Last post in my dystopias series and, I should note, I'm actually surprisingly pleased with this one. Typically these movies and shows are things I've already watched because I was curious about this one, but today's topic I actually stayed up and watched last night because it was crunch time and I was stuck, and, despite a lot of flack my fiancée was giving it, this is actually a pretty good movie.
TITLE: The Giver
DETAILS:
DIRECTOR: Philip Noyce
LEAD ACTOR: Brenton Thwaites
ANTAGONIST LEAD: Meryl Streep
SUMMARY:
In a seemingly perfect community, without war, pain, suffering, differences or choice, a young boy is chosen to learn from an elderly man about the true pain and pleasure of the "real" world.
PERSONAL CRITIQUE:
There are a lot of things that put me off about this movie at first glance, for starters, the opening does not do a lot to grab attention, except in explaining that the characters aren't in the real world. I guess, you kind of have to go into this movie with the intention of enjoying it, it's not a movie that will grab your attention when you flip through channels and happen across it. Due to the overall plot, the first quarter-hour of the movie is dull, we're introduced to our characters and what seems to be anxiousness, in a world without emotion that seems strange, but this world, for whatever reason, makes a distinction between emotion and "feelings," feelings being the temporary spurts of...well they're emotions darn it, temporary spurts of emotion like pride, joy, happiness, anxiety, fear, and other such nonsense. But, "emotions," are different, they're the extremes basically, like love and hate. This is one of those things that becomes very irritating about the whole experience. One of the rules the characters must follow is speaking with clarity of purpose, and for clarity's sake, I don't think any statement can be more clear than "love." Sure, it has a lot of applications, but love is generally a pretty good term for endearment, pride, happiness with another, and a lot of other ideas. Yet, every time a character uses the term love, they're asked for clarity, and the phrase is treated as if it has no meaning, but the characters then make statements that directly relate to feelings of love, even if the attachment isn't there.
Moving on from the terrifying idea that emotions and feelings are different things, the setting itself is pretty sound, drugs that suppress emotional response, employment opportunities decided based on capability and need, not just randomly decided by the person, everyone has a niche they need to fill, and they do fill it. No artists that want to be actors, no nuclear physicists out designing video games, everyone does what they're supposed to. Except the main character of course, he's practically an exile in nature as he receives forbidden information as a necessity for his position. Nothing about the movie can really be attributed to the movie though, can they? After all, it's all the fault of the original novel, right?
Maybe that's true, but at least the characters could be more devoid of emotion if they were meant to be devoid of emotion! Instead everyone seems anxious, curious, and occasionally downright angry about something.
Y'know what? I'm done.
RATING:
Nine out of Ten Givers would give this movie Two memories you're not ready for, out of Five.
Blame it on the book or poor directing, but this movie did not seem coherent at all. It wasn't terrible as far as its core ideas go, but I would not suggest you go out and throw a theater party for it.