I read the first Divergent novel a few years back. I know fans defend it against the accusations that it’s a Hunger Games rip-off but in general the YA Dystopian genre just isn’t my favorite. I didn’t dislike the book, but I just wasn’t eager to continue it. And after learning that the series was going to be filmed, I decided to watch the sequels instead. The first film was entertaining enough. I didn’t love it or hate it but I thought it adapted well enough from the book. So I assumed Insurgent would be the same.
Erudites are out for blood, Divergent blood to be exact. Jeanine (played by Kate Winslet) is on the tails of Tris (played by Shailene Woodley), Four (Theo James) and co as they make a run for it throughout the ruins of Chicago. More of the story is uncovered to figure out what Erudites are really after. Tris and Four’s backs are against the wall and the fate of the world depends almost entirely on them.
What I Liked: The setting it pretty cool. Though I don’t live in Chicago I’ve visited the city my fair share of times for family reunions. It’s one of my favorite places to visit in the summer months. So I found it interesting to see the dystopian take on it. I specifically thought about some of the spots I visited as we’re showed their ruined counterparts. I think they did a better job than the original in this aspect.
Theo James. I could watch him on screen all day. He’s really not a bad actor either, but he provides plenty of eye candy.
Kate Winslet. While this isn’t my favorite roll for her, her performance is still one of the highlights. Though for some reason she reminded me of a younger Madonna in a number of scenes.
What I Didn’t Like: The 3D. Oh my god was it atrocious! I had to lift my glasses up multiple times just to give my eyes a slight rest. I had a headache and felt nauseous. This was actually one of my worst 3D experiences. I am usually fine if the film has been filmed in 3D, but when it is post-converted more often than not I experience problems. And it’s not like 3D was essential to the movie. If anything it detracted from it for me.
The book-to-movie plot didn’t strike a balance as well as the first one. This one felt too crowded and at the same time sort of empty, which is typical for middle books in a series. You want to save the meat for the end most times. Though strangely enough, I thought Catching Fire was a lot better than its first film even though the book wasn’t as good.
Overall: The terrible 3D had me over this film around the first hour and it’s a two-hour film. The tired premise didn’t really help either. I left sort of dreading that the third book has to be split into two films, riding on Harry Potter’s coat tails to make more money. At this point unless the trailers look promising I may decide to skip the next two. It’s not like I don’t know the spoilers for the final book anyway, so waiting for them to get to the point (Which they can now drag out with two films) is going to be even more agonizing.
Rating: 2 / 5 Stars
*This review is a guest review for my friends over at The Grand Shuckett.