Review of Insurgent (2015) by Attentivecritic — 15 Apr 2015

“The Divergent Series: Insurgent Review”.

(Introduction).

Insurgent is the next installment in the Divergent series which is another series comprised of young adult novels turned into movies. This particular installment changed directors“The Divergent Series: Insurgent Review”.

(Introduction).

Insurgent is the next installment in the Divergent series which is another series comprised of young adult novels turned into movies. This particular installment changed directors and is directed by Robert Schwentke who's last film was R.I.P.D... yeah that's not a good thing. Last year's Divergent was bad. It did nothing to separate itself from another popular young adult series The Hunger Games and on top of that, the film ripped off The Hunger Games with a very similar rebellious female lead Beatrice “Tris” Prior played by Shailene Woodley. The movie suffered from lack of action, dull characters, and a plot that ultimately wasn't explained. In other words, if you didn't read the book, then the film didn't do much to persuade you to do so. So how does Insurgent stack up against its predecessor? Well I'll tell you now, it's a better movie but not by much.

(Presentation).

The presentation for Insurgent is just as boring and uninspired as the presentation for Detergent, erm, excuse me, Divergent was. Yeah Mr. Schwentke, it was a very good idea to have the “Insurgent” title plastered on screen while we watch a needlessly slow motion opening shot of Tris running through the woods. It was a good idea to have the movie start with an opening monologue by Kate Winslet's character, Jeanine Matthews. It was a good idea to just thrust the viewer into this story with absolutely no build up at all. So if you didn't watch the first movie, you'll have no idea what's going on. Not that it matters because what's going on isn't clear or interesting anyway so... well, it is what it is. Presentation's bad, period.

(Characters and Actors).

So just naming the important characters and actors, Shailene Woodley returns as Tris, Theo James returns as Four, Ansel Elgort returns as Tris's brother, Caleb, Miles Teller returns as Peter Hayes, and Kate Winslet returns as Jeanine Matthews. Some other characters return from the first movie with actors such as Zoe Kravitz and Jai Courtney but because they're given so little to do in the movie to the point of irrelevance, I'm not even going to mention them at all. A notable actress to mention is Naomi Watts whom plays Theo James's mother in the movie. Ultimately however and insultingly for a performer of her talent, her character is wasted in the movie, may as well have been cut entirely.

Performance wise, everyone in this movie besides Shailene Woodley looks bored in this especially Kate Winslet who gives a terrible performance. However, I'm not going to place the blame on Winslet because when you have bad material to work with on top of an mediocre to average director on the project, you're guaranteed to be bad. George Lucas's Star Wars prequels became proof of that. As another word for Shailene Woodley, she really showed her acting prowess in The Fault in Our Stars. That movie for me in regards to her skills as an actress was definitely needed considering the only two movies I saw her in prior to this film is Divergent and White Bird in a Blizzard, both of which are bad, the latter of which is terrible. In here, she gives an acceptable performance and unlike everyone else who appear as if they just showed up to receive a paycheck, Woodley does seem as if she's actually engaged in the scenes she's in but like I said with Dakota Johnson in Fifty Shades of Grey, she's not saving the story in this movie.

(Story).

The most important part of any movie, the story in Insurgent is ridiculously forgettable. This is one of those films where if the film has nothing to offer you as the viewer in regards to character development and cohesive story telling, then it manipulates its audience by chucking a bone at them, that bone being an action sequence. I'll just say it right now, the action in this movie doesn't offer anything that's already been seen before and like the majority of the movie, it's boring. From the train sequence which should've been cut down to the nighttime sequence, when they're being ambushed, it's all boring. The story in this movie is boring and not only is it boring, it's damn hard to follow. When I say that, I mean that this movie and the ultimate problem that I have with the Divergent series to begin with as someone who's never and will never read the novels, I still don't know what they're ultimately trying to achieve. You look at other young adult series like Harry Potter or The Hunger Games. It's very clear, crystal clear what those stories are about. Here, I'm lost as all hell.

Why separate this population into factions? Well to try and control society of course but to what purpose, why? Who's really pulling the strings? What's the true purpose of the factions? Why do these Dauntless jack***** run around randomly performing parkour? Why do these factions seem like a ripoff of the Harry Potter Houses? Why does Tris come off as a try hard Katniss persona? Why does this world have an uninspired dirty aesthetic look which also appears like a ripoff from The Hunger Games? These are all questions and down right issues that I had with the first film and unfortunately, they still apply here.

So from what I understand, the majority of this movie is about Kate Winslet trying to open this box or whatever the hell it is. Now this box will only open for a Divergent which again is someone who contains qualities representative of all the factions, Abnegation, Dauntless, um, Restless, Erudite, Great Value, whatever the hell you want to call them, it really doesn't matter. Now Kate Winslet can't just use any Divergent, this Divergent has to be one hundred percent pure the representative quality of all the factions. Okay movie, yall are just reaching into bs territory right now but I'm still with the movie. And obviously Tris is this pure Divergent and is the only person capable of unlocking this box or whatever it is, there's no spoiler there, it's only obvious. So my point is, the entire movie is about unlocking this thing which will obviously shed some great revelation. And that's the ultimate problem with the plot in this movie.

First of all, this movie is nearly an hour and fifty minutes going on two hours long. The movie bs you for a long time by throwing action sequence after action sequence at you and oh! Remember this character from the first movie?! Oh you mean the characters from the first movie who actually had a role to play in the plot like Zoe Kravitz's character or Jai Courtney's character? Or how about Ansel Elgort whom by the way like many other performers is completely wasted here. There's a scene in this movie which takes place just after the redundant train sequence in which Tris's brother tells both her and Theo Jame's Four, “you know what guys, I'm not cut out for this”. “All this running around and being a fugitive, the factionless, it's not for me”. “I'll tell you what, I'm going to betray you and go over to the dark side”. “At least then, I can take a shower and get some grub”. Obviously I summarized it in my own words but that's pretty much what they do with this guy and after watching Elgort's performance in The Fault in Our Stars, I wanted to see him have more of a dominant role in this movie. But he essentially plays a coward.

Another actor who's wasted in this is Miles Teller. The entire movie he plays an a-hole but then at the end of the movie, something happens with his character that made me go “What?” “That doesn't even make any sense, who wrote this?” All this crap and Teller you can tell doesn't even want to be in this movie. He looks so bored in this. The man just came off an Oscar nominated film Whiplash with J.K. Simmons. He doesn't want to do this ****. That's one of the biggest problems with this movie. Talent is just wasted. Character potential is just spilled from the script like a dirty bucket of water.

The big revelation getting back to it, isn't even satisfying. While it answers the question of what the purpose was in the existence of these factions which the first film didn't even explain, ultimately it just raises more questions. This is because director Robert Schwentke is directing the last book in this series which like damn Harry Potter, Twilight, The Hunger Games, and now this bs is split into two parts. Why do we have all these final installments in these young adult films being split into two films. Because these Hollywood producers and executives know that drones will fill the theater and double their income. With Harry Potter, it made sense. There was enough material in the last book to warrant a big two part finale for a franchise that had been around for ten years. Twilight and The Hunger Games though was not/is not warranted a split because it's not necessary. This is no different and it gets back to the point of this movie which feels shriveled in its story because it feels like they're holding back story elements to save for this two part finale. I mean god damn, is The Maze Runner going to do this too? And what's next after that, oh the Fifty Shades trilogy of course tsk...

Another thing that I've heard is that there are many differences between this film and the novel it's based off of, almost to the point where it's a completely different story. I can't warrant this to be true because I haven't read the book but as a film, Insurgent falls well, short. The only thing that I can say was kinda cool was the simulation sequences near the end with the city breaking apart and everything. It was some impressive CGI but it's nothing that was too mind blowing and when Shailene Woodley comes out and she has to randomly fight a clone of herself, that's when the movie lost me completely. Okay movie! I throw my hands up. I surrender, I throw in the towel because clearly this is not for me. Yall want to act like this story is deeper than what it truly is, I'll tell you what, you filmmakers better strip this and show it the way it is because for the people who actually can appreciate good storytelling, you're not fooling anyone with this. Yes, there may possibly be a good story here, but if it is, it's in the novels tucked away somewhere, it's definitely not in the movies if it even exists in the first place.

(Music).

The music, I can sum this up in one statement. Who gives a god damn? It's copy and paste action movie music. Most of the time you won't even notice it's there. I would advise to skip the soundtrack, cause it's not interesting, at all.

(Enjoyment and Verdict).

Well while a better film came out this time around, this is still a boring movie. The plot is still uninteresting and convoluted simply because it refuses to tell what the “point” to all this is. The characters are still uninteresting and having Shailene Woodley cut her hair doesn't make her more of a badass either if that's what they were going for, I don't know. The soundtrack is copy and paste and it's boring. There're too many action sequences in here and they're uninspired. I mean, this is targeted to a teenage audience, the movie doesn't have to be good at that point. Here's my recommendations, this isn't a terrible movie but I didn't really enjoy it and it's not good by any stretch of the imagination. If you read the book and you enjoy the series then by all means check this out but for everyone else, I recommend a rental at best. Otherwise, if you didn't care for the first movie or even if you skipped the first movie altogether, then skip this.

There's nothing special about this. The Divergent films still come off as if they're trying to be The Hunger Games and that's because the producers behind this want some of that Hunger Games money. Commendable I suppose but that castrates your product in quality if you're just trying to copy what something else has already done with little to no meaningful originality.

Pros.

• Shailene Woodley attempts to give a decent performance.

• CGI can be cool to look at...