Sam Claflin Talks About Finnick and Catching Fire On Future Radio
Would you like to listen to Sam Clafiln discuss Finnick Odair and the upcoming The Hunger Games: Catching Fire for a full seventeen minutes? Of course you would! Sam talked to Future Radio 107.8FM and the station has released a director’s cut podcast of the interview. Sam talked about how he had never heard of Finnick before auditioning but after gaining the role soon became a lover of the books (“I read them in 5 days”):
Beth: He was one of my favourite characters and he has one of the biggest arcs. Was he one of yours? Did he stand out while you were reading, like you struck gold that you got the good part?
Sam Claflin: I mean for me, I was already kinda cast! He definitely stuck out somewhat but for all the wrong reasons. Very selfishly, that was the only character I really cared about [laughs]. But the great thing about the books is that Suzanne Collins created these great arcs for each and every character, no matter, I mean from Katniss all the way down to her sister, to her mother. You know, each character goes on a journey. And I think that’s what’s so riveting about the books themselves.
Forrest: On the subject of Finnick, he’s quite a significant character in the story and he’s one that all the fans of the original literature are gonna have a mental picture of in their mind … So you’re gonna have this already well-established picture in people’s minds of what Finnick should be. How do you approach portraying a character like that with such expectations already there?
SC: I mean I have to say the pressure is on. I mean, I’m a member of Twitter and especially when it was first announced there was a huge backlash. Some positive and some very negative. You know people were sort of saying they wanted to kill themselves and that I wasn’t anywhere near good-looking enough. Everyone has their own perceptions of what a good-looking person is and basically all I can do is do my best and you know, you have to kind of not read the bad press or whatever. You have to keep focusing and working hard and the moment you channel that out I just had fun really. And it was hard work, it was definitely, definitely hard work. I was eating chicken and asparagus twice a day, every day. Not including all the other meals I was forced to have each day. And then working out two or three times a day. I didn’t really have a life but when I was on set there was a great dynamic between the cast and crew and when you’re on a set in the middle of Hawaii, you don’t really care about what other people think [laughs]. I enjoyed the moment when I was in the moment. You know, I’m still reading negative feedback but what can I do – I can’t change my face! [laughs]
Sam also talked about sitting down with director Francis Lawrence and discussing where Catching Fire was headed after the first film (along with a hint of Finnick’s wardrobe):
He was one of the first people I met when I arrived in America. And we had a sit down, we talked through the script, about the novels, about the previous film. I know he wasn’t the director on that but we talked about the flaws and ways of improving or developing the characters’ arc. And obviously the unfortunate thing about a film version is that they are trying to make this accessible to a younger audience, therefore there are certain aspects that you can’t include. One being Finnick Odair wearing just the net or just a knot covering his crotch. That was something that we couldn’t, unfortunately, include. But, you know, I’m scantily clad and hopefully people will still be happy!
The British actor told tales of getting his American accent right, getting Collins’ tone right, “mischievous” days on set with the cast, the transition from drama school to Pillars of the Earth to being in blockbusters – “I was eating beans on toast one day and the next day I was in Budapest,” and being freaked out by his talented co-stars:
It’s one of these things that gets through you, goes straight through you. I mean, Stanley Tucci, Woody Harrelson, Philip Seymour Hoffman, even with Jennifer Lawrence who’s just won a Golden Globe and what have you! I am lucky enough to be surrounded by some of the best actors that are living.
To round off the interview, Sam joked that his apparent clumsiness on the set of Snow White and the Huntsman was still present during Catching Fire filming:
Forrest: … you’ve been using a trident for the role of Finnick. Have there been any close calls or horror stories whilst you’ve been filming?
SC: There really has. This is a question I don’t really know how much I can talk about. I was specifically asked not to mention some of the accidents that happened on set. All to do with me, I have to say… Let’s just say I am a very, very clumsy person. There was fall, after fall, after fall, after fall. We basically, me and Francis the director, we were laughing that there would be a DVD extra, a whole DVD on it’s own for the blooper reel – just for me! Because every time he’d say action, just before we had to a fight, I would flip over or fall. And even when I was standing still I’d manage to fall over. There were plenty of accidents.
You can listen to the entire interview at Future Radio. Source: The Hob
He never really seemed to be the right choice for me, but the more I know about him and all the effort he poured into making Finnick happen makes me say ‘Yes!’
He has the charisma and charm that you’d expect from someone like Finnick, he might lack the whole sensual part but that’s alright, LOL!
I was sold on Claflin for Finnick a long time ago (I was unsure for a day or two after the announcement but just accepted it)
The more interviews etc I see I think he is perfect, it just seems like he fully tried to embody the character and make the best of it!
Thought he was perfect from even before he was announced. I was rooting for him since the beginning and was over the moon when he got the part! I am so excited to see you as Finnick, Sam! What a cute interview!
It’s never really mattered to me that he doesn’t look perfect as Finnick, I do think he has the ability to give the performance needed and I look forward to it.
I hate the rating system. They have to make kid friendly changes to a book that is very often read by kids. I know all kinds of people that have read the books and I know for certain that everyone in my sisters fifth grade class was reading the books last year (it wasn’t assimgned). They already know Finn was only wearing a net, they already know Johanna was naked. I’m not saying they should show Finn penis and Johanna’s breasts, but can’t they at least imply that they’re wearing nothing? Like just have the camera not show those parts? If Johanna is wearing a bikini, I will flip a table. Well probably never know that Finnick was a forced prostitute or that everyone’s outfits disintegrated in the books. And even the kids will notice that. I just feel like there should be a better rating system to accommodate for things like this–a not quite rated R book being turned into a public movie. Also, for example, the King’s Speech was great movie that kids could have benefited from, but it was rated r, because of a few bad words said like 20 times in a row as part of the therapy. There should be a difference between sexy r, violent r, and bad word r. Like WTF, I’ve seen pg13 movies worst than the kings speech.
Well, the rating system is often ridiculous, as the case of King’s Speech shows, but there is a big difference between a kid reading about someone’s penis showing and a kid actually being shown someone’s penis, so this actually makes sense. We don’t know what Johanna’s scene will look like, so it’s too early to freak out over that. I’m guessing that we will see that she’s naked, but the cameras will shoot her at such angles not to show too much. However, I’m sure they could imply that he’s wearing just a net without showing his crotch, unless other characters go “Oh look, he’s wearing nothing but the net!” which would be pretty clumsy. The whole idea is that this is normal in Capitol, Finnick is probably appearing like that on TV quite often. We know that he will be scantily clad, they will just have him wearing a bit more than a net in the crotch area, I’m sure.
And it seems that people often really don’t understand that the “PG 13″ rating entails and seem to confuse it with “G”. It doesn’t mean that you can’t talk about prostitution – there are lots of movies where prostitution is integral and crucial to the plot and that doesn’t make then R-rated. It’s not like Les Miserables had to change Fantine’s entire story and the fact she’s a prostitute to be PG-13 rated.
As for outfits disintegrating in the Quarter Quell, that really isn’t an important plot point by any means. And since the characters are left in their underwear rather than naked, they could show it without any problems. It’s not like teen-oriented movies tend to lack shirtless hunky guys running around, do they? But based on the set pics, Lionsgate decided not to take the opportunity to have Jennifer, Josh and Sam in their underwear for half a movie, probably because it would come off as really exploitative, distract from the story, and result in every non-book viewer thinking that this was just a way to have hot guys shirtless all the time for the girls to drool over and comparing it to Twilight again, plus a criticism that they’re sexualizing their heroine and showing off Jennifer Lawrence’s body.
You know I love you, right, Ivana? I already posted my own take on this controversy, but I just wanted to also express agreement that if LG had Jen, Josh, and others running around in their underwear, this would have come across as exploitative and in cheap taste. Much as I totally understand why the arena outfits themselves were changed from blue and purple to black and silver. What works in one medium, doesn’t always translate to another. (Hey, even X-men changed their outfits for the movies, and there was even an in-joke in the first movie, I believe from Cyclops, about NOT wearing spandex).
I completely agree. The movie shouldn’t have to cater to nine year olds. The book was written for mature audiences and should not have to be cut and edited so mommies can take their kids to a family movie.
The book has mature themes but it was written for teenagers and adult audiences, with teenagers being the audience that Suzanne Collins was primarily trying to reach with a story and messages about humanity, war, life and important values. You don’t seem to understand that going for a PG-13 rating isn’t “catering to 9-year olds” (who aren’t the target audience in the first place). Having an R rating slapped on the movie would mean that nobody under the age of 17 would be admitted to the movie theater without an adult guardian. I imagine that there are many teenagers under 17 who would love to see the movie without their parents going with them. It wouldn’t just be commercially self-destructive, it would also mean , it means making the movie inaccessible to its target audience (and I say this as one of the trilogy’s many adult fans, who hasn’t been a teenager for many years now). And why, just so we could see Finnick’s penis? Is that really so artistically important? C’mon.
Oh yeah, I doubt we will get the whole Finnick is a sex slave to the Capitol’s créme de la créme, which is a shame cause it was amazing to read such horrible things (it sounds odd, but it really gave the character a 360 from me. From cocky pretty boy to actual human being)
It was so intense to read how these people are literally like ancient Greece in every possible way they can, making the same mistakes(?) just in a different environment.
We didn’t get the details on what Finnick did with his clients in the book either. The mere fact that he was a sex slave isn’t something that gets you an R rating, any more than Fantine being a prostitute would get Les Miserables an R rating.
On the changes to make the movie PG-13: Just remember that Jurassic Park was PG-13. Also, we as adults probably shouldn’t get hung up about what they’re wearing, as long as the essence is still there. If Johanna isn’t naked, it shouldn’t bother us unless they fail to otherwise convey her sensual, teasing personality.
On the rating system: Movie ratings come with explanations as to why they’re rated that way – e.g. sexual themes, bad words, etc. While we’re all different in terms of how much “R-rated” stuff we’re exposed to at a young age, I think they’re doing the responsible thing by regulating on their side. Besides, the rating system doesn’t prevent DVD or Netflix rentals anyway – parents can still watch an R-rated movie and decide for themselves if it’s appropriate for their kids.
I’m the person who wrote the original long message, and I didn’t mean that they should show pornography, I just meant that they should try to stay true to the book but be creative with camera shots and angles. Also, to the person who said that ratings usually come with descriptions, while that is true, it simply isn’t enough. Most people don’t read that. We all had that friend whose parents wouldn’t let them watch a movie simply because it was pg13. To many people “Rated R for use of language” is the same as “Rated R for sex and nudity.” All they see is “R”. Same for Pg13.
Of course it’s annoying!
But when you read a book it’s not the same as when you see actual images. If an 11 year old where to read it, they would image net over his privates but not a lot more. They wouldn’t realize how sexual it really is. But if you show them a picture of a guy who’s penis is apparent, they will react differently.
As long as it’s not SHAKY FREAKING CAM i’m fine.
I think for Johanna, they will just show her shoulders, her back and her feet. They will cut out the ”round parts”. But if she is dressed…then we can flip.
He seems to be such a nice person!! as far as one could tell. I feel sorry for him cause he did read all of the negative stuff people are talking about him. You know it does kinda hurt…
As for me I’m just looking forward to see the movie and I don’t think Sam is a bad choice. We’ll see but that still of him and Jennifer gave me goosebumps
When I first heard that Sam Claflin was going to be Finnick, I didn’t really have an opinion. I didn’t know what he looked like or who he was. But now that I have seen him in pictures I think he Will be a really good Finnick. He looks a lot like who I would picture in my mind. A little younger and “shiny clean” than I would have thought but I’ m all good with it. And , by the way, how much more handsome can a guy get?
oh, sammy, i do love you so.
every little detail we know about him in the role just makes me more and more excited to see him as finnick.
meanwhile, i’m glad there’s at least been TALK of a possible blooper reel. lol. seriously, with a cast like this, i don’t want them to miss that opportunity again. francis lawrence better mean that seriously!
Oh yeah I’ve been so disappointed that they didn’t show anything like that on the dvd extras. I mean we know how hilarous jen and josh are and they told about so much fun stuff that happend on set..and I wanna see it !!! so please give us some bloopers the next time !
Once again, it seems people are jumping to conclusions and trying to find something to be mad about. Finnick’s costume being made ever-so-slightly more modest, in terms of visuals, is not the same as removing any mention of him being forced into prostitution. As Ivana has pointed out, PG-13 does NOT mean that the topic of prostitution itself is off the table. The Les Miserables movie is also PG-13 and makes it very clear that Fantine wound up becoming a prostitute.
So, I don’t think Finnick’s sexual exploitation will be edited out of the MJ movies. If it is, I will be annoyed. But I’m not going to assume that it will be. I also agree with Ivana that the books themselves do not go into any details of what Finnick had to do, except that Snow “sold my body” and that this messed him up so much, Beetee remarks that it’s amazing that he’s still alive, as opposed, to I assume, having committed suicide.
I think there’s a big difference between people reading about a character being naked or near-naked, and showing a visual of it. If 9 year olds are reading Catching Fire who don’t know much about what the opposite sex looks like naked, they are not going to get the same images from that as a 19 year old (who could get into a R rated movie alone) likely would. But if you actually show nudity on screen, there is absolutely no filter for such images. Since people can get arrested for flashing kids (or even adults) on the street with no prior warning, I understand this decision.
It also seems that Sam himself is expecting some criticism, but it doesn’t seem that the costume change was his idea, so hopefully no one blames him personally for this.
I found it interesting that when asked if he consulted with the author and director about his character he only mention speaking with Lawrence and not Collins. I love Pillers of the Earth so I really want to like Claflin but I still think physically he doesn’t look like Finnick. I think its much more important than the other characters because his personal appearance is such a big deal in the book. But he does seem rather professional and experienced so maybe he’ll prove me wrong. I felt kind of bad for him when he said so many people weren’t happy when it was announced he was selected. And he’s got a lovely British accent!!
Yay! I always enjoy interviews from the cast. (I love his accent)
I’m not going to judge on Sam just the fact that I’m so excited for this film. I’m not sad that the knotted net isn’t going to be in the movie. We want this to remain PG-13. And I’m sure they’ll find a sexy substitute.