Divergent - Allegiant

[Divide by Zero]

I got to see this movie last weekend and liked it as much as the first and second ones.

The story has some plot holes, but that is typical with the lazy writers/producers who are competing with total garbage films.

Spoiler alert!

___________________________________________________________



We learned in the first and second movie that a Divergent is a person who doesn't fit one group. They are rare and the administration was seeking them out as a threat to the social order. The rest of the people fit within defined groups - eg. Law enforcement/military, government, intellectual/academic, social support, labor and so on. It makes me think about authoritarian followers. Divergent are akin to those who can start the unilevel disintegration that Dabrowski talks about.

In the second movie it gets revealed that the divergent are the ones who are the future of humanity, because they can rise above the typical reactions of humanity that lead to the mentioned world war(s) that almost wiped out humanity.

Start of this movie:
The new leader of Chicago, decides to close the gates. She feels that it could be dangerous for people to leave until they are sure about the conditions outside the walls.

Meanwhile, there are trials where the officers of the former brutal leadership are being put on trial. The new leader decides to let mob rule take over which pushes into executions and a split in the new leadership.

Tris and the other protagonists decide to escape the city, taking her brother with them - who is facing a trial/execution.

We learn that the world has been destroyed by nukes a few hundred years ago. The world outside of Chicago's walls is toxic- colored reddish like Mars, with huge craters and erosion from persistent red rains.

They reach a point where a highly advanced group welcome them and bring them to their city.

The leader of this settlement explains that there is another city like theirs, in Providence. The destruction was caused by the mass proliferation of genetic modification, which split society. The genetic modification also created more agressive traits, sounding very much like psychopathy and even more authoritarian follower tendency- so people were not able to stop the divide between them.

Chicago is an experiment to see whether these genetically "unpure" people can heal their genes to go back to what humanity was before the technology messed up genes. Tris was the first one to have pure genes, which explains her ability to think outside the box. The leader, David explains how he needs to show her to the council at Providence in order to prove that 'damaged' people can be saved.

We find out later that David was hiding many things from Tris. He was kidnapping children from the uncivilized lands, erasing their memories and putting them into the Chicago experiment, while killing the older parents/people. He tried to explain it as humanitarian, to help the human race, but it seemed more like a form of justified eugenics, much like the west does these days invading a country in order to bring "democracy".

More politics and fighting ensues until Tris decides to escape and tell Chicago that they have been an experiment and the outside cities are not really benevolent, but see them as sub human in some ways.

---------------------------------------------

I found it a good way of showing where humanity is heading towards. I tend to like dystopias, probably because we live in one these days.

What is scary is that a crash of society starts off with a good ideal, to return to what is good and fair, but quickly gets corrupted for relatively simplistic gain. In the case of David, he just wanted more money and power from his research, which lead to shady practices in order to get the results he needed.

I sometimes feel like this reality as it is, with the 4d STS experimenting on us is similar to that world. We're poked and prodded in the direction of war and despite our technology and "education", we have grown to be more and more subjective and dissasociative, much like the class system developed in Chicago in order to "keep the peace". Like the movie, on this planet, those who think for themselves are quickly pushed aside as crazy or are deemed a threat to society.

 

[PhoenixToEmber]

I've been meaning to watch these films so I skipped the spoiler section - I like a good dystopia story. I can't decide if I should just read the books first, though, but I don't feel like I have time with everything else on my reading list.

 

[gdpetti]

As I posted just a minute ago, though I haven't seen the last one, nor this third one in the series, I did see the first one and like in any media format these days, it seems the same ideas/thoughts are roving around and around for anyone to make use of... and this Divergent series does remind me of Tomorrowland in this respect. The manipulation of 'Chicago' seems like Tomorrowland's manipulation of our dimension, and 4dSTS manipulation of our 3rd level STS.... which reminds me of a film seen long ago and far away called 'Logan's Run'... all of which seems to center around the maze, matrix, prison etc that we live in... and the need to escape, by following that white rabbit down the rabbit hole towards Sanctuary etc... same message of escape from a prison of the mind that we first need to realize exists, which is the biggest obstacle of all.... It's either this dystopian aspect of the expective future dystopian world in a time loop, shunt etc.. so many films/projects expressing the same idea like "The Hunger Games" and all those storylines that have been around for a long time... the 'game' aspect.. "Dark City"... the need to kill the beast, though usually, we don't recognize what/who that beast is, where or when. Most of these projects seem to flirt with the subject, most likely due to a lack of knowledge on the subject matter itself. It seems our culture is saturated with this idea, so you can't say the collective subconscious isn't trying. ;)

 

[Divide by Zero]

Interesting insight gdpetti!
Perhaps this subconscious is the "Thor's Pantheum" that the C's speak about which is both STS/STO.

 

[Mr.Cyan]

I've been meaning to watch these films so I skipped the spoiler section - I like a good dystopia story. I can't decide if I should just read the books first, though, but I don't feel like I have time with everything else on my reading list.

feel the same way too - somehow I feel dystopias are normally more accurate projections of our possible future timelines. Been also meaning to read the books, but the reading list is just getting longer :) - I guess the movies will do for now...

Thanks DivideByZero for the review.

 

[gdpetti]

Saw the preview for it last night as I watched Hunger Games: whatever 2... seems to have the same problem... the main character, this female hero, just doesn't seem the type and can be easily taken in, misguided etc... in many of these projects, the casting just isn't right... same with Neo in Matrix... it's ok to be bland and indecisive etc when asleep, but such a person doesn't wake up... thus in that first Matrix film, he had to be woken up by force.... So, right from the beginning we have a problem... something that may have even been in the original source material... not sure on this Divergent... haven't read the books (i think it was, right?). They try to make these characters look right for the part... but they simply aren't, and that is their major character flaw... in recent decades, it's been popular to utilize anti-heroes and other non-traditional forms, but that's just a cop-out... but then, it is a true reflection of their creators... who can't even imagine what a real hero is in our times... so they go into kiddie daydream types for inspiration.. the dumbing down process, that reinforces itself over and over again with the same flawed heroes... Laura wrote on this in one of her books... the lack of real heroes.. how... who was it? the archetype of .... what was his name??? can't think of it... the one that saves the girl from her parents leaving her at the rock for the underworld's god to possess... he defeats that scenario and then they take off ... I think that's the one... today's so-called heroes, seem more like Odysseus forever lost at sea... but unlike him, our heroes stories never really end because they're forever lost at sea... no wonder that 'LOST' tv show was popular! ;) Most of these storylines seem like just another drug to keep the sheeple lost... fake villians for fake heroes... lies built upon lies... rare it is to find any of them actually see through the veil, the matrix, which is why that film came closer than most... but he never escaped the matrix... just reset it... and I think we can imagine how this third installment of this Divergent series will go... reminds me of 'Planet of the Apes'... At least in that last Hunger Games, she killed the new replacement evil leader... with her arrow that rode the wind of truth... about the only part she really seemed to 'get'. Is this series any different? The main character simply doesn't have that 'look' of a hero... reminds me of Harry Potter as originally envisioned by Rowling.... she drew an image of him quite different than what we saw on screen, but then she left that kid behind by the end of that first book, never to be seen or heard from again, for the most part... that 'angst'... of one beaten down by life around him.

Or we get the 'dark' Batman types, losing his parents... yes, yes, but not to worry, his immense wealth will allow some comfort in his loss... and that loneliness will be shielded by the 'affluenza' that comes with it... a shield that allows the near idiocy of his character... again, one that never seems to learn... same with James Bond and almost all others. In the first film of this Diverent series, like most such stories, the main character is found to be 'special' ... it's so classic and hits all the right buttons in our weakened emotional yearnings... and then the usual 'special' hero story starts.. they save the day for their community and live happily ever after.... until the sequel and the new evil villain shows up, but only if the box office numbers were high enough, as it always comes down to the 'bang for the buck' even in propaganda. Empires are greedy and don't like to share.

All of these projects/stories have that initial promise of potential, but it so very, very rare to find any of them that meets expectations... which is why such heroes are so very rare... as that example Laura mentioned, whatever his name was. :/

 

[gdpetti]

Just saw part 2 the other day... not bad as these storylines go... with the usual problems of the 'hereos' being sleepers just waking up, for the most part.... no different than Neo in the Matrix really.
From Wikipedia:

It is the sequel to Insurgent and will be followed by the concluding entry, Ascendant (Allegiant and Ascendant were originally to be titled Allegiant – Part 1 and Allegiant – Part 2).[6]

Allegiant was released on March 18, 2016 in theaters and IMAX[7] and was panned by critics.[8] The film also was a box office bomb, grossing $66.1 million domestically and $104.1 million in foreign markets.[3] This led to budget cuts on the fourth and final installment in the series, Ascendant, set to be released on June 9, 2017.[9]
[...]
Many critics have blamed the underperformance of the film on Lionsgate's decision to split the last novel into two pictures.[22][23] As a result, Lionsgate will cut the budget of the fourth and final movie in the series, Ascendant....
[...]
Critical response

The Divergent Series: Allegiant was panned by critics, who criticized the lack of originality and character advancement.[39][23] On Rotten Tomatoes, the film has a rating of 12%, based on 158 reviews, with an average rating of 4/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "Allegiant improves on previous entries in The Divergent Series on a few superficial levels, but they aren't enough to counteract a sense of growing boredom with a franchise that's gone on too long."[40] Metacritic gives the film a score of 33 out of 100, based on 33 critics, indicating "generally unfavorable reviews".[41] Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "B" on an A+ to F scale.[2]

Hmmm... not a good sign, but that kind of splitting the book into 2 films is usually not a good sign, just a studio trying to milk more money out of this cow. Moooooney! Show me the money!!!
But accurate assessment wasn't it? "lack of originality and character advancement".... boy, that sounds familar! I was thinking the same of the second film that I just watched last night.. haven't caught up on this third one yet... forgot about it... as there are so many from mass consciousness in this direction these days.... and that same critique would be used for the Matrix series if they came out today... and might have been when they did... as Neo was always a bland character for THE ONE! ... but I always blamed that on the actor.

The plotline on Wiki sounds like they are milking it. The weakest link seems to be this 'Council' Tris goes to, learns this David could have helped Chicago on his own all along.... so without reading the book or seeing the movie ... it sounds like this storyline is going in circles... round-robin Laura termed it... though the similarity of this girl waking up is familar as well to another one of Laura's lines "For a smart person, you sure do dumb things" ... sounds like this Tris character... which might be real, but the growth of the character has to be done faster on film, not slower like a long book series... they should have made only this last installment... a mistake that can't be taken back now, but that is almost always the case.. even the Ring series was edited way, way down... until the recent prequels did the opposite to less applause and box office.

Reading the plot summary on Wiki does make this 100% divergent main character seem ignorant... a definite lack of knowledge in this one Master Yoda... seems a do-gooder, which can be explained by upbringing in her faction, but then the mother as a insertion into the city should've negated that... so we have to assume the two didn't talk much.... probably a problem in the book.... gullibility of the main character is never good for the box office, nor customer appreciation! As this is what we get in our everyday life most everywhere, especially in our political leaders... which turn out to be just puppets or psychopaths with little to no redeeming values.... being a female (Hillary) or being black (there is no 'part' in the USA as Obama is) only goes so far....

This storyline of 'divergents' seems like a loss of Adamics since the catastrophe of nuclear war and the attempt to reinsert them into the game once again... but being divergent doesn't help the characters any in this storyline.. for the most part... blame the writer for that. Being nice but gullible is pathetic and not a hero for the masses. LIke the Harry Potter series, it says this is a scifi novel for young adults... guess that is the usual cop-out...

... ok, just read on the book's author, Veronica Roth... rather young, in her 20s still, so I guess great character development cannot be expected, but a few points are interesting:

Veronica Roth (born August 19, 1988) is an American novelist and short story writer known for her debut New York Times bestselling Divergent trilogy, consisting of Divergent, Insurgent, and Allegiant; and Four: A Divergent Collection. Divergent was the recipient of the Goodreads Favorite Book of 2011 and the 2012 winner for Best Young Adult Fantasy & Science Fiction.[1][2]
[...]
Personal life

Veronica Roth was born on August 19, 1988 in New York City, and was raised primarily in Barrington, Illinois.[3] Her mother, Barbara Ross, is a painter who resides in Barrington.[3][4] She is the youngest of three children. Her parents divorced when she was five years old, and her mother has since remarried to Frank Ross, a financial consultant for landscaping companies.[5][3] Her brother and sister live in the Chicago area.[3]

She is of German and Polish descent.[6][7] Roth says of her father: “He had a job, and worked far away. Now I have a good relationship with my stepdad.” [8] Her maternal grandparents were concentration camp survivors, whose religious convictions pushed her mother away from religion. Veronica Roth learned about Christianity by attending a Christian Bible study during her high school years, and has stayed with it.[5][9]
[...]
Veronica Roth is best known for her trilogy of novels: Divergent, Insurgent, and Allegiant; Allegiant was released on October 22, 2013.[12]

She is the recipient of the Goodreads 2011 Choice Award and the Best of 2012 in the category Young Adult Fantasy & Science Fiction and also Best Goodreads Author in 2012.[1][2][13] Roth wrote her first book, Divergent, while on winter break in her senior year at Northwestern University.[5] Her career took off rapidly with the success of her first novel, with the publishing rights sold before she graduated from college in 2010 and the film rights sold mid-March 2011, before the novel was printed in April 2011.[5][14][15][16]

That pretty much explains it, the author is just like her main character.... even JKRowling went through much more in life before 'making it'. Unless 'guided' in some fashion, making it this early in life will suck you in fast and can prevent further development... thus the characters and this story is intended for teens... and not the 'enlightened' types... but still interesting to see how the same message gets projected into society and through who... because everything is a little bit interesting, right? even if just a little? ;)

 

[Woodsman]

I've grappled with the weirdness of actors like Keanu Reeves and Shailene Woodley being cast into roles where they are variously depicting extraordinary individuals capable of great feats of awareness and action.

They're both so bland.

Neither actor offers compelling or charismatic performances. I'd go as far as to describe them both as seeming almost medicated.

The only explanation I've been able to come up with is that this casting might be very deliberate; if you put up a strong performer, (say, a guy like Will Smith), then that is who the audience sees. But if instead you put up a void, then the audience is required to project their own energy into that void just to see something. Consequently, they see the energy they put in; themselves, thus creating an instant recognition which cuts across all demographics and makes your movie a big success.

When it works, anyway. I still feel a mild urge to smack Neo for not being something more than a complete blank.

Harrison Ford was perhaps a more successful version of this model; he was a big blank when you'd see him in interviews; it was easy to project onto him, but at the same time, he'd also provide the audience with emotive hooks we could recognize as things we might feel ourselves and thus sympathize with. Nobody could look surprised, vulnerable and tough all at the same time quite like Ford. But I'd also have a hard time seeing Ford as being a particularly Christ-like figure on the edge of ascension.

I suppose, on the other hand, in order to ascend, one must leave behind the false personality. Maybe this does look a little blank when achieved since we're constantly surrounded by ego-driven false personalities. The non-ego looks abnormal. But I imagine even with such an individual, that there would be a strong sense of power surrounding them, the result of a crystalized magnetic center, which might be mistaken for charisma.

I don't know how you'd go about solving that problem. But I certainly wouldn't attempt it with Reeves or Woodley.

 

[gdpetti]

Harrison Ford is a different case and quite the opposite, as he's just plain 'real'.... was in construction before and didn't 'need' to act... was successful, if I remember, but like many, kept plugging away at it until he got that break... and this 'realness' shows up in all his work... he simply 'is' that guy... usually playing a version of himself as most stars do, as their persona becomes bigger than they are, which is easy to spot when the reverse happens and actors become stars, like Dustin Hoffman... .a good actor, but it's really obvious he's 'acting' when he takes on those 'other' parts.... once you become a public persona, you really can't pretend to be anyone else, as it clashes with the projection and can hurt box office in most cases... not so much in Dustin's case given the work he became a star with.

In the first Matrix film, K. Reeves works as Neo until he is supposed to 'wake up'... and we see that he really hasn't.... he's still asleep, yet even that sort of works due to the way the story in written in the two sequels... as he never actually leaves the matrix... perhaps in death at the end of the third installment.... as if the W. brothers were having the same problem as their main character... unable to see through the attacks that eventually F'd them up.... and made them trannies... or Bruce like... not sure if they cut it off or not... and isn't this prevalent in our society today?

Examples: Michael... Obama's 'wife': RUMORS MICHELLE OBAMA A MAN - COMES OUT SWINGING ON ELLEN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvAxiHEezeM

Williams sisters.... IRREFUTABLE PROOF that Serena Williams IS A MAN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwrP1zHC5Eo

And we wonder why we have the engineered issue or meme of transgender in our bathrooms today??? ;) I never really paid it much attention, but always thought the same... just didn't watch them, and the first 'lady'? Haven't the rumors always been that Obama was gay? from back in college etc? So no surprise... as for the Williams boys... and 'mom'.... haven't we all thought the same? Best bit was the tiny clip of Joan Rivers saying so... irritated by the press on her way in some place... and these kinds of things are commonly known out in Hollywood about the 'stars'... No one says anything... same with the molestation of kids in the industry... most people don't have any actual physical evidence to present ... but the same has always been the case about cop abuse etc... until those damn 'smart phones'. Must make the peds a little nervous, but like the cops, lawyers or wallstreeters etc... they are never held accountable for their actions... so they continue on like a virus.

But is seems that all of this stuff is starting to eek out of the infamous basement closets... same as this film Divergent- Allegiant... at the end, the book is said to close with the exposure of that other city.. as the force field wall or whatever she called it is blown up or something.... Haven't seen the third yet.. but by the synopsis on Wiki of the book, that is the case.... and that main character seemed never to learn much either... gullible and ignorant, as trained and conditioned by the city, its factions and the other city manipulating them as an experiment in DNA realignment.

Perhaps the 'trannie' issue is two-faced? The STSers attempting to divide and conquer through corruption of the civic etc norms... all the while it preps those paying attention to the next level of being... sort of. :/

 

[Divide by Zero]

I don't see too much of a conspiracy with using bland characters.

What is more annoying with movies is when they do have a super hero type character that is beyond a normal person.

For example, as Woodsman mentioned, Will Smith. Had he played the main role of Divergent or what not, it would be less real. He's like any other movie star, a "star", and not a normal everyday person like any of us.

So it might be for selfish reasons for Hollywood to cast small characters which are cheaper.
But, it gives the normal people a chance to think- "hey, I feel like her too!"

Also, she might have been naive with that city manipulating here, but we were all quite naive through our whole life. She did listen to her instincts when things were not matching up, like Neo, etc.

 

[gdpetti]

Which is why I mentioned she was gullible... especially coming from that faction of Negation? add in her age as the character, and we are pretty much all in that position.... regarding stardom as a factor, that is definitely true... such a star as Will Smith would automatically overwhelm the role as portrayed in the storyline, book etc... because he's a 'star', but if he wasn't, less would be expected and absorbed by the audience... so that a 'no-name' fits the role nicely, but hurts the box office... but a few minor roles had bigger 'stars' in them, same as with 'HungerGames'... it does come down to the story in the end... and all of these are pretty much telling the same story, just in slightly different forms... some just 'click' with the audience better than others... how well we, the audience, an relate to the storyline, characters etc... using a sports analogy, so popular here in the States as they are one of our main forms of distraction, and people living in the heart of empire and supporting it, need lots and lots of distraction, conditioning et al... but that analogy would be the basketball team of Golden State with Stephen Curry... not tall, just a quick and good shooter, works works well in the game as it is now played without hand checking etc.... 'no touchy'... so more offense, better sales etc.

Actually, I don't understand why most of the 'superhero' movies are so popular these days... they are so over the top special effect driven, with mostly cardboard cutout characters... but then I'm not their targeted audience obviously. And it's always been this way once the empire steps out of the closet... James Bond is no different... How long does it take someone to realize they aren't saving the country, they are wrecking it... they are the problem, not the solution... Bond, like all superheroes seems mostly mindless, though not braindead... just totally clueless regarding the nature of the govt they are working for... at least in this Divergent series, we find out why.... it's a setup, a con, a maze, matrix and they are the subjects being studied.