Review: Divergent (film)

[Brian G Turner]

Beatrice "Triss" has been raised in a post-apocalyptic Chicago - many buildings remain damaged from a previous war, and the city is protected by a massive fence.

To keep the peace and control human society, every member belongs to one of 5 factions, based on positive personality traits they are expected to live by: selfishness, bravery, honestly, peacefulness, and intelligence.

Anyone not belonging to these is "factionless", and forms a social underclass.

At age 16 the young adults are expected to choose a faction - either the one they were born into, or else choose another. To aid their decision, they take an aptitude test which is supposed to better illustrate their best choice.

Beatrice's test demonstrates that she could fit into at least three factions - a rare condition called "divergence".

Regarded as a threat to the stability of this society, divergents are hunted and killed.

- - - - - - -

I didn't expect to enjoy this film.

The idea of being able to neatly divide humanity into just five different personality attributes doesn't immediately make sense.

But, psychologists have been trying this on us for decades.

And, like the Hunger Games, it becomes clear that the story is focused on internal conflict. But unlike that film, this adaptation makes a good effort to show it.

The story is clever - the concern about making the correct choices at sixteen, and sometimes going to new places as a consequence - and clearly reminded me of the real life issue to choose the right education, the right career, and the transition from familiar school to unfamiliar college.

However, the sense of danger, and stakes, grow quickly - this is no longer just about Triss - and the film roils with tension. At the end I was practically on the edge of my seat.

There's always the danger of infusing too much teen angst and ending up with a soap opera with special effects - but Divergent steers as an action thriller with a science fiction background.

There are some predictable plot elements, but many welcome surprises. The film never feels stilted or slow, and keeps a strong pace.

If the film is a reasonable adaptation of the book, then it's obvious why Veronica Roth's debut novel is such a run-away success.

This is a good story damn well told.

 

[HareBrain]

Hmm, the DVD cover rings a certain bell ...

(What if the male Avengers posed like the female one, by Kevin Bolk)

 

[kythe]

I have a different view of Divergent. I can't wrap my mind around a society that attempts to force people into lifelong career commitments based on 5 personality traits. Psychologists have not attempted to do this at all. If you are referring to the Myers-Briggs personality test, it divides people into 16 personalities and this is supposed to help us understand ourselves and more accurately assess strengths and weaknesses. But no one has ever proposed dividing society into rigid forms based on anything like this. And only 5 factions? I would think most people would be divergents. This structure is not a key to cultural stability, and in all of history its never been done.

I did enjoy the movie and found the characters very engaging. Some of their adventures looked quite fun. But the "world" of Divergent falls apart quickly when you really start thinking about it. They are raised in families, but if the 16 year old makes a different choice, it is suddenly "faction before family" and family ties are permanently severed. Yet factions do interact with each other - they would have to in order to have a cohesive society. And how do the faction-less survive? Dauntless, for instance, seems to weed out about a third of those attempting to enter. I don't know the "failure" rates of the other factions, but it seems like you would quickly get more "faction-less" than those in factions.

Its an interesting concept and although the movie excels at characterization, I still feel that the story does not hold water.

 

[Rafellin]

I thought that while it was a little simplistic due to being from a teen novel source, it was nicely done and, thankfully, knocked the Hunger Games franchise into a cocked hat. Entertaining and worth a rental.

 

[Kylara]

Was about 12-15 minutes in and "hang on this sounds suspiciously like the Wind Singer trilogy...was an entertaining film, bit predictable but enjoyable. Poor Theo James though, he only ever seems to be insanely good looking and ends up with the main female (Underworld - whichever ones he was in ) still, I'm not going to complain

Like you said, simplistic faction divides and it does rather come unstuck, but as long as you don't pay too much attention to it and just roll with it it works (ish)

I'm still waiting for Fforde's Shades of Grey to be made into a film - an excellent book, well worth a read - people are divided by the colours they see, but there is the "overall control" element too. Still, better than many other recent YA book -> film projects

 

[biodroid]

It was an OK movie, I thought the Hunger Games was better.

 

[Juliana]

I thought it was an okay movie; fast-paced and entertaining. I watched it with my 10yo daughter and she loved it (though she still prefers Katniss to Triss), and it was a fun mother-daughter evening (with copious amounts of popcorn!).

I'd like to read the books, I think. I loved the Hunger Games movies but I had already read the books and been quite struck by them, so perhaps I'll feel stronger about Divergent one I've read it.

 

[WinterLight]

I found this to be an enjoyable enough film, though the fact that I did not think of it again until seeing this thread says a lot.

That it was dressed in the Hunger Games/Twilight mould gave me immediate reservations/expectations which the film met as it went on. I am curious to consider it being a completely different film if aimed lets say at The Book of Eli audience.

Sadly the thing that intrigued me the most was not explored at all, being the reason for the fall of society and also what is beyond the wall.

Hmm, the DVD cover rings a certain bell ...

Ah the old tropes vs women coming into play.
Thankfully she was in no way pouty or was the focus on her 'assets' - quite the opposite in fact, she was young and vulnerable like any young person, we see her mature and find strength and a sense of place like any person must do. Not once was she depicted sexually IIRC. Now I think about it, this is a female character done very well.

 

[Juliana]

Sadly the thing that intrigued me the most was not explored at all, being the reason for the fall of society and also what is beyond the wall.

I think if I recall correctly they do mention briefly war and the total collapse of infrastructure, and also fracturing of the nation? But yes, would be nice to know more.

 

[Cli-Fi]

Sorry to dig up an old thread, but as having just seen this movie, I'll let you all know why I didn't like the film. Going into this I was well aware that this was going to be another teen saves the world movie. So I didn't expect anything from it and this isn't one of the major problems I have with it after having seen it.

The problem I have with the whole plot isn't what any of you are talking about, either. Maybe I missed it, but I don't exactly understand why Jeanine wanted to take over and/or destroy the different factions. I mean, after all her boasting about how important separation was. What is the point of destroying the others? Even if she was lying about her beliefs, it would be pretty clear to everyone and it would be hard for her to hide it. Why should the other factions bother her exactly? Now, if the answer lies in the "truth serum," that is a very weak plot point in my opinion. Plus since it's clear Jeanine wasn't affected by the serum before Tris gave it to her, we don't really know how the serum gets distributed among the other factions. Thus, I still don't understand the cause of the "political" banter. Who started that and why? Maybe these questions are answered in the other two books, but I highly doubt they go that deep. Despite trying to act like they do. Again, the movie is actually forcing me to read the books, because maybe all of my concerns are explained better in the book.

Overall, the action sequences were quite boring and I barely connected with any of the characters. The beginning was amazing and then I quickly lost focus. I still gave it a full chance because I kept waiting for it to get better. Also I should repeat what most of you are saying here: I don't think the message of this movie/novel is very original. OMG You are a Divergent!!!! You don't fit into the norm!!! That has been spoon-fed to every single Gen-Y to millennial child in Western Civilization from the moment they were born to their college graduation ceremony! I also believe that it's a leading cause of the selfish entitlement culture that consumes my own generation. Yet shockingly, in an attempt to highlight that, they ended up mocking individualism and collectivism all at the same time. So Tris wasn't quite Neo and she never became a Borg either. Leaving me utterly confused at the end. Despite the "you should know what you are," slogan repeated by the leadership in this society. Tris never portrays a sense of belonging even as she finally convinces herself that she really is a Divergent. She also says towards the end, but, "both my parents died today." That's clearly not someone jumping for joy over the amount of "good" she supposedly accomplished. She feels just as lost as I did during most of the movie and I also don't get why she had to leave on the train?