Divergent (2014) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
758 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Divergent is a tedious experience
Argemaluco17 April 2014
SPOILER: The main problem from Divergent is that its premise is too far-fetched, improbable and illogical. If the story had been ingenious enough to justify so many conditions and unearthly circumstances, there wouldn't have been any problem. But no... this is simply another juvenile tale about the typical main character who must overcome her insecurity when she finds out she's "special", and her actions escalate until she practically saves the world... without forgetting, of course, the "unexpected" romance in the road to her destiny. Well, I'm speculating about saving the world. Divergent is based on a series of "young adult" novels I haven't read (and I will never do so), and the producers obviously expect to shoot sequels, so this first film establishes the (absurd) post-apocalyptic world, the bland characters and the obligatory conspiracy in which NOTHING IS LIKE IT SEEMS (translation: everything is exactly like it seems, from the predictable villain to the gallant who starts being a hateful lout, until he softens himself and shows his romantic side). In other words, a simpleton and innocuous teenage fantasy made for female spectators; and another attempt to create the saga which will inherit the crown from The Hunger Games... something which isn't precisely bad. Divergent was made for a very specific audience, and I sincerely hope that the female fans of the novels are left satisfied by this film. For the rest, the production values are pretty high, the special effects are competent and the cast is composed in a big part by attractive multi-cultural young people who seem taken from a catalogue of Urban Outfitters (what a luck for the post- apocalyptic world). I don't know how the casual spectators can take Divergent; in my personal experience, it bored me very much (specially during the "exciting" conclusion full of action), but I'm very far from belonging to this film's objective audience. Each one will know his/her posture and tolerance to this kind of film; I personally regret having wasted my time and my money on it.
215 out of 294 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Most predictable movie ever- I cannot believe Andreea Negoita liked it.
aker9957 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
As I said, the movie was extremely predictable. I knew what was going to happen before it did and I honestly felt like I was watching it for the 3rd time! There were no twists, no suspense, no surprises. I could not believe that there would be so many clichés and unrealistic scenes. Instead of an "action/adventure film" I saw a boring love story. I can't imagine how unbearable it must have been for those who read the book..

*SPOILER* The following scenes are examples of why the plot was so obvious and boring:

We knew that Tris would not go into the same faction as her family, we knew which one she'd choose, we knew that she'd fall in love with Four, we knew that she wouldn't get kicked out of training, we knew that Four would find out that she was a Divergent but wouldn't tell anybody etc... Moreover, the scene where Tris and Four fight is so unrealistic and again, the fact that he started fighting on her side was way too PREDICTABLE.


To me, Divergent looked like a bad version of the Hunger Games and I am really surprised that so many people liked it. Unless you are a teenage girl who finds Theo James hot and unless you have never read any books or watched any other movies in your life, I see no reason why you would want to waste 2 and a half hours of your life watching Divergent.
216 out of 322 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
How Did Veronica Roth Approve this Movie?
Laura Dochtermann22 March 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I have read all three books written by Veronica Roth. I came in with expectations of character profiles and I reviewed the characters on IMDb. I understand that all book-to-movie adaptations make it difficult to fit in all the elements and are not perfect. It's impossible to portray the book word for word. Despite knowing all of this, I came in with a low expectation.

As I suspected, the tall and beautiful Shailene Woodley is definitely not the small and weak Tris we imagine while reading the book. A lot of the character profiles were 'off.' However, Shailene gave an excellent portrayal of how she developed from a shy dependent girl to a confident fearless warrior.

The opening to the movie indicates we are in 'Chicago,' and that we are separated into the five factions because of the war. There is no explanation of why the war happened, where and who with. Just that we have the huge fence to keep each other safe and we don't know what's out there.

Elements were definitely rushed and lacked intensity. The characters that were not featured in this movie are revolutionary figures in the second, making it impossible to have a movie without them. Key characters were left out or barely mentioned. Drew, Edward, Molly & Susan don't exist in the movie. There's no relationship at all with Susan and Caleb, as they left her out. Peter's entourage is completely removed. Edward has a couple brief mentions in the movie including the capture the flag game and on the leader board. Otherwise, the entire eye stabbing scene doesn't exit. We don't see Peter for who he really is. The intensity of taunting Tris and making it difficult for her at Dauntless headquarters is glossed over. We see Peter make a name for himself when he beats Tris in the fight. Molly has barely two lines in the movie. One of the lines Molly has complimented Tris. In the book she's part of Peter's entourage and they hate each other. I find that Peter is too soft in the movie and he isn't enough of a jerk. In the book he's way more nasty.

Elements of the Dauntless training were not victorious as they're supposed to be. There was no focus on how vital Dauntless training is and that they do it well. There was no desperation to survive the training like there was in the book. You saw the rankings change, but the intensity in the fights and the will to survive was never built up.

Members of the family have the choice to visit on visiting day. This scene was replaced with Tris' mother sneaking into the Dauntless compound to be updated about her progress in the Dauntless training. She warns her about doing too well and asks her to remain in the middle of the pack. It's not revealed that the mom isn't going to visit Caleb, nor does she ask Tris to visit Caleb and ask him to find out what's in the serum. Instead, Tris on a whim visits Caleb.

The movie was way too focused on the romance of Tris and Four. Four softens up to Tris way too easily. He's supposed to be edgy and guarded. Details about Four were supposed to be revealed in his fear landscape. Four seems unfazed by his fear landscape. This scene is so critical in the book, it's the first time we are supposed to see how vulnerable Four really is. Four never tells Tris to call him Tobias. In Tris' fear landscape, she sacrifices herself for her family. In the movie, she faces her family and the gun is aimed at them.

I can't even talk about the ending. It was completely changed. I might have appreciated the ending if I hadn't read the books. There were elements of the ending I quite enjoyed, but it's still very rushed. I understand that they needed to end the movie with no cliffhanger, but my sister who had not read the books still had questions about the ending.

Overall, I rate the movie as a C+. Other discrepancies include Tris taking credit with Christina after the win in the Capture the Flag scene, Will dying at the same scene as the mother (rather than in the Dauntless compound), Tris not showing her displeasure with Four and yelling at him, as well as Peter not begging for his life to be included with Tris, her dad, Caleb and Marcus. As well the initiate who jumps from the train and falls to her death, Al's crush on Tris, Four getting drunk, and overall many scenes that never showed the struggle of being that character. Near the end when the dad, Caleb, Marcus & Tris have to catch the train to the Dauntless compound, there's no struggle from any of the characters jumping on or off the train. Dad and the others jump like they have done it a million times and Caleb never complains. When they jump into the netting below, Tris asks each of them, 'you good?' 'you good?' There was a lot of odd phrases that Tris never used.

There were quite a few memorable scenes including the aptitude test, the fear landscapes, the simulations, the tense moments Tris and Four had that were very true to the book including the capture the flag scene, as well as the zip lining experience. 
91 out of 132 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
More holes than a colander
kevinmorice11 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Much like similar teen girl action movie series this one kills itself early on by introducing so many holes that the house of cards that they then try to build has no foundation.

Before the credits are even over the story makes less than no sense. Having destroyed civilisation in a world war (ok) Chicago survives. The survivors had enough materials to build a massive wall around the city, 300ft high, but can barely feed themselves. Now they have split into 5 factions (actually 6 because they throw a lot of people out and call them 'factionless') and this somehow magically creates peace.

So none of that makes sense, and much like Hunger Games, having built a nonsensical premise we now follow a teenage girl as she turns into a super-soldier capable of jumping of buildings fighting off trained armies single-handed (using a cheap looking paint-ball gun). All the while with her buff and perfectly capable new boyfriend doing as little as possible to help her.

Oh and I forgot a quick detour while we ride a pointless zip wire through some buildings for absolutely no reason than to try and spend some of the left over special effects budget.

And occasionally Kate Winslet pops up, but is shot from funny angles all the time while they try to make her baby look less visible. Not that they need to as her bad blonde hair is distracting enough.

All in a total waste of 2 hours. Just go and watch Twilight or Hunger Games for the same movie done slightly (but not a lot) better.
359 out of 556 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
tandrei200127 March 2014
I went to see this movie misled by the high rating on IMDb. Unfortunately it looks like Hollywood makes movies for people with short memory. I admit I haven't read the source book, but I guess I wouldn't, judging by what came out of it. I hereby venture myself in saying that the book is also a bad SciFi novel. It has way to obvious imports from well known themes that have been exploited to the brim by today (like the "perfect" society that sacrifices diversity for peace, the "different" guy that stands-up to the system, the genuine technology that controls individuals (poorly described, by the way), the fear confrontation ad the list could go on and on. It is not essentially bad to bring these themes in a movie, but I see nothing new, original here. So... if you have seen Equilibrum and the Hunger Games then you know it all. Movies today are just mobile phones... keep reproducing "features" from the competition, while it is supposed to be an art. Another thing can't stand in movies in general is the poor IT incursions. I am talking about the scene in which Jeanine is asked to turn off the "control system" which consists of a huge touch screen in which she just hits some "cancel" button. That was really pathetic... Anyone could have done that right? Another thing that I can't stand, is the cheap psychology things in these movies. They are all based on some sort of psychoanalysis which is long time deprecated in therapy. But it is somehow considered to be "cool" and "trendy" by producers to insert these kind of flavour into the movies to make it more profound. Or are they just as stupid and ignorants as the target viewers? Anyhow... to me, this is bad taste in art. If you want to really go for it, you must do way better that that and if you can't, then at least make it more interesting. It is also true that movies like "Inception" don't occur every month, but once they do... they set a trend and everybody will just take a byte of it. Don't get me wrong, it is a "watchable" movie, perhaps a little too long for its story, which, by the way, is very predictable and full of clichés. I read some users claiming it resembles "The Hunger Games" and so it is, especially with the modest ending that awkwardly announces a sequel. I could predict how the story developed and ended after the first 15 minutes and that's what makes this movie mediocre. Script is mediocre, but at least it does not abounds in stereotypes so it's bearable. What can be said about acting... there is no acting in this kind of movies, you only need to be young and good looking, be able to learn your part and you're done. It's not that the actors are bad, but the movie itself is not based on any acting mastery and just because of that, the girl gets a plus for making something out of it. I am curious if the ratings will stay as high as now in time.
186 out of 293 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Made for teens TV Movie would best describe this
Stiobhan28 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Although lacking any real sustained exciting action parts, this would probably appeal to under 16 year old's.

I really have a problem with the voting, as according to it's current evaluation by over 48 thousand viewers it is 7.5 which essentially means that it should be better these movies which were rated less than 7.5: Man of Steel (2013); Captain America: The First Avenger (2011); X-Men; X-Men 2; X-Men 3; X-Men Wolverine; Iron Man 2; Iron Man 3; Oblivion; Superman Returns (2006); Independence Day (1996); Transformers (2007); and Stargate.

This movie is just awful; no substance, and worst of all it's set up to allow for the making of a sequel.

The only good thing about a sequel is that they won't have to do too much to make the sequel better than this.
97 out of 150 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Stupid and Senseless Concept of Society
Claudio Carvalho13 September 2014
Warning: Spoilers
In a post-apocalyptic dystopia, the world is destroyed and only Chicago has survived with a society divided into five factions: Abnegation (the selfless), Amity (the peaceful), Candor (the honest), Dauntless (the brave), and Erudite (the intelligent). The teenager Beatrice Prior (Shailene Woodley) belongs to the Abnegation that rules the society but she fells outcast and attracted by the Dauntless. When she is sixteen years old, she is submitted to an aptitude test to indicate in which faction she will stay for the rest of her life, but she learns that she has aptitude to be in the Abnegation, Erudite and Dauntless. Further, she learns that she is a Divergent that is destroyed by the government. On the next day, she chooses to join the Dauntless where she changes her name to Tris and is trained by Four (Theo James). They fall in love with each other and soon Tris discovers that the Erudite are planning to take over the power from the Abnegation and become the ruling faction.

"Divergent" is an adventure movie with a dull and lame story based in a stupid and senseless concept of society. The dystopia does not make any sense and everything is idiotic in the story: the society, the plot, the romance, the way the Dauntless jump from the train, the conclusion. If there is a faction formed for the most intelligent people, it seems to be obvious that they should rule this chaotic society. Tris kills many soldiers but she leaves Jeanine alive in the end. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "Divergente" ("Divergent")
32 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A boring, sanitized version with no chemistry between the leads
Logan-2224 March 2014
I read the trilogy (which was nothing special and kept getting more annoying each sequel), but at least the first book had some kind of * something * to it. The movie sucks. It is boring and there is very little action (and what little there was is over too fast and not very thrilling). The violence is sanitized with the only real blood being when Four nicks Tris's ear with a knife toss. The two most horrifying scenes in the book are not even included: the attempted rape of Tris by Peter's gang and the transfer girl who jumps from the train and misses the Dauntless rooftop to splat on the street below. Tris doesn't have a "save the cat" moment early on and provides no real reason to ever like her.

The story takes too long to get going, then the training goes on forever, only to have the ending feel rushed. Not once did I feel anyone's life was in danger. Not once did I perceive any credible romantic chemistry between Tris and Four. Not once did I laugh, cry, or feel anything but bored. And it goes on for two and a half hours! Ugh. Sure, the production values are high, but who cares if I can't relate to any of the characters or the story? It's just a dumb waste of time. I didn't hate it (only because I scored a free ticket), but have no desire to watch the sequels.

However, I'm glad Divergent made a bunch of money opening weekend to pave the way for other YA books to be adapted into films, but they need to do a better job. The reason all the recent YA adaptations tanked at the box office is because they sucked (Vampire Academy, Beautiful Creatures, City of Bones). The only decent one I can remember was Warm Bodies.
84 out of 129 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I wish I had the option of giving a Zero
mreynolds96626 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was terrible. It was awful. And infuriating. It made no sense. This movie is the epitome of crap. In fact, instead of watching this near 2 1/2 hour movie, watch a piece of crap. It will have a better plot than this flick. The first hour and forty-five minutes (precisely) are spent on the wrong thing. It makes reference to the "government" (cough CAPITOL) to being some sort of evil, but rather focuses on Tris becoming part of a cult. It doesn't even make clear what they do. It gives no reason to why they are in "factions". There were so many plot holes I would have thought Tommy Wiseau wrote it. The guys name is Four. Four. Apparently the author of the book thought, "Well, anyone who reads this is a moron anyway." Four. Why? Why? WHY???? I understand that this garbage was only put together to make money, but did they have to assume everyone is an idiot? Couldn't they at least let it make sense? Or shorter? Or less cheesy? Or better acted? Or more focused? Or more intelligent? There was a point when Tris argues with Kate Winslet's character that them choosing isn't a matter of free will. Or at least she almost does. Right when it seems like the movie has any brain they shut it down in a hurry. There is way too much wrong about this movie. If I continue I will only be hurting myself by spending more than ten minutes thinking about this movie.
73 out of 112 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Mediocre at best.
Bruce7226 April 2014
When reading the book, I had concerns about how well it would translate to film. It's a book without much action and most of the narrative is internalized to the protagonist. Books like that tend to struggle to adapt well and Divergent is no different. The director tried to make changes to the story in order to try and make it work but I honestly think it was futile. It's just not a good story for a 2-hour interpretation. Even at that, I would rather have seen the story stay true and struggle to adapt than change and struggle. All in all, it was set up to fail from the beginning. Shailene Woodley and Theo James gave solid performances and the special effects and action sequences were done well but they made the film watchable and slightly enjoyable at best.
181 out of 295 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Greatly disappointed
galdude902119 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I was actually pretty excited about watching this movie. My cousin thought it was great and better than Hunger games, so I read the books before I watched the movie. I liked the books, but there were a few things I wasn't satisfied about. The relationship between Tris and Four is confusing and spontaneous, completely out of the blue and random. In the movie it is worse. They barely know each other, Tris' ear gets cut from Four, then Tris is making out with Four topless. They didn't include a lot of the important characters, like Uriah and Peter's crew. They barely acknowledged the characters they did put into the movie and there seemed to be no importance in them. Al's suicide was a big thing in the book and it didn't really make an impact in the movie, there was no significance, I wouldn't have felt any emotion if I hadn't read the book. Will, Christina, Tris and Al's friendship is too muted and you don't really get to know any of the characters well, the character development was non-existent, . Four of the characters I couldn't really tell apart from the others, Will, Al, Peter and Drew looked pretty much identical. Too much is left out and there are too many changes added to the movie that make no sense. In Tris' fear landscape it seems that Four is trying to rape her and she has to violently fight him off. In the book it is playful and she ends up laughing it off. Edward's knife stabbing in the eye accident is also left out and that was an incredibly important scene.

This movie just really disappointed me, I never really get disappointed with movies, but this just frustrated me too much.

The books and movie both had great potential but were just a little bit off.
55 out of 83 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
David Selin16 April 2014
Four is the name of an important character in the movie. Apparently, it stands for poor writing, poor directing, poor casting, and poor acting.

Let's start with the poor writing. Obviously this movie would be more enjoyable if one had read the book. Well, I hadn't, and therefore I was confused because the back-up story was non-existent. The movie takes place in an dystopian society. However, nobody tells what really happened to the world. Without adding any spoilers, it is hard to specify why the quality of the writing is constantly so poor, but let's just say that the story is so full of holes it looks like an emmental cheese.

Poor directing. Good directing could have compensated for the ludicrous writing, but in Divergent they seem to form an unholy alliance. The scenes lack credibility - especially the action ones. Because of this, Divergent is a movie for the children at best.

There are three characters that look somewhat the same. It took constant effort to keep on track on who is who. The absurd changing of the scenes didn't help. However, the biggest mistake of the casting crew was hiring Shailene Woodley. Sure, it is cool to see a relatively new face in a big budget movie, but there is a reason why it is so rare - they cannot act.

The previous statement takes me to the final part, which rendered this movie close to unwatchable. The actors consist of young and inexperienced actors mostly. Because of the cheesy writing and directing, their acting seems even more horrible than it already is. Again, without including any spoilers, I won't go any deeper, but just watch the so-called "chemistry" between Tris and Four... Makes you feel awkward, huh?

Finally, I want to clarify that I usually like dystopian films. In this case, I was expecting a rating of 7 or 8, so I'm still quite shocked because the movie fell below my expectations so badly. It just makes me so disappointed that this kind of budget goes to absolute waste because of these flaws I mentioned above. All in all, I wouldn't recommend this movie unless you are a big fan of the books!
381 out of 653 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Best tween film in ages
MovieSonic29 July 2014
I'm glad I got around to watching this, I'm not sure who's writing the negative reviews or what they were expecting but I can honestly say that this is the best tween film I've seen in a long time.

It IS a tween film, it's blatantly aimed at young girls and as a "twenty-something" youngish female, I'm not embarrassed to say that I really enjoyed this film. It's pure fantasy fodder of course but here's what I liked about it:

  • the relationship between the two leads develops naturally i.e. they don't see each other and go 'you're my soulmate', in fact they don't really get on at first so this is believable and refreshing

  • the lead actress (Shailene Woodley) playing Tris is extremely natural and one of a very few actors I've ever seen who has convinced me that they are grieving (usually grief in films is just 'oh, they're dead, I'm so upset' ... swiftly moves on with their day..) - Actually both of the leads (Theo James as well) play their roles really well

  • I loved the point of view shots like when Tris looks at Four during the training and you see it from his perspective and then the camera cuts to his face to get his reaction to the look she gives him (there are other similar scenes) and it just adds to the effect of feeling like these are real people and I empathised with them more as a result

  • Yeah the background story for the city is quite thin but who cares, stranger things have happened in the real world and what I like is that we're given a sense of 'this is what they've been told but is that what's really happened?'. I'm not sure if that's in the book or if the film makers wanted to add some realism for us grown-ups but when they question what's out there, I got the feeling this might be similar to The Island (2005) - that's not a spoiler it's just my opinion and probably totally off base

I have now watched this film about 4 or 5 times because I really liked so much of it: the fighting was believable for me because I think we've all gotten used to flashy choreography and sound effects but that's not what real fights look like or how they sound so for me, these fight scenes are really good. I liked the weapons because they kept it simple and for training, they're a good idea.

Probably the thing I liked the most is the fact that "it's not all about Tris". I mean, it IS all about Tris but it's not 'totally in your face, the world revolves around Tris and no-one else matters' all about Tris... What I mean is that there are some "films" out there which spend their entire running time having the supporting actors running around warning the lead actress not to have sex with her boyfriend lest he destroy her vagina but in this film, the lead actress often shares centre stage with her new best friend, there are a lot of scenes where she is in the background looking out as opposed to a lot of shots of her standing alone / in the centre and we see her friend fighting too; the focus is just not 'always' on her. Having said that, I do think that there could have been even 'more' focus on the people around her. First of all, had we gotten to know her friends better, we might have empathised with them more (trying not to include spoilers!) and also, this will sound harsh but it needs saying, I'm sick of seeing 'ethnic' people in minor or reduced roles: what a waste of Mekhi Phifer! I wish that Zoë Kravitz had been given more to do, yes she had a decent amount of screen time but I would have liked to maybe see her 'fearscape' and... that's about it for ethnic characters I think... yep.

I liked that Jai Courtney's character didn't go overboard as the villain but again, his character was a little one dimensional and I would have liked to have seen some more interaction and dialogue between him and Four just to flesh out their background story.

Kate Winslet honestly did the best she could with her part and it's a massive credit to her that she managed to make me severely dislike her and believe that she was evil with just a few odd lines here and there. Her role is to literally just pop into the film every now and then to be a bit menacing and give off a female-Hitler vibe (bright blonde hair). But she pulls it off in my opinion. There's no point in elaborating on why someone is pure evil, we know this exists, it's happened in the real world and it's still happening so her role didn't distract from the believability of the story.

Overall, I liked the subtlety of the story. There is no sex, no profanity, no overt 'I love yous' yet it didn't come across as 'after-school-specially' at all. Also, I never groaned out loud once or cringed or had to hide my face behind a pillow while someone professed their undying love for someone they just met a week ago. The dialogue was realistic with occasional over-rehearsed acting from some of the supporting cast but I really loved this film. Go into it knowing it's a tween film and that there won't be a lot of intelligent scientific explanations for things and you'll probably enjoy it as much as I did.

34 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Brainbleeding intesifies
fast-giga23 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Of course this movie is made for a very young female audience so I have problems to identify myself with the targeted audience. The good point about the movie is, that the heroine is not complelty depending on her male counterpart, so its none of the "girls-are-mentaly-and-physically-too-weak-to-exist-without-man" movies, but thats about it. If you want to watch something about strong female characters try the legend of Korra. The rest of this movie is terrible, especially the huge amount of brain bleeding inducing logic errors.

SPOILERS!!!!!!!!! For Soldiers knife throwing, jumping from trains and excessive hand-to-hand combat are the most important skills. As well as being complelty fearless...people throw knifes at you and you aren't allowed to be afraid? Yes, thats the stuff marines are made of. Being a soldier has nothing to do with endurence, guns, tactics and unimportant stuff like that real life soldiers train.

Being "divergent" not fitting into a faction is something rare...at least thats what the characters say...funny how the rarest thing turns out to be a majority.

The training officer sits at the same table as the rookies, but the rookies aren't allowed to talk to him? Yeah, makes sense.

A rookies says something stupid to a teacher...and they put in into the world wide newspaper...yeah, nothing else interesting happening.

Oh, I nearly forgot, the actual most important thing for a solider is house climbing. Know a soldier who hasn't climbed the empire state building? He's a noob.

These are just some of the terrible brain bleeding inducing logic errors in this movie. If you are a 8 year old girl you might be able to accept them, but for everybody else this movie isn't watchable.
45 out of 69 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Perfect Storm
cjgrayso16 April 2014
This is perfect storm of bad movie making: a stupid story, bad acting and bad directing. Who is ultimately to blame? Money grubbing CEO's. Who else?

Thanks to the mega-success of the Hunger Games and Harry Potter, Hollywood's scouring young adult books, like some pedophile in a playground, looking for new material to get their greasy hands on.

Divergent is one of those series. I've not read the books, but in the movie, you belong to one of 5 factions. Our heroine does not - she's divergent - and that apparently frightens the powers that be.

Why? Because individualism is seen as a threat. In much the way independent film makers are perceived a threat in Hollywood.

What follows is one inane, dumb, idiotic scene after another. I was rolling my eyes most of the time or laughing out loud at some of the nonsense I was watching. I almost got up to leave, but it was like watching a train wreck. That would be more entertaining.
279 out of 486 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
"Don't Try And Define Me."
TheAnimalMother8 September 2014
I have to say that the producers would have to be stupid not to use Burger again as the director. He did such a great job with this one. I thought I was going to see a film that was mostly aimed at teens. However the story alone makes this far superior to most teen oriented films. In fact this didn't feel much like a teen film at all. The fantasy story is a great metaphor for our current society, it's simply a very relevant film. The directing here was spot on. The story as fun as it is, does have a few holes, sure, but they are easy to look over because they are such small holes. The film simply works as a commentary piece on political philosophy, and as an entertaining action film laced with some romantic tension. In my view this film was far, far superior to the very teen oriented and very one dimensional Hunger Games, and it's certainly more unique as well. Woodley is impressive here, clearly showing the ability to play a very layered and complex character.

11 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A Riveting Dystopian Sci-Fi Yarn
DareDevilKid29 July 2014
Reviewed by: Dare Devil Kid (DDK)

Rating: 4/5 stars

This is one of those rare occasions that a movie based on a recent young-adult novel has been done right, so savor it for what it's worth. And, worth it is, quite a lot, going by the terrific 2 hour 10 minutes ride you get through the stark dystopian landscape of "Divergent". What's more, the movie is not just about bleak dystopian locations and the direct bearing they have on the daily lives of their characters, but it also shrewdly manages to raise some highly pertinent questions about our own existence and what sort of world we could be leaving for the coming generations. The most uplifting fact about "Divergent" is that it pulls off this unexpected act through astute direction and some incredibly nuanced performances we usually don't associate with summer blockbusters.

While, Kate Winslet is an old warhorse and has played practically every type of role with grace and confidence, Shailene Woodley is a revelation, and proves yet again why her name is being taken in the same breath these days with Jennifer Lawrence as one of Hollywood's brightest, upcoming female talents. She captures the desperation, confusion, grit, determination, vulnerability, and tenacity of her character with the kind of self-assured conviction and realism you'd associate with seasoned performers. Kate Winslet as usual just shows up and reminds us of her immense abilities in every frame she's in, playing the villain with menace and an uncompromising faith in her misguided beliefs. Ashley Judd lend great support in the few scenes she's in. Sadly, the rest of the cast offers nothing worth penning down.

Now we all are well aware that this film is based on the first of a series of best selling fiction novels by author Veronica Roth, but as alluded to earlier, it's an aberration that the core elements of a good novel are retained while making it viable for a cinematic audience within cinematic time-constraints. For this reason alone, due credit must be bestowed upon screen-writers Evan Daugherty and Vanessa Taylor for brilliantly adapting a recently loved novel, fresh in readers' memory, and transforming into a crisp screenplay that the Director and producers could work with. But, a screenplay - adapted or original - no matter how good, needs proper guidance, and this is provided with assured measure through the watchful eyes of Director, Neil Burger (known for accomplished efforts such as "The Illusionist" (2006), "The Lucky Ones" (2008), and "Limitless" (2011)). Alwin H. Küchler's cinematography could have been engaging and Richard Francis-Bruce and Nancy Richardson's editing could have been crisper, but thankfully they do not steer too far away from the plot.

"Divergent" not only gives us a fantastically entertaining blockbuster to thrill and chill us for w hours plus, it also offers up a thought- provoking sci-fi tale, which begs us to reflect on some startling points it raises even while we're being enthralled by the proceeding on-screen - something of an oddity in modern cinema. Along with being faithful to Roth's book, it also builds a strong cinematic universe apt for the screen and successfully manages to engage both sections of viewers - those who've enjoyed Roth's novel and even those who have no prior knowledge of the happenings of her dystopian fiction series. "Divergent" is basically a must-see for all who enjoy a thoroughly gripping, judicious sci-fi tale.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Falling victim to the same problem of many science-fiction or fantasy epic startups, the story is 90% introduction.
GoneWithTheTwins20 March 2014
Studios are constantly in search of the next "Twilight," "The Hunger Games," or "Harry Potter" franchise, with best-selling books being the primary source of episodic additions. They've found just such a novel (an entire trilogy by Veronica Roth), containing the similarities and elements so highly coveted – but originality definitely isn't one of them. "Divergent" is once again a teen-oriented science-fiction adventure, full of action, romance, and adolescent consternations. Instead of focusing on a love triangle, survivalist thrills, or a great magical evil, this derivation is all about independence, corporatism, and the dramatic coup d'état of a corrupt government. The setting is still a postapocalyptic dystopian remnant, the small gathering of heroes is still vastly outmatched, and unconvincing love banter is carelessly tossed about.

Hundreds of years after a war devastated the planet, Chicago is reduced to a small community walled off from an unknown outside threat and hidden amongst dilapidated buildings. The founder of this surviving civilization has divided all inhabitants into five factions, each with different skills and jobs. At an undisclosed age (sixteen according to the book), each member must choose between the path of an intellect, a farmer, a public servant, a politician, or a soldier. Youths are expected to follow their heritage and are discouraged from selecting a role unaligned with their birthright. Nevertheless, an archaic choosing ceremony (involving the ridiculous ritualistic cutting of the hand and squeezing blood drops into a symbolic bowl) allows everyone to select publicly, after having taken a mental test that informs of personal skills and mindset.

Beatrice Prior (Shailene Woodley) originates from the selfless "Abnegation" faction, but chooses to pursue a career with the brave "Dauntless" clan (a controversial move instigated by her rare multi-faction tendencies, dubbed "divergent"). She's separated from her family, seemingly permanently, for a 10-week training period that isn't as militaristic or educational as it is gladiatorial, anarchical, and naturally nurturing for bullies. Rules of combat and scoring points are made up along the way, with failure rewarded with a casting out to the homeless, filthy, starving "factionless" throng (its existence is obvious evidence that the intended peaceful societal system in place spawns inequality, greed, and dictatorial leaders). Beatrice becomes "Tris" as she sets about learning how to fight and quell her fears. She finds herself drawn toward instructor Four (Theo James) while learning about a plot by conspiring, power hungry politician Jeanine Matthews (Kate Winslet) to violently overthrow a discordant sect.

This strange, totalistic world, full of peculiar traditions, is explained via bland voice-over narration, hindered further by rock beats, spontaneous running, and borderline parkour maneuvers conducted by the Dauntless pack (which serves as showy, daredevil guardians of the city). The premise, which has the unmistakable feel of "The Hunger Games," also borrows considerably from "Equilibrium," "1984," "City of Ember," and even "Bee Movie." The extended sequences of training, camaraderie, and simulated war games hints at "Starship Troopers," while a laughable introduction to coed showering facilities that is, of course, never alluded to or shown again, vaguely reminds of "Robocop" or "Aliens" – a desperation to compare with movies filled with mature characters that could actually cope with such an R-rated concept. There's absolutely nothing unique about "Divergent," though the action-packed finale desperately attempts to fix the staleness of lengthy exposition and unfamiliar environmental establishment.

Falling victim to the same problem of many science-fiction or fantasy epic startups, the story is 90% introduction. The majority of the movie is merely a first act. Resolutions aren't even attempted and many characters are clearly saved for subsequent chapters, which prevent the satisfaction of revenge or clarity for this mystifying society. "Let's just say they built the fence for a reason," insists Four. By the time the themes of free will, chemical brainwashing, and rebellion are put into action, it's too late. The plausibility of confronting an army, sneaking into a heavily defended command center, or conquering mind control drugs are at a low, especially when the lead hero is an unpersuasive, untoughened insurgent incapable of killing the villains that are in desperate need of dispatching.

  • The Massie Twins
57 out of 92 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The truth about movies like this one...
Jac2344329 March 2014
Warning: Spoilers
If this is truly based off a book, then God help those who actually thought this movie was good. Personally I have not read the books, although from what I saw in this movie, I am glad I never have. What kind of movie is this anyway? There was nothing pinnacle about this movie, nothing iconic, nothing that caused me to want to get up out of my seat and scream at the top of my lungs that was incredible because its all been done before. The army being controlled for God's sake was a pathetic attempt at being the slightest bit menacing, if menacing was what they were going for, it was pathetic. Then don't even get me started on the point where Tris gets to Kate Winslet, seriously!! No security to guard the most important person in the whole movie, the person who was behind the taking over of ABNIGATION, seriously?! Okay. There was barely any character development in any of the other characters except for Tris and Four and even that was done poorly (the revelation that the father beat Four when he was younger, if the movie really wanted fear to be felt, my God they failed). This movie SCREAMED young adult book, but then again the Hunger Games was a young adult trilogy, and all I could do was cover my mouth and hope the characters didn't die, and I know there is a part one and two coming out soon. This movie left no cliffhanger, nothing to the imagination, nothing to make a person ponder positively over what they just saw, it just happened to happen. There was nothing that dazzled and that is something I am noticing in most movies coming out these past few years. There isn't an elaborately put together story, its just put together in the way that's most clear to its audience, it is almost as if creators of movies nowadays don't want a thinking audience. AND THAT IS SAD, as sad as this movie was. I wouldn't recommend this to anyone, due to its soggy and cringe-worthy script, poorly placed emotion, and over-told story. Thank God I got Game of Thrones, the Hunger Games, and Marvel movies to save me from movies like this. Seriously folks do not waste your money on this movie! I am giving this movie a five out of ten due to the fact that it tried, but it wasn't anywhere near as great as it could've been.
57 out of 93 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The Dystopian Future Is In Vogue
E. Catalan2 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I'm amazed to read most reviews here. It seems to me that most IMDb readers/users think of themselves as "film noir" critics, or maybe the second coming of Roger Ebert. When I watch a movie, I like being entertained. Sure, the story must be good but not necessarily plausible. If that was the case, movies like STAR WARS or even TITANIC would've been colossal failures.

DIVERGENT was such a movie: entertaining, teen-oriented, post- apocalyptic fun. In the not so distant future we find out that there was a terrible war. Little is said who started it or what provoked such devastating war. What it is clear is that mankind survived and made strict rules for its new society in order to ensure the peace. This new society has been classified into different personality categories, or factions: abnegation, candor, dauntless, Amity and Erudite. Each strata of this new society complements the other factions so to keep a harmonious balance. The members of this society reach a certain age (18, I guess), they go through a series of tests that will define their definite personality, regardless if they come from a different faction. This new society's motto is "faction before blood", so one has to be more loyal to his or her faction than to their families. Those who do not fit in any faction are called (most obviously) faction less, but they do not pose a threat to society, simply an uncomfortable burden (they are the homeless, the tramps, the scum). As the movie moves along we find out that there is another profile of people who also don't fit in, but pose a supposedly "serious threat" to society. These are called "divergent" and are to be terminated as soon as they are spotted. Divergents possess qualities of all factions, they are like a "greatest hits" of factions.

As you might guess, the movie revolves around a girl named Beatrice "Tris" and her finding that she is a "divergent" and how she must survive in a society that has no room for her kind.

Shades of THE HUNGER GAMES are evident all over the place. THE MATRIX too, even FLASH GORDON (1980), but all done in very good taste. I found myself enjoying DIVERGENT significantly more than THE HUNGER GAMES (at least the 1st installment), which I'd like to remind all IMDb critics is a "light version" of BATTLE ROYALE. We get to see Kate Winslet (TITANIC) as the baddie. It was never clear to me if she was the President or what, but she seems to be in charge of this new society. Ashley Judd and Tony Goldwyn are in there too and that's about it as far as "names" in this picture. All other actors are basically teens or twenty somethings, so yes, there's a strong effort from the filmmakers to attract a young audience (like THE HUNGER GAMES).

Anybody who's worked for a big, multi-national corporation will quickly see the similarities between the dystopian society portrayed in this movie and the company they might work for. Companies ALWAYS want to label their employees, as if we could only be ONE type of personality, so I found this intriguing. I supposed most "Roger Eberts" in IMDb barely perceived this. Was it a predictable movie? Most movies are, in a way. All Disney movies have happy endings, don't they? Being predictable is not a sign of being a BAD movie. I found DIVERGENT getting more interesting and interesting as frames passed by. It has good special effects and the acting is quite bearable. Trust me, I've seen far, far worse movies that end up being praised as the ultimate in cinema.

If you didn't like the movie, that's OK, you're entitled to think and say whatever, just as I'm entitled to say that DIVERGENT was a truly entertaining, interesting and fast paced futuristic movie. If you ask me, I enjoyed it far more than the over-blown HUNGER GAME series.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Beyond Horrible. Gave me a headache, literally.
ifeedmedia10 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I went to see this movie and i must say this is a special kind of horrible. Not one of the subplots made any since and most of the characters accept the leads were poorly introduced.

They set up divergence as if it is a special ability but its not. Its just a tittle. The main character Trice never really comes off with anything that looks like a special ability. The fact that there are no contrasting examples of her special ability make her ability hard to see. She just a girl falling in love.

The movie is slow as molasses and until you get to say 45mins into the movie you want to fall asleep. The plots are all incomplete and at the end you have no summary of what just happened.

The society they set up in the movie is not realistic in anyway. The Dauntlets are basically a group of wild side party teens and they act like they are tough when none of then really show a capacity to fight or defend. Though the story sets them up as the defender or police of this world.

There are pointless scenes like a zip-line scene that seems to come out of no where and have no relevance to the plot or the development of their NON-hero Hero.

The movie is like a mesh of other films like, they use the color look of Twilight and try to set the 2 main character up in the same romantic way. The world reminds you much of The Hunger Games but has much much less action and much less relevance. There is even has a touch of Matrix to it accept with all that technology they had no gun that could fire in rapid succession. Everyone in the movie pulled guns and most of the time they did not shoot.

Nothing is cohesive in this movie and I would rather you go see a re-airing of Spanglish, Tremors or Judge Dred if you want to see a much better movie.

I am a guy so maybe this movie was made for ladies more than men but I really did not like this fragmented, inconclusive, cheesy movie. Any 4 year film student could have made it.
23 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
teenage girls movie
kontonachomika30 March 2014
Warning: Spoilers
... and not a very good one too (not to say simply boring).

i even couldn't force myself to watch it all. Maybe im too old for it, bu then last week i watched "the last mimzy" (children movie) and found it pretty good. No, if something is good you'll find it's quality even if you're not a lover of a specific movie type.

Some details: - acting - it's as artificial as the whole script itself so i cannot blame the actors - script- look above - the whole concept of society being divided to factions, im fine with that, but excluding/killing people who e.g. feel compassion and declared themselves to be soldiers, thats just ridiculous. - oo, and that hand combat technique of holding your front-to-oponent elbow high- try that in real life and it wont be a long one.

To summarize, i agree with critics on this one.
45 out of 73 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Stands out against other similar minded movies.
jackmeat21 August 2014
Settling in to this film, I expected to see Hunger Games again. Set in a near-future Chicago, what we see is another take on the dystopian society. The central plot here is that growing up in this walled in world, everyone must fit into one of five classes. But of course, the question here is what if you don't fit into the nicely packaged definition of a single class, then you must be Divergent, or in this movie, a danger to the perfect society. When our main character, Tris (played very well by Shailene Woodley)finds out she is Divergent she must hide this secret and discover the reasons why it is such a secret and why society fears Divergents. I'll leave all of that for you to watch unfold in the various physical and psychological training exercises that are portrayed on screen. In a nutshell, the world painted is similar to that of Equilibrium but with much less action. This is not a bad thing, since this allows the cinematographer to reveal a very wonderfully crafted view of this world. The pacing of this movie moves along nicely as we plod through Tris trying to fit in as a part of the Dauntless clan. Friendships are made, lost, and so on as expected. Even more so is the romantic involvement with the mysterious Four (or 4) played by Theo James (which I believe over acted his part entirely too much). So the mystery of why the government wants to kill all Divergents must be unraveled and this leads to the majority of the story. I was happy with just sitting back and enjoying the view during many of the scenes that were almost breathtaking. Not reading the book, I hope that the movie did well to portray the story but I also know it is a trilogy so they couldn't go from start to finish all at once. Stand alone I believe the movie was quite well made and under-appreciated, swept under the rug by the highly successful Hunger Games series. You will be hard pressed not to see the similarities between them. I am looking forward to seeing what else this world has in store for us and would recommend that moviegoers join me to find out. Will you see silly acted parts, and scenes that are just there to draw you in with nice landscapes and perfectly choreographed music, YES. But why would anyone complain about something like that? I know I wouldn't. Enjoy this film, you won't regret the time you spent on it.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Shailene Woodley and Theo James make a good couple; unfortunately, true to its title, everything else in the movie seems to go off in the wrong direction
moviexclusive19 March 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Every studio hopes for a hit YA franchise, and in particular for Lionsgate-owned Summit Entertainment, the imperative is even stronger seeing as how they had unearthed that lucrative segment with the 'Twilight' series. And so 'Divergent' comes with high hopes that not only will it become hit YA property, it could potentially enjoy the same astronomical success as 'The Hunger Games', especially since both are of the sci-fi genre set in a post-apocalyptic world with fresh young faces.

Adapted from Veronica Roth's book, it imagines a dystopia where society is organised into five distinct factions based on personality types, each understanding and playing its role in order to keep the peace. These are Abnegation, Amity, Candor, Dauntless and Erudite, the names rather self-explanatory in describing what they represent. Youths are tested at the age of 16, given two likeliest factions from the results of a hallucinatory test, and then at a Choosing Day ceremony made to pick one of the two in which they choose to belong.

As narrated by our lead character Beatrice Prior (The Descendants' Shailene Woodley), there are those fit into more than two categories which are labelled 'divergents' and cast out to live as homeless vagabonds on the pretense that they do not belong. Needless to say, Beatrice is a titular 'divergent', and warned by her testor (Maggie Q) that she must keep this information secret lest she be the subject of a witchhunt led by the leader of the snobbish Erudite faction Jeanine Matthews (Kate Winslet). So at her ceremony, unlike all the others, she exercises her free will to join the Dauntless, who train to be soldiers keeping the peace.

Even with the task of laying franchise groundwork, it is both surprising and disappointing how much time the movie spends inside the subterranean Pit where Tris and the rest of her initiates train under the tough yet tender Instructor Four (Theo James) and the harsh and controlling leader Eric (Jai Courtney). From sparring to knife throwing to shooting, screen writers Evan Daugherty and Vanessa Taylor spend about an hour laying out Tris' Dauntless boot-camp training and the dynamics between the trainees, in particular with two Candors - one a snide competitor played by Miles Teller and the other a loyal friend played by Zoe Kravitz.

There is of course the budding romance between Tris and Instructor Four, the latter of which turns out to be a 'divergent' himself and who ends up teaching her how to overcome the final 'fear test' of her training. At no point however does director Neil Burger inject a sense of urgency into the proceedings, which unfold relatively unhurried and without consequence until the final half-hour. It is at best a drag, at worst a bore, and while parallels have been drawn between Tris' training and Katniss Everdeen's in 'The Hunger Games', you'll find the former here oddly devoid of danger or purpose.

Only in the last segment is there some measure of thrill as a power struggle between the Erudites and the Abnegations build up into real conflict unfolding on the streets of an already war-ravaged Chicago. Burger assumes that his audience's patience will eventually pay off in a rushed final act that throws everything it can into the mix - including some heavy urban warfare, exposition, shifts in character - but it is a peculiar case of 'too much too late' that ends up making you frustrated more than anything else. There is little poignancy even with two key supporting characters meeting their demises within the short span of ten minutes, and that is also a result of the film's flawed construct, which diminishes the familial bonds illustrated in the novel between Tris and her parents (Tony Goldwyn and Ashley Judd) and twin brother (Ansel Elgort).

With little chance to flex her acting muscles, Woodley is hardly any match for Jennifer Lawrence, and indeed doesn't quite grasp her character well enough to put forth a consistent and compelling portrait of Beatrice. At least she does share some screen chemistry with Underworld: Awakening's Theo James, the bond that builds slowly between them rather winning to say the least. Other thespians like Winslet and Judd give solid supporting turns, though they are yet again hemmed in by a ham-fisted script that hews too closely to the book's straightforward prose.

On his part, Burger tries his best to build a convincing vision of a futuristic Chicago, but fails to convey the extent of a hyper- militarized and technologically advanced society on the verge of factional conflict. The postwar cityscape hardly leaves much of an impression, though the drug-induced mind trips that Beatrice takes boasts some degree of visual ingenuity that recalls Burger's far superior work in 'The Illusionist' and 'Limitless'. Worthy of special mention though is the score by Junkie XL (with Hans Zimmer listed as executive music producer), which hits the right notes more than you would expect in certain scenes.

Still, it's hard to imagine 'Divergent' being the kickstarter the way the first 'Hunger Games' movie was; though both share similar narrative blueprints, this adaptation feels inert where the latter is lively, failing to engage its audience with its female teenage protagonist's rite of passage. Unless you're a fan of the books, you'll probably be lukewarm about the next instalment 'Insurgent' whose production is already underway; indeed, true to its title, there is something off about 'Divergent' that never quite reconciles even till the end of the movie.
86 out of 150 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An idiotic book...
mauro volvox22 July 2014
...made into a pretty stupid film!

Where authors(sic) get these unbelievably lame ideas? A world divided into 5 factions? This is ridiculous.

This is another politically correct tripe. The plot is based on countless Hollywoodian stereotypes. Actors all look like they came out of catwalk fashion show. They have as much substance and personality as bobble head dolls. The film is tedious, move at a snail's pace and do not even fall into the category "so bad it is good"

It is embarrassing to know that there are those who classify this sophomoric attempt at literature as a dystopian science fiction novel.

Pure waste of time, money.
348 out of 655 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed