Iron Man vs The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
Iron Man has the higher audience score (7.7/10 against 7.4/10 for The Hunger Games: Catching Fire). Iron Man is the shorter watch at 2h 6m compared with 2h 26m. Iron Man is the older of the two (2008 against 2013). Both are action, adventure, science fiction movies, so they suit a similar mood.
Iron Man
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire| Iron Man | The Hunger Games: Catching Fire | |
|---|---|---|
| Audience score | ★ 7.7/10 | ★ 7.4/10 |
| Year | 2008 | 2013 |
| Length | 2h 6m | 2h 26m |
| Genres | Action, Adventure, Science Fiction | Action, Adventure, Science Fiction |
| Country | United States of America | – |
| Director | Jon Favreau | Francis Lawrence |
| Main cast | Paul Bettany, Clark Gregg, Jeff Bridges, Terrence Howard, Tim Guinee | Jeffrey Wright, Jena Malone, Liam Hemsworth, Donald Sutherland, Toby Jones |
Synopsis
Iron Man
After being held captive in an Afghan cave, billionaire engineer Tony Stark creates a unique weaponized suit of armor to fight evil.
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
After surviving the Hunger Games, Katniss and Peeta struggle with the consequences of their victory as unrest spreads across Panem. Forced back into the spotlight, they become symbols of hope and resistance while the Capitol prepares a new and deadly challenge that will change the future of the nation forever.
Where to watch
Where to watch Iron ManWhere to watch The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
More like Iron Man · More like The Hunger Games: Catching Fire · Compare other titles