User Reviews (893)

Add a Review

  • Just finished reading the book "Divergent" before the movie opened today. It was a quick easy read. There was obvious inspiration from various other futuristic young adult books I have read, like "The Giver", "Ender's Game" and the "Hunger Games" books. Like the others, the treatment of the story was cold, But its descriptions of the initiation rites were very much more violent.

    The setting is the walled city of Chicago after a great war. Their society is divided into five distinct Factions based on personality traits: Dauntless (brave), Amity (friendly), Candor (honest), Erudite (intelligent) and Abnegation (selfless).

    At the age of 16, a child takes an examination to help him choose which one will be his faction for the rest of his life. He may follow the suggestion of the exam results, or he may decide on his own. Those who fail to be accepted into a faction becomes factionless, as they become hopelessly poor and destitute for life.

    Our heroine Beatrice Prior has been born to the Abnegation faction with their grey clothes and disdain for any form of vanity. However, her examination results are revealed to be inconclusive, so she has to make her own decision. Meanwhile, an uprising is brewing in Erudite against the government run by Abnegation.

    I had some problem with the book and the way they try to make the Factions distinct from each other, when it is easy to see that overlapping does happen. These traits simply cannot be mutually exclusive from each other. It is also disturbing the way the author describes the Dauntless. Does being brave mean jumping off running trains, having piercings and tattoos, beating each other up mercilessly, or even killing yourself? This may give immature readers the wrong ideas about courage.

    • o - o - o -


    The film was a perfectly conceived interpretation of the book. In the first few scenes where they show the color-coded clothes distinguishing each faction was quite clear. How director Neil Burger showed us most of the memorable scenes in the book, like the choosing ceremony, the jumping on and off the trains, the fear landscapes of Tris and Four, and the invasion of Abnegation were all very well done.

    There were some parts which were reinterpreted in the film. Most did not really affect the story-telling, like changing how Tris meets her Mom during Visiting Day, or glossing over a particularly violent episode where Peter stabs a fellow initiate in the eye. There was one big change towards the end about how a climactic surprise rescue transpired. I thought the version in the book was so much more better set-up and executed than the less-dramatic altered version we saw on screen.

    As I suspected, the tall and beautiful Shailene Woodley is definitely not the small and mousy Tris we imagine while reading the book. However, I thought Shailene gave an excellent portrayal of Tris' character, how she developed from a shy dependent girl to a confident fearless warrior. For people who have not read the books, they will not be aware of any discrepancy at all.

    Theo James had very good romantic chemistry with Shailene, so his Four never really felt like a threat to Tris, unlike the initial parts in the book. The director gave James a lot of lingering close-ups for the benefit of the teenage fan girls.

    Ansel Elgort, who played Tommy Ross in "Carrie" recently, now plays Tris' brother Caleb. His Caleb is less dynamic than I imagined him in the book. Coincidentally, Elgort has an upcoming movie with Shailene Woodley later this year called "The Fault in Our Stars" where they play boyfriend-girlfriend.

    More up and coming actors play other more minor characters. Zoe Kravitz, who was in "After Earth" last year, is not exactly how I envisioned Tris' best friend, but she won me over as the film went along. Miles Teller, who was recently in "That Awkward Moment", plays bad boy Peter, whose role in the film is much diminished compared to the book. Jai Courtney, who played Bruce Willis' son in "A Good Day to Die Hard" last year, brutally plays Tris' tormentor in the training camp.

    Among the senior stars, Ashley Judd makes a nice comeback of sorts playing Tris' mother, who had major secrets of her own. Maggie Q played Tris' examiner and tattoo artist Tori with the requisite compassion. Kate Winslet plays the cool and calculating Erudite uprising leader Jeanine with icy perfection.

    Overall, I thought this film was a practically perfect interpretation of a book that was less than perfect in itself. So, whatever things the film might show us which we might not like, like the slow pace of action progression, and the questionable motives of the characters, are actually because the book told it that way. Fans of the "Divergent" books will find this film version faithful. While it cannot compare to the high standard set by the Hunger Games film series in terms of cinematic quality and character casting, "Divergent" definitely has its own entertaining appeal going for it. 7/10.
  • 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.

    8/10
  • 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.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Divergent was indeed made to capitalize on the popularity of the Hunger Games book & film series by author Suzanne Collin. Some people might say, it's a total rip-off, but in my opinion, author Veronica Roth was influence by the books and inspiration to make her own. It's no differ, than Suzanne Collins taking elements from previous novels like George Orwell's 1984 and Koushun Takami's Battle Royale. For people to say, Divergent is a total rip-off of Hunger Games is an understatement. If anything, the movie is more influence by novel works like Jacqueline Carey's Kushiel's Dart, Orson Scott Card's Ender Games, and J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter. Even the movie takes bit of its story from films like 2010's Inception by Christopher Nolan & Mark Water's 2004's Mean Girls. Other influences come from the Meyers-Briggs personality tests, Milgram experiment, and attitude toward divergent thinking (ATDT). This is a Psychology major fan film. With all this influences, Divergent create its own identify. The movie starts out in a futuristic dystopian Chicago, society is divided into five factions: Abnegation (the selfless), Amity (the peaceful), Candor (the honest), Dauntless (the brave), and Erudite (the intelligent). Members join a faction based on their preference but are initially given a suggestion by an aptitude test. Beatrice Prior (Shailene Woodley) has grown up in Abnegation, the faction that runs the government, yet has always been fascinated by Dauntless. Every year, 16-year-olds undergo a serum-based aptitude test that indicates the faction into which they would best fit, but something went wrong, with Beatrice's test; as she shows that she has more than one personality trait, meaning that she's a Divergent. Since Divergents can think independently and the government therefore cannot control them, they're considered threats to the existing social order. The premise can be too far-fetched, improbable and illogical. You have to suspense your disbelief on this premise, as it's hard to believe that people can only have one personality trait. Since, it's a Sci-fiction film, anything is really possible. Personally, for a movie that supposedly has a lot of one-dimensional personality characters, these characters really do have a lot of divergent type traits. The pacing is a bit slow, as most of the time, the film focus on her time with the Dauntless. The training kinda did go a little too long. The plot could be a bit confusing, with all the tests, they go through and seeing how some test matter and some don't. The whole exposition somewhat got lost between the transfer from book to screen, as it wasn't that clear to the audience. Seeing how this film is the first one of the 3 books with the sequels Insurgent and Allegiant on their way. This movie will leave you with more questions, than answers, if you haven't read the books. Even if you readt the books, there are some minor different from the book to the film. The dream scenes were a bit longer in the book. Some characters such as Peter (Miles Teller)'s level of bullying is reduced to verbal comments as in the book, he's more engage in sexual abusing, and physical provoke her. Another big missing piece from the book is one of the character getting stabbed in the eye. Hopefully, they can fit that in, the next movies. Nothing too big was change in this film, so it's a fairly well adapted movie. The acting is pretty good for the most part. Shailene Woodley nearly quit acting in 2011, so it's good that she didn't, as she was great as the main lead. Theo James as her love-interest was pretty cool to have. The only problem is that Theo James acting really doesn't stand out. If anything, he kinda could be mistaken for James Franco. The supporting cast made out of Ashley Judd, Jai Courtney, Ray Stevenson, Zoë Kravitz, Miles Teller, Tony Goldwyn, Maggie Q and Kate Winslet were all great in their own roles. The movie could need some more minority characters. I don't know if it's part of the story, with the white washing due to its being a post-apocalypse or Hollywood just being ethnic bias. After all, the United States seems to be home to large groups of immigrants of many races and ethnicities and they rarely depicted in films like this. Even Hunger Games had more ethnic characters than this. It really doesn't look like people from Chicago. I also would like not everybody looking like a model. It kinda hurts the realistic tone that the film is possible to represent. The movie was shot beautifully by director Nick Berger. The mirror scene alone had some really good symbolism. The music choice was pretty good. My favorite had to be Run Boy Run – Woodkid. I wouldn't say this movie is a chick flick or only for young adults as there is enough material for everybody to relate to. Overall: It's a surprisingly good YA sci-fi action drama thriller adaptation. I'll be looking forward to the sequels.
  • "Divergent" is the first Sci-Fi movie of this trilogy and in this movie we watch a world that is divided into factions and each person has to be a part of one. Unfortunately Tris cannot be a part to any of these factions because she is a divergent. Divergents are considered as the most important and dangerous people and have to be eliminated but why?

    I liked this movie because it has a different kind of plot from other Sci-Fi movies and that's something that made this movie interesting at first. The direction which made by Neil Burger was very good with many good action scenes. Also the interpretation of Shailene Woodley who played as Tris was very good. An equally good interpretation made by Theo James who played as Four.

    Finally I have to admit that I did not expect much from "Divergent" but it was a very nice surprise. This movie made a very good start for this trilogy and I hope to continue like this and even better.
  • Divergent is a science fiction film in action, fantasy and adventure. The divergent was officially released on March 18, 2014 in Los Angeles. The film was directed by Neli Burger, Evan Daughterty, and Vanessa Taylor. The divergent tells of the city of Chicago which was destroyed by war. To create peace, 5 factions formed according to personality. Abnegation that is unselfish and simple. Erudite is smart and prioritizes science. Good and peaceful Amity, Candor who prioritizes honesty, and Dauntless who is brave and free. Whereas Divergents are people who have more than one faction in their personality. Children who are 16 years old must take a test to choose a faction. After the test, Tris has 3 results there are Abnegation, Dauntless, and Erudite. Tris must keep his identity as a Divergent. During the selection ceremony, Tris finally chose Dauntless. It turns out that only 10 people will be elected as official Dauntless members. Because of abstinence and intelligence, Tris managed to become a member of Dauntless. But chaos occurs when Erudite controls Dauntless's brain to attack Abnegation. Tris who is not affected by serum pretends like the others. At that time, Tris knew that For was also a Divergent. Eventually an attack was carried out by Erudite against Abnegation. In addition, Divergent hunting is also underway. However, all can be thwarted by Tris, Four, Marcus, Caleb, and Peter. The five of them fled with the train go to beyond the wall. This movie have an easy to understand path. In addition, the acting of the players successfully supports the story. Divergent films are in accordance with the character of teenagers who want to find their identity
  • When beloved books make their way to the silver screen, the resulting movies are usually met with much frustration and rending of clothes from amongst the literary faithful. A character is changed beyond recognition; a crucial plot-point excised; an important theme lost in the murk and swell of a film. Oddly, Divergent isn't actually a bad adaptation. In fact, Neil Burger's film is as good a version of Veronica Roth's wildly patchy source novel as you're likely to get. Whether that makes for a good movie - especially for people who've never read the book - is another matter entirely.

    Divergent begins in a post-apocalyptic Chicago divided into five factions, each valuing one virtue - Dauntless (courage), Erudite (wisdom), Candour (honesty), Amity (kindness), and Abnegation (self-sacrifice) - above all others. It's an odd system, perhaps, but one that is apparently necessary to keep chaos at bay. Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley) has been raised in Abnegation but, try as she might, she cannot completely subsume her self or her desires. Indeed, the aptitude test that everyone must take at the age of sixteen suggests that Tris doesn't belong in just one category: she is Divergent, equally at home in three factions.

    Come the day of the Choosing Ceremony, she decides to forsake her family to become Dauntless: a decision that plunges her into a nightmare initiation process in which the weakest are summarily kicked out of the faction. As Tris navigates the politics and perils of her chosen world, trying all the while to hide the fact that she's Divergent, she encounters her fair share of allies - Christina (Zoe Kravitz), Will (Ben Lloyd-Hughes) and possibly her charmingly broody instructor Four (Theo James) - and enemies, including the brutal Eric (Jai Courtney) and vicious Peter (Miles Teller).

    Anyone unfamiliar with Roth's book might find themselves trying to puzzle through this seemingly shapeless mess of a plot. It ebbs and flows in odd directions, dancing around Tris' desire to be true to herself, before it gets a little lost in the dystopian clutches of Jeanine Matthews (a gleefully icy, evil Kate Winslet), an Erudite leader hellbent on bringing down the entire Abnegation faction. Along the way, Tris literally battles her fears under the influence of a simulation serum, toughens up physically, strikes up a sexy chemistry with Four and frets over her brother Caleb (Ansel Elgort). Within the confines of this universe, it makes an odd kind of narrative sense, but the logic of it all never really bleeds through.

    Here's the thing, though: this strange, frequently illogical plotting is very much a defining characteristic of Roth's novel - and, in fact, becomes more of a problem as the trilogy progresses. (Anyone who's read Allegiant, the controversial final novel in the series, will know just how difficult it will be to adapt.) The emotional and logical flaws present in Divergent the film, then, are - for the most part - already inherent in the book. Why does Jeanine, supposedly one of the smartest people in the community, plot and plan the way she does? How does the entire society function in this utterly dysfunctional way? Technically, Burger can't really be faulted for failing to develop a coherence and logic that was never there in the first place.

    In fact, Burger actually substantially improves upon the novel in several ways - he keeps the film mostly free of Tris' inner voice, which becomes increasingly moony and silly as her crush on Four grows by the day. Burger plays up a zip-line sequence that highlights the joyful recklessness of the Dauntless, as Tris soars freely through the midnight air. He also handles the problem of Tris' fear landscape very well: instead of simply willing herself out of the influence of the serum (as the Divergent can do), she must figure out how to face each of her fears in a non-Divergent way. These scenes are shot with quick, simple visual flair, dispensing with some of the novel's trickier convolutions.

    Of course, Divergent isn't a perfect adaptation either. To Roth's credit, there are some truly dark, painful moments in the novel which transcend its loopy narrative. It's no surprise, and yet it's a little disappointing, that these bits simply vanish from the film, no doubt in the interests of securing a PG-13 rating. As a result, Peter is a far less repulsive antagonist than he is on paper. For instance, he doesn't brutally (and casually) maul a fellow initiate who's doing better than him in the rankings - an incident that's crucial in the development of his character in the subsequent novels.

    The young cast works hard and quite well together. Woodley makes for an intriguing screen presence, effectively playing both the steel and softness of Tris' choices. James, heretofore best known for dying in Lady Mary's bed in Downton Abbey, acquits himself reasonably well - he's not as leaden as some of the trailers have suggested, and he forges a believable chemistry with Woodley. Of the supporting players, Teller is the standout, so good in his easy malevolence that he actually makes the thought of Allegiant as a movie quite appealing.

    In the final analysis, Divergent is likely to divide audiences. Fans of Roth's books should be, on the whole, pleased. This is a frequently very good, intelligent adaptation of a rather problematic novel. Everyone else, however, might be less enamoured of the final product: a film that, just like the book on which it is based, boasts a compelling story and some great ideas, but is also messily executed, overly complicated and a tad nonsensical.
  • Divergent is gripping and intelligently brought to life on the big screen from the director who brought us "Limitless" and "The Illusionist." Are we seeing something of similar essence with the "Hunger Games" series? Yes. However, my personal take was that the characters were more engaging and the plot was as well in this film. Shailene is excellent at the helm, and really brings forth a convincing portrayal of a heroine battling in a world where chaos and tragedy envelope the characters. Her graceful emergence from shy personality to dominance is done artfully and really speaks to her ability as an actress. Theo James is also exceptional in the co-pilot role and almost effortlessly seems to pull off the bad boy with standards persona in a manner I haven't seen since Will Smith in his prime. The plot is high octane and especially more gritty than I first imagined. The emotion raw in intensity and empathic build. As a guy who was just going to this film to act as arm candy and a shoulder to lean on for my highly enthused girlfriend, I can write this piece while honestly saying that my eyes were glued to the screen the entirety of the film and was pleased to see this film do such an excellent job at developing both the plot and characters involved in it. Highly Recommend.
  • DIVERGENT delivers where so many of the recent young adult novel film adaptations have failed. I saw this film not having read the book and on its own it stands very well.

    First off the bad:

    1) action sequences feel slow and not natural. You can tell that the actors were not particularly familiar with hand to hand combat, not to say their characters weren't supposed to be but even when they're supposed to know how to fight it feels lackluster. 2) obvious age difference between the two main characters. 3) high school Clich feel for the first half of the film.

    Now with that said ^ here is what Worked:

    1) length. Often we see film adaptations of novels try and cram everything into 90 or 100 mins but Divergent takes its time. Normally this would be a drawback but the film makes good use of the extra time (the film is 145 mins) to really progress. 2) the performances of the main characters are solid. Nothing amazing but the dynamic between the two main characters works well. - the visual style of the film is very good. The dystopian city of Chicago is very well realized. 3) brings to light moral and societal problems. Suprizingly deep for a young adult film.

    OVERALL divergent is a good film. It fails in few places but succeeds in most that count. With the failure of young adult movies such as Percy Jackson, Divergent healthily separates itself from them. I would recommend seeing it. There WILL be a sequel.
  • 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.
  • september_9029 October 2014
    My review is not based on reading the book but solely on the movie alone. I found the movie very similar to The Hunger Games in the sense that it divides people into groups and focuses on the teenagers. But this movie was 100x better! It had me on the edge of my seat for most of the movie. This movie is inspiring and motivational. It is the type of movie that shows that accepting people for the flaws and their strengths is important and that everyone is different in their own way and that it's okay to be who you are. I think more kids need to see these types of movies and I would recommend it to anyone. P.S. Do not watch this movie before or after The Fault In Our Stars cause it may make things a bit weird haha.
  • iconic-sr20 September 2014
    Warning: Spoilers
    Brief Overview: Divergent is a movie based off the book by Veronica Roth also titled, "Divergent." I am going to start off by saying that I did enjoy this film, but there were a lot of bland moments and plot points that were covered in similar movies.

    The Positives: One thing that I really enjoyed was how well the movie stayed true to the book, starting with the cast. Shailene Woodley plays the leading role Tris, who is an awkward and remote teenage girl living in a futuristic society divided into factions. Woodley has also in the 2014 release, "A Fault in Our Stars" which has been met with positive reviews. She was also scheduled to play Mary Jane in the 2014, "The Amazing Spider Man 2," but her scenes were removed from the final cut (and for Spider Man fans, she may return for the third installment, maybe). What I liked about Shailene's portrayal is that she does do a good job playing a plain personality, and just being plain in general. She was definitely not going to win a beauty contest when this movie was shot (which may be a problem for some), but that is the way she is supposed to be. The book makes important notes that her appearance does not stand out and she is somewhat of an outcast. Moving on to other performances, Theo James plays the role of one of her faction leaders, also known as "Four." He also lives up to his novel counterpart by giving the vibe that he lives on a completely different planet with virtually no tolerance. Another positive aspect is the chemistry between Tris and Four which really makes the movie stand out.

    The Negatives: In many ways, this film feels like a branch off of "The Hunger Games." Just watching the scenery, action, and the way the camera is handled gives me some Deja Vu. Also a lot of the character traits for the protagonist are strikingly similar. On a different note, "Divergent" lacks the "explosiveness" required to keep full attention of the general audience. I just feel that the script was slightly under par and maybe even disappointing for all the potential this franchise has.

    The Conclusion: I gave this film an overall rating of 7/10. I think this film would be more satisfying if you have previously read the book, but it is by no means a bad movie if you haven't. I recommend this film for most viewers.
  • 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.
  • As a stand alone movie, Divergent was great. The cinematography was decent, but the storyline alone was marvelous. The action keeps you on the edge of your seat. The romance was well... romantic. It may have been a little too sappy and forced to me, but still cute. All in all, the movie was a perfect blend of comedy, mystery, action, drama, and romance. Thus, a new fan base was created.The only problems with this movie were the acting was a bit shaky at some points and it diverged from the books a lot too (see what I did there). The characters were well developed in the movie as well as the book, but some details about the characters were left out from the movie that were in the book. The settings and storyline did the same thing as well.
  • When first hearing of this film and seeing the first trailer, I didn't know what to think about it. It didn't excitement me much and all the way up to it's release, I didn't feel it had that same kind of vibe that 'The Hunger Games' had. A vibe that it was a must see film. Then I heard a sample track from the score, composed by Junkie XL. It was great, and it made me want to see the movie a little bit. Well that and I wanted to see if it was actually a great film, like The Hunger Games was. Plus I do like the main star, Shailene Woodley. Well, I just saw it today and here is what I think. The music is great, it has one of those themes that I can't get out of my head and a score I've been listening to since I left the theater. The film itself was a very interesting film, very different from what I understood from the trailer, but I'm not familiar with the story so that is probably the main reason. I really liked the futuristic, post-apocalyptic, dystopian feel that it had going on through it, but it also was kind of scary to think that human life could become that one day. The plot was easy enough to follow, but sometimes confusing. Though, if I had read the book, I'm sure I would understand it 100%. The elements I had trouble remembering were the names of all the factions that people were divided in, or chose to be in, and what those factions' meanings were. When they would show the symbols for each faction, it made sense to me, but the names itself I couldn't quite grasp. I'm sure a second viewing will clear that up, defiantly if that second viewing is on blu-ray and with the captions on. Anyway, other than that, It kept me quite intrigued in a pleasantly unexpected way and I really look forward to next year for the sequel, Insurgent, and the year after that for the concluding film, Allegiant.
  • 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.

    9/10
  • Warning: Spoilers
    If you have read the series, you might understand the stories underlying this community mess, dividing it into five factions based on one different virtue. Of course a group of people living with only one virtue would cause chaos inside the one faction itself and affecting the society. But here, the other problem is, when your mind can't be fitted into any group, you'll be called divergent, and they'll hunt you down. That was what happened on Tris (Woodley).

    About the plot itself was lack of surprise for me. All the flaws of the plot originally came from the book. All about this messy complicated world, was introduced at the first part of the movie. I think it was the hardest part for Burger to explain the audience about the world of Divergent. You'll find it confusing and somehow boring. I love how Burger dealt with this. The way he built up the character of Tris turned this movie into a beautiful journey if a young woman leaving her family and society. She must learn new way of life that opposite with her old ones. Abnegation was stiff and odd. And she had to choose which one of factions she wanna live in and how she managed herself to fit into the new one, how she managed herself to face the family she left. I think it's the beautiful from Divergent for me, Woodley could deliver the emotion. The flaws of the setting and plot can be covered by the way they building the character.

    I think it's a good book adaptation movies. Some of adaptations ruined the original book. But Burger picked a good point of the book to develop it into a movie. Which he chose to build the journey of Tris.

    Fans are worried about the age of Theo James, they are expecting 18 years old actor to get the role of Four. But i think James's maturity here helped much in developing the characteristic of Four. He could bring Four's trait exactly fit. Four looks mature and capable of handling things.

    The romance wasn't too cheesy, not like the other teenage romance.

    What Burger did, make this teen stories acceptable for adult audience. Even though, the plot and setting is kind of mess. But Burger and the team, so the actors, did, yeah, okay, in developing Divergent movie. For me it is a good book adaptation movie. I was surprise by the lead actress performance.

    I recommend you to watch, until the studio gets enough profit and pick the sequels. Because this one isn't kind of standalone movie. The mystery of the factions hasn't solved in the end of the movie, and i love to watch the other journey of Tris and Four, and how that world recover.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I took my 12 year old son to the movies on a "guys day out" last weekend. We left Mom and sister/daughter at home. Anyway, we had a great time and it was a good movie to take my kid to see. I must say this isn't a hugely serious review, but a review nonetheless. When a movie leaves me thinking about it for days or weeks after I watch it, there is something to that. There is also something to be said about how this story relates to modern present society. Square pegs go into square holes, and when someone is too divergent, they seem to suffer in our shallow, worker bee society. The movie was entertaining from the beginning to the end, however I felt like there was no closure in the final scene. This is probably because the story is a series, as it should be, if it's based on the books. I loved the way the movie made me think about myself. This is where the genius of this film blossoms. Everyone I've talked to about the film, and everything I've read on the Divergent fan site is rooted in how people feel about themselves and how they fit into our current society and culture. Because all the excitement, plot, and direction of the film is borne out of the Dauntless faction, I've noticed that everyone who's watched the movie now wants to be Dauntless. Why not? It's exciting and they are pretty bad-ass with the black clothing and tattoos. For me personally, I was Dauntless as a former cop who sports his share of ink, but now a full fledged Candor or maybe even an Abnegation since I'm one of five running our local government. Really, I'm Divergent like most people. We generally don't fit into one category as human beings and that's the moral of the story here. Human nature is eternal and cannot be curbed no matter how you structure your society. The film as a whole was really well done. The plot flows, the tension is always there, the mystery seeps in now and then, and the action is outstanding. The lead actress is pretty, yet tough and smart, but young and has a lot to learn. That is the point though. Bottom line is that I loved the movie and I'm still thinking about it a week later. I will definitely own the movie when it comes out on disc. I can't wait to play it for my wife and daughter.

    I also found out that the lead actress is from my home town and went to my high school. I'm more than double her age, but it is very cool that she is from my neighborhood and went to my school. Because of this, the movie has even more meaning to it because, again, the story made me think about how I relate to this world and where I fit in.

    You can also take the faction quiz on the fan site. Everyone in my family took the test. My son and I came out as Candor the honest. My wife Dauntless the brave, and my daughter Erudite the intelligent. Of course this was just for fun, but interesting because there is truth in those results. (my candor is coming out again). This movie will be very successful because it's a lot of fun and a great story.

    Update (Spoilers!): I read the book and really enjoyed it. There are some differences from book to movie, but I have to say the movie (all things considering) did a great job with keeping the story in line with the book. Tris was never last on the points board. She was first initiate by the end. The stun darts were paintballs in the book. The movie skipped the very important scene with the factionless man on the street. Mom didn't sneak into the warehouse. She came to the pit on visiting day. Tris never visited her brother, didn't fight the first day, mastered the gun the first day, wasn't going to be executed by three with guns, but by drowning in a tank, etc. Lots of details left out or changed in the movie, but it was still done very well and reading the book AFTER watching the movie didn't ruin it.
  • Englizi27 April 2014
    I went to the movie without watching a trailer or reading about it so i had no expectations . from the begging the story was kind of so predictable. you could see where is it going. even though the movie had plenty of action, romance and drama. there were missing parts like they didn't tell us what happened to the rest of the world after the war that we don't know any details about. the society was so dystopian. he idea of dividing people into 5 frictions, at a certain age they test them to find where they belong even though they could choose something different. and friction before blood ! and those who didn't fit anywhere have to live their rest of their lives homeless useless. The writing was poor, inconsistent and very basic it could not compete with other action superhero's movies released in the last couple of years.

    I gave a 6 because i find the directing and the cast were good, they made the movie stand out. I found Theo one of the best parts in the movie.. I mean lets be honest, they had to choose a good looking actor and make his this perfect to attract audience.
  • 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.

    *END OF SPOILER*

    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.
  • HaiisamAshraf27 January 2015
    Warning: Spoilers
    Divergent" is all about identity—about searching your soul and determining who you are and how you fit in as you emerge from adolescence to adulthood. So it's all too appropriate that the film version of the wildly popular young adult novel struggles a bit to assert itself as it seeks to appeal to the widest possible audience.

    It's the conundrum so many of these types of books face as they become pop-culture juggernauts and film franchises: which elements to keep to please the fervent fans and which to toss in the name of maintaining a lean, speedy narrative? The "Harry Potter" and "Hunger Games" movies—which "Divergent" resembles in myriad ways—were mostly successful in finding that balance.

    In bringing the first novel of Veronica Roth's best-selling trilogy to the screen, director Neil Burger ("Limitless") and screenwriters Evan Daugherty and Vanessa Taylor have included key moments and images but tweaked others to streamline the mythology and move the story along. The results can be thrilling but the film as a whole feels simultaneously overlong and emotionally truncated.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    As based on a novel this could been better.story feels a little predictable but it's amazing.a slow paced and apart form book fan I prefer the movie but the disappointment that are the sequel does hurt and no conclusion because of cancellation of the final movie of the series.this is my favourite dystopian film.the acting is great but not extraordinary.ost is great too.Directions is ok but bad in sequels. Overall divergent series is a reck but the movie divergent is great if you're a dystopian fan this and hunger games is the the kind of movies you should try
  • 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.
  • Now here's the thing: I've read the book, which means I started the movie knowing what to expect. So the cheesy plot, the seemingly nonexistent background, everything was already inherent to Divergent in my mind. To me, it was simply part of the concept that the movie would develop, so I didn't find it so horrible. In fact, I even thought it was a good adaptation of the book, but then that could have been because I read it over a year (or maybe even a couple of years) ago. I can't say it was objectively good, though.

    The romance was awful, there seemed to be no chemistry between the characters in question, they definitely would have been better off as friends. Time seemed to be off too. I mean, I knew quite some time was supposed to have passed between (SPOILER)the choosing ceremony and the final confrontation(/SPOILER), but the director didn't seem to be able to convey the passage of time properly, so hadn't I read the book, I think I'd probably have a sense of timelessness and would see it all as a bunch of things that happened somewhere at some point with some unknown amount of time separating them.

    Not only weren't characters really unique or remarkable, but also the film lacked emotion and thrill. Most scenes that could have been intense seemed to be left unexplored in detriment of more fight scenes and, seeing as I'm not really a fan of action (or romance, for that matter), I didn't care much about all that violence.

    Despite all that, I did enjoy myself while watching it. I don't know why. Maybe seeing images I'd only had in my mind be put into something real and concrete made it special to me, maybe I already knew how bad it could be, so whatever good thing came of it was surprising enough... In the end, I'd say this is a movie for you to watch when you don't have much to do and you just want to relax.
  • raluotesanu2 April 2014
    Warning: Spoilers
    It seems that all these new movies are about SF scenarios, the end of the world, mass destruction and so on. Divergent is a combination of The Hungers and Harry Potter with all the pickings for the right house or faction, whatever. The most idiotic part was the parents' death scene: cry like hell for the mother, don't even bother for the father. Overall, totally not impressed: uninteresting, not original, and extremely long . But I don't know what I expected actually. Maybe the books are interesting, who knows. After seeing the movie I won't read them. I'm sure that they'll make a part 2 that I'm going to see only because I don't like to leave things unfinished. Other than that, it's just a snore...
An error has occured. Please try again.