The Giver
1/4
Starring: Brenton Thwaites, Jeff Bridges, Meryl Streep, Odeya Rush, Katie Holmes, Alexander Skarsgard, Cameron Monaghan, Taylor Swift
Rated PG-13 for a Mature Thematic Image and Some Action/Violence
When I heard that Lois Lowry's powerful and haunting novel was being adapted for the screen, I thought, "It's about time." The novel was published 1993, with three sequels that followed in the years since (which surprised me, since I've never heard of them). Given Hollywood's obsession with special effects and toning down everything to appeal to those with the lowest IQs, I was nervous. Still, the novel is still widely read in middle schools, so I was hopeful that the filmmakers would realize that the majority of the audience would be able to grasp its complexities and rich thematic material. No such luck.
Philip Noyce's film version, which Jeff Bridges has been trying to make for the past 20 years, is exactly what I feared the film would be. It dumbs down the thought-provoking material to the point where it's a shadow of the source material, paced like an action movie trailer, and the ending is an action scene. What the hell were they thinking? As someone who is a fan of the book and still finds it compelling to ruminate over decades after reading it, I found such shoddy treatment to be shameful and insulting.
In the future, a new society has been created. Choice, feeling and individuality have been removed from daily life. Every aspect of daily life is organized and controlled down to the last detail. At age 16, each citizen is assigned a job based on the person's volunteer history, although for one young man named Jonas (Thwaites), things don't go according to plan. He has not been chosen for a job, but selected as a Receiver. With the help of The Giver (Bridges), Jonas will experience all the joy and sorrow that his society doesn't allow for instances when the Elders, led by The Chief Elder (Streep), need to access to old memories in order to keep their carefully constructed community alive. But is Jonas able to handle the truth about his life?
Problem number one: the film's setting is not adequately established. In many ways, the society that Lowry created is one of the most fascinating elements of her story. It's not particularly original, but she created it with such care and vivid detail that I can still visualize it in my mind. It's like a sci-fi version of "Pleasantville" crossed with "Equilibrium." Unfortunately setting the stage takes all of five minutes. We know Jonas is going to work with The Giver after the first ten minutes. This lack of set-up robs the film of all of its possible involvement on the part of the audience, and the suspense that was palpable in the novel is non-existent here.
Problem number two: the film's story, which was a parable of communism, is so diluted that it becomes a waste of time. The ideas in the book were powerfully presented. Frankly, with a straight approach that didn't underestimate the intelligence or the popularity of the book, it had a shot at some Oscars. Here, they're skimmed over. There's little in the way of depth and feeling in this film. The characters are too thin to be called stick figures, and the thought-provoking material the formed the bulk of Lowry's narrative is almost entirely ignored.
Problem number three: the acting is terrible. Lead actor Brenton Thwaites showed promise in "The Signal," the ambitious thriller from earlier this summer, but he appears to have forgotten how to act during the last month. He's flat and uncharismatic. This was Jeff Bridges' passion (he helped produce the film, and even filmed a version of it with his family), but he should have had the good sense to let someone more age-appropriate play the role. The Giver is meant to be played by an elderly actor, and Bridges, who has a fair amount of range, tries to do so. The 65-year old tries to play the part, but he comes across as Jeff Bridges acting like an old fart with a bad experience getting a tongue stud. Meryl Streep is creepy, in a role that was expanded probably because the novel lacked a physical villain, but her part is so thinly written that I'm wondering why she, who is fairly choosy about the roles she takes, agreed to participate. Katie Holmes is awful as Jonas's mother, while Alexander Skarsgard does a great job of blending in with the scenery as his father. They act like brainwashed cult members. Odeya Rush and Cameron Monaghan are utterly forgettable as Jonas's friends. Taylor Swift makes an appearance as Rosemary, although her character's significance is robbed of all its power due to the speed in which the film hurtles towards the climax. Speaking of...
Problem number four: The climax is jaw-droppingly awful. It's really bad. First, it closes with a chase scene that has far too little adrenaline. This is not an action-oriented story, and as such, a race between a motorcycle and a plane would be out of place even if it was done well (which it isn't). The book's ending was more low-key, which allowed it to retain feelings of melancholy and hope at the same time. Additionally, the stakes have been raised in the film, which would be fine had it been written better, but as it is, it feels ridiculous. "The Giver" is not "The Hunger Games," and that's the film's biggest mistake. Then there's the scene when Jonas finds out the darkest truth about his community. This revelation in the book was done perfectly. It had its capacity to shock, but it was appropriate. The one in the movie is just sick, and it shows it in all it's disturbing glory. "Boyhood" gets an R while this gets a mild PG-13? Unbelievable.
"The Giver" made me angry. It had such potential, but the filmmakers continuously underestimated the brainpower of everyone in the audience. "The Giver" is a powerful and thoughtful story. The movie is just trash.
Starring: Brenton Thwaites, Jeff Bridges, Meryl Streep, Odeya Rush, Katie Holmes, Alexander Skarsgard, Cameron Monaghan, Taylor Swift
Rated PG-13 for a Mature Thematic Image and Some Action/Violence
When I heard that Lois Lowry's powerful and haunting novel was being adapted for the screen, I thought, "It's about time." The novel was published 1993, with three sequels that followed in the years since (which surprised me, since I've never heard of them). Given Hollywood's obsession with special effects and toning down everything to appeal to those with the lowest IQs, I was nervous. Still, the novel is still widely read in middle schools, so I was hopeful that the filmmakers would realize that the majority of the audience would be able to grasp its complexities and rich thematic material. No such luck.
Philip Noyce's film version, which Jeff Bridges has been trying to make for the past 20 years, is exactly what I feared the film would be. It dumbs down the thought-provoking material to the point where it's a shadow of the source material, paced like an action movie trailer, and the ending is an action scene. What the hell were they thinking? As someone who is a fan of the book and still finds it compelling to ruminate over decades after reading it, I found such shoddy treatment to be shameful and insulting.
In the future, a new society has been created. Choice, feeling and individuality have been removed from daily life. Every aspect of daily life is organized and controlled down to the last detail. At age 16, each citizen is assigned a job based on the person's volunteer history, although for one young man named Jonas (Thwaites), things don't go according to plan. He has not been chosen for a job, but selected as a Receiver. With the help of The Giver (Bridges), Jonas will experience all the joy and sorrow that his society doesn't allow for instances when the Elders, led by The Chief Elder (Streep), need to access to old memories in order to keep their carefully constructed community alive. But is Jonas able to handle the truth about his life?
Problem number one: the film's setting is not adequately established. In many ways, the society that Lowry created is one of the most fascinating elements of her story. It's not particularly original, but she created it with such care and vivid detail that I can still visualize it in my mind. It's like a sci-fi version of "Pleasantville" crossed with "Equilibrium." Unfortunately setting the stage takes all of five minutes. We know Jonas is going to work with The Giver after the first ten minutes. This lack of set-up robs the film of all of its possible involvement on the part of the audience, and the suspense that was palpable in the novel is non-existent here.
Problem number two: the film's story, which was a parable of communism, is so diluted that it becomes a waste of time. The ideas in the book were powerfully presented. Frankly, with a straight approach that didn't underestimate the intelligence or the popularity of the book, it had a shot at some Oscars. Here, they're skimmed over. There's little in the way of depth and feeling in this film. The characters are too thin to be called stick figures, and the thought-provoking material the formed the bulk of Lowry's narrative is almost entirely ignored.
Problem number three: the acting is terrible. Lead actor Brenton Thwaites showed promise in "The Signal," the ambitious thriller from earlier this summer, but he appears to have forgotten how to act during the last month. He's flat and uncharismatic. This was Jeff Bridges' passion (he helped produce the film, and even filmed a version of it with his family), but he should have had the good sense to let someone more age-appropriate play the role. The Giver is meant to be played by an elderly actor, and Bridges, who has a fair amount of range, tries to do so. The 65-year old tries to play the part, but he comes across as Jeff Bridges acting like an old fart with a bad experience getting a tongue stud. Meryl Streep is creepy, in a role that was expanded probably because the novel lacked a physical villain, but her part is so thinly written that I'm wondering why she, who is fairly choosy about the roles she takes, agreed to participate. Katie Holmes is awful as Jonas's mother, while Alexander Skarsgard does a great job of blending in with the scenery as his father. They act like brainwashed cult members. Odeya Rush and Cameron Monaghan are utterly forgettable as Jonas's friends. Taylor Swift makes an appearance as Rosemary, although her character's significance is robbed of all its power due to the speed in which the film hurtles towards the climax. Speaking of...
Problem number four: The climax is jaw-droppingly awful. It's really bad. First, it closes with a chase scene that has far too little adrenaline. This is not an action-oriented story, and as such, a race between a motorcycle and a plane would be out of place even if it was done well (which it isn't). The book's ending was more low-key, which allowed it to retain feelings of melancholy and hope at the same time. Additionally, the stakes have been raised in the film, which would be fine had it been written better, but as it is, it feels ridiculous. "The Giver" is not "The Hunger Games," and that's the film's biggest mistake. Then there's the scene when Jonas finds out the darkest truth about his community. This revelation in the book was done perfectly. It had its capacity to shock, but it was appropriate. The one in the movie is just sick, and it shows it in all it's disturbing glory. "Boyhood" gets an R while this gets a mild PG-13? Unbelievable.
"The Giver" made me angry. It had such potential, but the filmmakers continuously underestimated the brainpower of everyone in the audience. "The Giver" is a powerful and thoughtful story. The movie is just trash.
Not surprised this movie blew chunks, the book kinda sucked as well.
ReplyDelete