Divergent

I went to see it with my friend and I can say, without having read the book, it is a pretty forgettable movie. Very average and very little excitement. This movie will join the list of average sci-fi movies that will be shown later on cable channels and people will always channel surf to see if there's anything better somewhere else. Yeah, it's like that.
 
I'll probably get the DVD from the library when it comes out. But the book series isn't written as well as the Hunger Games (which isn't really written that well either), so maybe I shouldn't have expected that the movie would be any better.
 
If it was between this movie and Starship Troopers, I'll go for ST anytime! Remember, service guarantees citizenship!:D
 
I just saw it Friday, and I thought it was good. Not as good as the Hunger Games(which I might disagree with Glen, they say a lot about our society). I liked how they toned down the romance in the movie, I always disliked that part in the book. I also like the sets, that was my favorite part of the book.
 
(Actually, I agree with your reasons for liking the Hunger Games books, Annemarie. The plots are good, and I appreciate the social commentary. It's just that the writing style isn't so good. Unfortunately, a lot of YA books are like that.)
 
Glenburne said:
(Actually, I agree with your reasons for liking the Hunger Games books, Annemarie. The plots are good, and I appreciate the social commentary. It's just that the writing style isn't so good. Unfortunately, a lot of YA books are like that.)
Click to expand...

Well yes, I agree with the fact that most YA books are poorly written, but the comments I said about the sets and stuff where about Divergent.
 
Aravis Kenobi said:
In response to your tests question, in the case of Beatrice/Tris, her test results were forged. In essence, she had an aptitude for 3 different factions (Abnegation, Dauntless, and Erudite), but her test instructor recorded her result as Abnegation to hide the fact that she was Divergent. She's the only one I know of (and can remember) whose test results were manually altered. I think in the case of most other Divergents, they were able to choose their faction(s) within the test simulations (simulations that judge which faction you have the most aptitude for). It's sad that I'm already to book 3, and I can't remember exactly how that goes. lol.

I may have been too quick to judge, as in the 3rd book, there are some hints that they haven't slept together; however, they continually walk that line, and, while I know people flirt with temptation all the time, eventually people succumb to that temptation. That's got me a little aggravated with Roth. That and all the instances of her characters taking God's name in vain. At least with THG, there's no God OR religion, so there's no mention of God either respectfully or disrespectfully.
Click to expand...

The thing with writing and reading fiction as a Christian, is that you can not expect characters who aren't Christian to live by a Christian ethic. If you try, it comes off as corny and is not good literature. And it does become a bit subjective when you start saying that a Christian should not have there characters doing certain things. I mean, what if you were to say that they should not kill anyone, which way worse than using God's name in vain, Tris and other "heroes" in the books do that, but you don't pull her us for that .
 
Narborg said:
The thing with writing and reading fiction as a Christian, is that you can not expect characters who aren't Christian to live by a Christian ethic. If you try, it comes off as corny and is not good literature. And it does become a bit subjective when you start saying that a Christian should not have there characters doing certain things. I mean, what if you were to say that they should not kill anyone, which way worse than using God's name in vain, Tris and other "heroes" in the books do that, but you don't pull her us for that .
Click to expand...
Good point Narborg. And nice to see you here!

If the "heroes" of this books are killers, how very "Christian" can we call it? After Christ's coming, all the heroes of the Bible laid down their lives -- none that I can think of killed anyone. How do we justify it?
 
inkspot said:
Good point Narborg. And nice to see you here!

If the "heroes" of this books are killers, how very "Christian" can we call it? After Christ's coming, all the heroes of the Bible laid down their lives -- none that I can think of killed anyone. How do we justify it?
Click to expand...

HI Inkspot, I am glad that you bring up the idea of laying down ones life, because this in fact is, in my mind, the key theme of the trilogy. "Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends." This is an idea which is central to both the trilogy, and to the Christian worldview, so in terms of the fundamental themes of the trilogy, I would say that yes, there is continuity with a Christian message.

While there is some killing, which includes the "heroes" (I'm not sure how helpful this terms for this trilogy) it is not something which is is glorified, and is mostly (as far as I can remember) done in "self defense."
 
Narborg said:
The thing with writing and reading fiction as a Christian, is that you can not expect characters who aren't Christian to live by a Christian ethic.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. I think that taking God's name in vain WHILE you claim to be a Christian is contradictory to your witness. Why even bother claiming Christianity if your life and work won't reflect it? We aren't called to be popular Christians; we're called to be faithful.

I still haven't seen the film and can't say that I'm upset by it.

But I was intrigued to hear that Cashmere from Catching Fire will be in Insurgent. Thoughts on who she might play?
 
I never read the book but I did see the film Divergent. I do find it perplexing and morally objectionable in a number of ways. Mixed in were some truths, or at least half-truths that I've tried to carefully sort out.

As the lead villain, if you will, Kate Whinslet delivered a stellar performance as a versatile actress. Representing evil, she was true to form when she proclaimed that "human nature and free will were the enemy." That was cleverly paired with evil by the author (I presume) of the series. Human nature and free will cannot be considered bad (and only someone or something evil would declare that). They are both ordained by God, who is all-good. It is the misuse of humanity and free will that is evil; and it is something that can never (as history has tirelessly shown) be eradicated by any government or group of people in this world.

If the series is a trilogy, then I suspect that the next film would follow the usual model and be a bit darker, so I'm not sure that I'll see it.

It is an interesting and fitting paradigm for the one-world/COEXIST/neo-aristocratic technocracy that seems to be emerging.
 
I finally got to watch the film the other day.

Aside from some minor changes (the eye stabbing, the meeting between Tris and her mom), the movie didn't stray very far away from the material. But here's the thing. Where as I feel that Hunger Games handled adolescent love in the right way, Divergent comes off as being more of a Twilight in the way it handles romance. It was corny. One of my few gripes against Catching Fire the film was the poorly executed/written dialogue that came from the book. Divergent suffers from the same calamity. Poorly written and executed dialogue makes for awkward scenes between characters, and the romance? Pfft. One might as well prepare to have a cavity removed as sugary sweet as it was.

Maybe it's due to the fact that I've seen him as Kamal Pamuk in Downton Abbey, but I did NOT like Theo James as Four. And to go even further, I didn't really like Shailene as Tris. I also didn't care for how characters were introduced. I realize a film like this can't spend hours upon hours of getting to know characters (exposition; i.e. Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit), but after watching the movie, I still dont' know what characters are who outside of Will and Peter. Al? I thought he was Will for the longest until he up and died. There's no distinction between male characters. Eric, though, was a well cast and designed character. He looked like I thought he would.

Would I waste the time on this movie? It was okay, if you like this sort of genre. I'll see the remaining films if only because I've read the books and I'd like to see how the last movie plays out (and I'm sure the following uproar over a plot twist at the end will be something to see). If you're deciding between Hunger Games and Divergent for dystopian YA fiction, go with Hunger Games. Better characters, better dialogue, better written. And the characters don't play with sexual fire (the characters in DIvergent come awfully close to sleeping together; I might remind folks that Tris is 16 while Four is 18, so technically their relationship is illegal in today's world).

My rating: 2/5 (the 2 is because it stuck close to the material and it made the book purist side of me happy).
 
I finally started the book and 1/3 of the way through I started skimming because the darkness was getting to me. I appreciate Glenburne's analysis, but dystopias just don't seem to agree with me. (For the record I do not care for Hamlet that much either.)
 
I did see the sequel, Insurgent, which just came out. It was quite interesting. It was very violent but ended with some optimism, which suprised me for a second film in a trilogy. These movies are interesting. There are things about them I do not like, and there are also things about them that are strikingly realistic.
 
Back
Top