When I walk into my local CVS, I ponder the choice between the name-brand Doritos or CVS’s brand for $1. The optimist in me always hopes that I can save some cash without forfeiting the acclaimed taste of real Doritos, so I go with the underdog.
This is the same mindset I had when I went to see the Robert Schwentke film “Insurgent,” or what I affectionately refer to as “The Poor Man’s Hunger Games.” Like the generic brand of chips, “Insurgent” leaves one not only unsatisfied, but full of regret. To my chagrin, the only fallacy in my analogy is that, unlike the knock-off Doritos, I paid the same price to see the missed opportunity as I would’ve to see a decent film. Even though “Insurgent” is problematic on its own, the fact that it’s the sequel to the mediocre film, “Divergent,” makes me wonder why it ever came into existence.
If planning on seeing “Insurgent,” I recommend a close reading of the “Divergent” book series by Veronica Roth, which the movie was based on. I failed to heed this advice, and I assure you, those 96 minutes of my life were some of the most confusing and tumultuous moments I’ve ever endured.
In this convoluted film, Tris (Shailene Woodley, “The Fault In Our Stars”) and Four (Theo James, ”Divergent”) are fugitives on the run, searching for allies and answers amongst the ruins of a futuristic Chicago. Against all odds, they try to piece together what Tris’ family sacrificed their lives to protect. Being hunted by the evil and power-hungry Erudite elite leader Jeanine Williams (Kate Winslet, “A Little Chaos”), the duo face daunting challenges as they try to unlock the hidden histories and prophecies of their world.
Even though the film is set in a futuristic and dystopian Chicago, I don’t understand how many of the characters ended up arriving at their destinations. The characters, who are all insufferably one-dimensional, just seemed to appear randomly in new places throughout the movie. With all this movement, one would think there would be a recognizable plot progression, but it was as if the storyline was frozen in carbonite.
I felt bad enough for my fellow spectators and myself, my heart truly goes out to the cast of “Insurgent,” whose talents were wasted on one of the most cumbersome screenplays I’ve witnessed. The motley crew of Tris, Four, Caleb (Ansel Elgort, “Men, Women & Children”) and Peter (Miles Teller, “Two Night Stand”) gave it their best shot to keep the film’s flimsy storyline moving along, but the task of saving this screenplay proved too daunting. Winslet had the most unfortunate performance as the malevolent Williams. Her attempts to be menacing and ferocious did not register an iota of maliciousness, but once again I attribute this failure to a subpar screenplay and pedestrian directing.
For years now, there has been this horrid trend towards releasing sequels of every monetarily successful film, especially if it appeals to the “young adult” audience. For instance, Hollywood did the public a huge disservice by not only giving each novel in the “Twilight” series its own film adaptation, but by breaking its last novel, “Breaking Dawn,” into two painfully deplorable movies. The “Divergent” series is no different. Unfortunately, I forecast yet another lousy young-adult dystopian film in the future.
Based on the films occupying theaters across the country, one could assume my generation is only interested in the fantasy genre. Every movie marketed toward a millennial audience includes some mythical character, be it a vampire, futuristic heroine or a super-hero. This constant focus on the fantastic is only removing audiences further and further from reality.
“Insurgent” falls right into this trend of bush-league fantasy young-adult movies. Nothing groundbreaking or different from its counterparts takes place–viewing the movie is just a wasteful use of 96 minutes. So if you feel the need to quench your thirst for a young adult dystopian film, rent “The Hunger Games” again, rather than seeing the flop that is “Insurgent.”
1.5/5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suZcGoRLXkU
