be digitally edited so maybe that was part of the problem, but since this is an old fashioned film maybe they should have stuck with old fashioned techniques. Could it be that he spent too much time on "The Adventures of Tintin", which opened four days prior, and not enough overseeing this final draft of "War Horse"?

There are a few other minor problems, including an annoying goose who is something out of a bad family comedy and where were the horses names in the closing credits? Without them there couldn't have been a movie!

"War Horse" is rated PG-13 for intense battle scenes which include some violent deaths. It's appropraite for teens and up, especially those who may be studying WWI in school. Of course this story is fiction, but the setting and the conflicts are real.

On "The Official Kid Critic Report Card", "War Horse" gets an B-. 

Of the nine 2011 Best Picture nominees "War Horse" was one of the least deserving.

Leonardo DiCaprio has received a great deal of praise for his dignified performance as J. Edgar Hoover in this Clint Eastwood-directed biopic, and rightfully so. Eastwood delivers an interesting film, as the focus bounces back and forth from Hoover's early days creating the FBI to his later years, as he's telling his life story to staff writers.

We get to see Hoover's struggles, both professional and personal. Before the FBI was created there were no real methods for gathering evidence from crime scenes or tracking criminals. And the public and politicians were not happy with the idea of an organization such as the FBI having the power over local police. But a few events change that, and we then see Hoover, as the leader of the FBI, becoming powerful and famous.

The movie also focuses on Hoover's relationship with Clyde Tolson (played by Armie Hammer). Tolson becomes Hoover's right-hand man and their personal relationship is also a key part of the story. Naomi Watts plays Hoover's secretary/assistant, Helen Gandy. She is also with him throughout his time as the head of the FBI, which spans eight Presidential administrations. The other powerful figure in Edgar's life was his mother (played by Judi Dench, who had a nice year with this performance and her work in "My Week with Marilyn"). The acting in "J. Edgar" is outstanding.

Eastwood's directing, on the other hand, is not. I'm not a fan of his back-and-forth method of story-telling. Fortunately toward the end of the nearly 2-hours the time periods catch-up to each other and  the movie finishes that way. But the biggest problem with 'J. Edgar" is the make-up. The film tries to show the main characters aging and the attempt with DiCaprio and Watts is pretty believable. But Hammer's older look is simply awful. I can't understand why Eastwood or someone else on the crew didn't notice during the making of the movie that Hammer's make-up was a disaster. Unfortunately it's so distracting at times that it keeps you from being able to appreciate his performance.  

"J. Edgar" is rated R for language, adult content, a disturbing image and brief violence. It's appropriate for teens and up, especially those who may be currently studying this time period in our nation's history.

On The Official Kid Critic Report Card, "J. Edgar" gets a B-. It's a compelling and engaging portrayal of a fascinating life.

When I first saw the trailer for "Warrior" I thought the film looked like a corny, cheap knock-off of so many other sports movie, this one designed to take advantage of the current popularity of Mixed Martial Arts. Two brothers - fighters - hard times. A rip-off version of last year's "The Fighter", without the big stars. Well, "Warrior" certainly won't get all the Oscar attention that "The Fighter" got, but it's a much better movie than I expected.

Tom Hardy ("Inception") plays Tommy Conlon, an ex-Marine who is back from Iraq. He pays a visit to his father (played by Nick Nolte), who he and his mother ran away from when he was a kid because his father was a violent alcoholic. Tommy was a great high school wrestler and he wants to get back into competing, this time in MMA. And even though he still hates his father he wants him to be his trainer again.

Tommy's brother Brendan, played by Joel Edgerton, is a former MMA fighter who is now a husband, father and high school physics teacher. The family house is about to be taken away because they can't pay the mortgage so Brendan decides to return to "the cage" to make some extra money. Eventually both brothers are entered into the greatest MMA tournament of all-time, where the winner will get $5-million. And, if you've seen the trailer, you know what's coming.

For a high-action sports movie "Warrior" gets off to a very slow start. Several of the scenes involving the sons reuniting with their father go on much too long. And the big tournament takes-up most of the last half of the film and, frankly, we know what's going to happen, at least until the final match.

And that's what sets "Warrior" apart from other typical sports movies - the ending is quite suspenseful because, for a change, you don't know who's going to win.

The script is solid and includes one nice twist that adds another layer to the story. All of the performances are good, led by Nolte. His work as Paddy will definitely get him some attention for a Best Supporting Actor nomination, and deservingly so. But this will be the only awards buzz the film will get. It's not this year's "The Fighter" or "Million Dollar Baby" or "Cinderella Man"  or "Rocky" for that matter. But this is a solid and, at times, exciting film and a must see for MMA fans. Director Gavin O'Connor (best know for directing 2004's Disney hockey drama "Miracle") stages very believable fight scenes and uses actual MMA personalities to add to the realism.

"Warrior" is rated PG-13 for the fighting scenes and some adult language. It's appropriate for kids 12 and up.

On "The Official Kid Critic Report Card", "Warrior" gets a B-. 

"Kung Fu Panda" was an instant hit when it came out nearly three year ago and it's one of my favorite DreamWorks animated movies of all-time. Coming-up with a sequel to match or even be better than the original would not be easy. And "Kung Fu Panda 2" isn't as much fun as the first one, but it's still well worth watching.

Jack Black is back as the voice of Po. This time he and the Furious Five are called upon to prevent an evil peacock named Lord Shen (voiced nicely by Gary Oldman) from taking over China and ending the reign of Kung Fu. Shen has discovered a way to defeat the masters of martial arts - by blowing them up with cannons.

Before he sets-out on this journey Po learns what everybody else already knew - that's he's adopted. But we all find out for the first time - through flashback scenes and Po's dreams - how Po got separated from his parents when he was a baby and how he ended-up with Mr. Ping, the goose, as his father. And the evil Shen played a major role in this as well. But before Po can defeat Shen he must find "inner peace", which doesn't come easy.

"Kung Fu Panda 2" is filled with nicely choreographed and entertaining action scenes. The problem is there are just too many of them, and they overshadow the story lines, some of which are pretty serious. And there isn't the same amount of humor this time around. Younger kids either won't understand the scenes involving Po losing his parents or they will and could be scared by them. This is clearly a more adult movie than the original "KFP".

The story lines involving Po's parents, his relationship with his adopted father and his search for "inner peace" are very effective. You can add "KFP2" to the long list of recent films that center around the relationship between a son and his father (already this year "Hop" and "Thor" have used that theme).

Along with Black, who does his best to keep Po funny and goofy even during these dark times, all the voices from the original are back, including Angelina Jolie, Seth Rogan and Jackie Chan. The Furious Five characters actually have a few more lines in this sequel, but Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) is hardly in the film at all.

The animation in "KFP2" is spectacular, though much of the action happens at night and so the scenes were rather dark. That shouldn't be a problem at home. New Director Jennifer Yuh Nelson provides stunning visuals, including the dream sequences and flashbacks.

I haven't written this too often lately, but "KFP2" may actually be too short. The film is listed at 90-minutes, but nearly 10 of those are the end credits. I was suprised when I realized the final scene (which is a bit surprising) was the final scene. It's rated PG for the action violence and serious themes. As previously mentioned, this isn't non-stop laughs like the first one, which older kids and adults will appreciate, but the younger ones won't.

On "The Official Kid Critic Report Card", "Kung Fu Panda 2" gets a B-.

There are plenty of fun extras on the DVD/Blu-ray, including the all-new short, Kung Fu Panda: Secrets of the Masters, a look at the new Nickelodeon TV series “Kung Fu Panda: Legends of Awesomeness” and two games.

Hopefully the song "Kung Fu Fighting" will be included somewhere, since it is not in the movie.