Skip to main content

Somebody seriously messed up the world.

The Divergent Series: Allegiant
(2016)

(SPOILERS) If anyone much cared about the Divergent series by this point, its sorry demise might have been a crime tantamount to Ralph Bakshi leaving The Lord of the Rings dangling halfway through, or the BBC only making two thirds of The Tripods. Lionsgate, misplaced greed having got the better of them, split the final Divergent book into two films, hoping for results in the manner of earlier YAs, or at least in a manner comparable with the earlier Divergents. Instead, Allegiant grossed $100m less than Insurgent, which failed to make inroads on the moderate performance of the original (and, unlike some YAs, these didn’t come cheap). The result? The studio has announced they would be making a direct-to-TV final part… And then a TV series?!


Some bean counter somewhere must have decided that the financial sense in being able to package a complete series was insufficient for medium or long term profit prospects (although, one has to wonder). So given that, how do they then have the gall to compound the crime, surely satisfying no one, least of all the faithful, by attempting a tangential bid for further bucks with a TV continuation? It’s a further slap in the face. They probably won’t finish it either (one season, ending on a forever unresolved cliffhanger). Where Ascendant’s fate stands currently is unclear, but Shanene Woodley was last heard confirming she knew nothing about where things were at. And presumably, given the wattage of some of the cast here (Jeff Daniels, Noami Watts, Miles Teller, etc.) serious recasting will be necessary for the switch to TV. We’re talking Home Alone 3 or Addams Family Reunion. It’s all a wretched mess, frankly.


Which is the opinion of many of this series as a whole. I quite liked the first instalment, didn’t care much for the second, which seemed like a glossy retread while failing to capitalise on the better features of the first. And this? Well, it’s better than the second. Less enamoured of tired VR, although the exposition regarding the hows and whys of a Purity War are never especially convincing or motivated; the genetically pure people outside the city have performed an experiment in which the compromised people within will hopefully eventually result in purity, just like those without... In that at least, it continues the series’ core conceptual risibility. That this all comes down to a “accept people for what they are” credo is fine ’n’ all, but not when expressed through such an incompetent premise.


There’s also too little emphasis on the ideas, what there are of them, such that Allegiant ends up looking like a string of sci-fi clichés in search of a point. The citizens of Chicago have been watched for years, such that David (Daniels) makes it sound as if Tris (Woodley) is almost the star of her own The Truman Show. But it’s of very little consequence. Nor is David’s autonomy to do what he likes with the city, as granted by the Council.  There’s a gas attack come the big climax, intended to wipe memories of Evelyn (Watts) and everyone else it seems, but it manifests as a wholly spurious plan. Meanwhile, Teller pops up every five minutes as the hapless lackey of all things rotten, siding himself with wrong ’uns and then wondering why he has such rotten luck when it all goes wrong.


So none of this really hangs together, but the movie has just enough action and variation that I wasn’t quite bored by it, unlike Insurgent, and aside from Theo James, who takes plankishness to new levels, the cast do solid work. Woodley in particular impresses more than her more popular YA contender Jennifer Lawrence, and if Daniels, Watts and Octavia Spencer can do this kind of thing in their sleep, they’re all welcome.


On which level, it’s ahead of The Maze Runner, but it ultimately falls fatally behind that series because there’s no sense that anyone involved cares about telling this story. At least with Runner, a series only marginally less stupid in its premise, director Wes Ball gives it his all, and it shows. Allegiant looks to have belly-flopped the series, but ironically, unlike the penultimate Hunger Games, it isn’t because it doesn’t have enough story juice (I don’t know how Ascendant will fare on that score), it’s because Lionsgate’s avaricious approach is writ large, dwarfing any other factors. The Divergent series was a YA also-ran, and now, for the time being at least, it seems the whole genre’s well may be dried up.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Dude. You’re my hero and shit.

El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie (2019)
(SPOILERS) I was going to say I’d really like to see what Vince Gilligan has up his sleeve besidesBreaking Bad spinoffs. But then I saw that he had a short-lived series on CBS a few years back (Battle Creek). I guess things Breaking Bad-related ensure an easy greenlight, particularly from Netflix, for whom the original show was bread and butter in its take up as a streaming platform. There’s something slightly dispiriting about El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie, though. Not that Gilligan felt the need to return to Jesse Pinkman – although the legitimacy of that motive is debatable – but the desire to re-enter and re-inhabit the period of the show itself, as if he’s unable to move on from a near-universally feted achievement and has to continually exhume it and pick it apart.

Two hundred thousand pounds, for this outstanding example of British pulchritude and learning.

The Avengers 4.18: The Girl From Auntie
I’ve mentioned that a few of these episodes have changed in my appreciation since I last watched the series, and The Girl from Auntie constitutes a very pronounced uptick. Indeed, I don’t know how I failed to rate highly the estimable Liz Fraser filling in for Diana Rigg – mostly absent, on holiday –for the proceedings (taking a not dissimilar amateur impostor-cum-sidekick role to Fenella Fielding in the earlier The Charmers). I could watch Fraser all day, and it’s only a shame this was her single appearance in the show.

The past is a statement. The future is a question.

Justified Season Six
(SPOILERS) There have been more than enough damp squib or so-so show finales of late to have greeted the demise of Justified with some trepidation. Thankfully it avoids almost every pitfall it might have succumbed to and gives us a satisfying send-off that feels fitting for its characters. This is a series that, even at its weakest (the previous season) is leagues ahead of most fare in an increasingly saturated sphere, so it’s a relief – even if there was never much doubt on past form – that it doesn’t drop the ball.

And of those character fates? In a show that often pulls back from giving Raylan Givens the great hero moments (despite his maintaining a veneer of ultra-cool, and getting “supporting hero” moments as he does in the finale, 6.13 The Promise), it feels appropriate that his entire (stated) motivation for the season should be undermined. He doesn’t get to take down Boyd Crowder, except in an incarcerating sense, but as always he is sanguine about it. After…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

You’re only seeing what’s in front of you. You’re not seeing what’s above you.

Mr. Robot Season 2
(SPOILERS) I suspect my problem with Mr. Robot may be that I want it to be something it isn’t, which would entail it being a much better show than it is. And that’s its own fault, really, or rather creator and writer-director of umpteen episodes Sam Esmail’s, who has intentionally and provocatively lured his audience into thinking this really is an up-to-the-minute, pertinent, relevant, zeitgeisty show, one that not only has a huge amount to say about the illusory nature of our socio-economic system, and consequently the bedrock of our collective paradigm, but also the thorny subject of reality itself, both of which have been variably enticing dramatic fodder since the Wachowski siblings and David Fincher released a one-two punch at the end of the previous millennium.

In that sense, Mr. Robot’s thematic conceit is very much of a piece with its narrative form; it’s a conjuring act, a series of sleights of hand designed to dazzle the viewer into going with the flow, rath…

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

It’s the Mount Everest of haunted houses.

The Legend of Hell House (1973)
(SPOILERS) In retrospect, 1973 looks like a banner year for the changing face of the horror movie. The writing was on the wall for Hammer, which had ruled the roost in Britain for so long, and in the US the release of The Exorcist completed a transformation of the genre that had begun with Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby; the realistic horror film, where the terror was to be found in the everyday (the home, the family). Then there was Don’t Look Now, which refracted horror tropes through a typically Nic Roeg eye, fracturing time and vision in a meditative exploration of death and grief. The Wicker Man, meanwhile, would gather its reputation over the passing years. It stands as a kind of anti-horror movie, eschewing standard scares and shock tactics for a dawning realisation of the starkness of opposing belief systems and the fragility of faith.

In comparison to this trio, The Legend of Hell House is something of a throwback; its slightly stagey tone, and cobweb…