Al's Omniflick: Divergent

Monday, March 24, 2014

Divergent

**Spoiler Alert** Dir. Neil Burger. Starring: Shailene Woodley, Kate Winslet and Ashley Judd.

Given the phenomenal box-office spoils of the Hunger Games films, Hollywood can't be blamed for attempts at reproducing the same success with an alternate franchise featuring a young, strong, female lead. What can't be countenanced is a doppleganger and a sometimes corny one at that. Divergent, based on the novel by Veronica Roth, tells the story of a future where one's role in society is determined by a specific virtue: Abnegation, Amity, Candor, Dauntless, and Erudite.

A young woman named Beatrice Prior, played by the lovely and burgeoning talent Shailene Woodley, belongs to a Abnegation family but may not be an Abnegate. A preliminary test to determine her virtue is inconclusive and therefore dangerous; a fact kept under wraps by a sympathetic woman conducting the test. Those who belong to none of the virtues are deemed social outcasts and thus Divergents

A more formal test performed before the various factions in a large hall reveals Beatrice to be a Dauntless; a caste of warriors assigned to protect the citizens from what menaces beyond the immense barrier surrounding the city.

Forced to leave her family, Beatrice, self-christened as Tris, undergoes the dangerous and rigorous Dauntless training with other recruits while trying to maintain her secret. The punishment for failing the spartan tests and games is a dismissal from the faction, and an ignoble, social reassignment to those living in the streets and who belong to no faction.

In the course of the story, a faction lead by an Erudite (Kate Winslet) will seize power by exploiting the Dauntless using mind control and in doing so, will attempt to kill all citizens deemed subversives, including all Abnegates; to which Tris' family belongs. One will already guess at this point that Tris plays a key role in the resistance, which leads eventually to the destruction of the Erudites behind the coup (sorry again for spoiling the story) and lays the groundwork for another installment, for we know not what lurks beyond the city defenses

After reading reviews savaging the movie, I expected little and was rewarded accordingly but Divergent isn't all bad, it just seems like a glossy knock-off coming too soon on the heels of Hunger Games 2 to establish its own identity.

Shailene Woodley is a credible action character and like her roles in The Spectacular Now and The Descendants, she brings a quirky charm to a character that is essentially Katniss Everdeen reconfigured and repurposed. Identical, self-empowering trials and struggles Katniss endured greet Tris at every corner.

I would have liked to see more of Kate Winslet, who is given only an outline of a character to work with while Ashley Judd is allowed more color and screentime to acquit herself well.

It doesn't take much brain power to plot the story once the characters are established. Because it is all predictable, little tension or suspense follows. It isn't dull but it's hard to wave away Hunger Games, which buzzes around one's head like a pesky fly during the movie. And like Hunger Games it's difficult to overcome the risible sci-fi-lite setting that would make the average science fiction fan cringe. And what of the allegory, which the film seems to wear on its sleeve; of erudite attempting to vanquish abnegation? Or the none-too-subtle message about the perils of conformity? Is it all silly or profound?

Whether a sequel or a trilogy can help the series forge its own identity has yet to be determined but in the meantime, I'm sure Hollywood will flood the mutliplexes with more Hunger Games clones, which again, given that movie's stellar success, isn't exactly unjustified.

Monday morning follow-up: According to the New York Times, Divergent did exceptional box office over the weekend, which will now justify--in Hollywood anyway--a franchise.

No comments:

Post a Comment

On DVD

Fury (1936)

Director: Fritz Lang

Though we might normally think of the films M and Metropolis when director Fritz Lang becomes the topic of conversation, less known is the legendary director's work in Hollywood. Having fled the ever-growing menace of Nazi Germany for America in the early 1930s', Lang eventually found himself under contract for MGM.

Though his work in Hollywood is very uneven, one standout is Fury, from 1936. Starring Spencer Tracy and Sylvia Sydney, the film's condemnation of mob justice seems spectacularly daring now, considering lynching was still a reality in Depression-era America. We don't see one black person in the film entire but we know precisely for whom Lang film is sympathetic.

Spencer Tracy plays Joe Wilson, who is arrested in a small town while en route to meet his fiance, Katherine (Sylvia Sydney). Suspected of being part of a kidnapping of a little girl, Wilson is arrested on the flimsiest evidence. While he sits in cell; angry and indignant, Katherine is puzzled as to why her fiance hasn't arrived at their prearranged meeting place.

But Wilson's fortunes take a darker and more dangerous turn when a mob--already on edge--is roused to anger. Egging one another on, the mob moves on the jailhouse where Wilson is being held. As the angry gathering becomes a mass, drawing citizens of the town into their swelling numbers, a lynch-mob begins to form. The sheriff, determined to see due process take its course, refuses their forceful demands. Becoming angrier and angrier and bolder and bolder, the crowd storms the jail, overwhelming the sheriff and his deputies. Unable to unlock the cell doors to reach Wilson, the mob sets the jailhouse ablaze as an alternate method of lynching.

Katherine, having arrived on the scene, faints when she sees flames engulf the cell where her fiance is held.

In spite of the mob acting as a faceless entity, its principle members are brought to trial though the town and the defendants maintain a conspiracy of silence, hoping to escape convictions and censure.

A sure acquittal seems imminent until damning evidence assures their guilt. When the majority of the members receive death sentences, Wilson turns up at his brothers, having survived the fire. Knowing the public is unaware of his survival, he vows to stay in hiding to ensure the mob conspirators are executed.

The scene where Katherine, nearly insane from grief, comes face to face with Joe is a powerful moment in the film. As she slowly recovers from her state, she realizes Joe's vindictive determination to see the mob hang is in itself a great injustice.

The story climaxes during a stirring courtroom scene that brings the fascinating story to a close.

I would have never expected Hollywood to make a statement as powerful as Fury made in 1936. Given the fact that lynchings in America at the time went unpunished, the movie railed bravely, in spite of the main character being white rather than black, against what was then the status quo. The Oxbow Incident would make a similar and commensurately powerful statement seven years later.

The film's willingness to peer into the darker side of American life could be partly attributed to Lang, who co-wrote the story and who was no stranger to exploring the darker side of humanity. Having seen evil flower in his home country, it makes sense Lang would choose to tell this story.

Spencer Tracy and Sylvia Sydney give wonderful, emotionally layered performances. Katherine's near descent into madness is depicted touchingly by Sydney. To see Tracy's mild-mannered Wilson become angry and vengeful is heartbreaking.

Even watching Lang's film on a small screen does little to diminish its power. Weeks after the viewing, I still can't shake its indelible images or its angry indictment of one of America's great crimes. One couldn't devise a better title than one it was given eighty years ago. Fury indeed.