Insurgent by Veronia Roth

By the looks of my previous review for Divergent by Veronica Roth (the predecessor to this book), it would seem that I would not touch the rest of the series with a ten foot pole. Fortunately, or perhaps unfortunately, because a girl crush for Shailene Woodley commenced followed by a decent adaptation, I somehow felt compelled to put myself through continuous torture. So, here is my review of Insurgent.

Picking up where the last book finished, our heroine Tris and her beau Four have ended the first round of drug-induced simulations where Dauntless (brave faction) were brainwashed to commit mass genocide against Abnegation (selfless faction). On the run from Jeanine Matthews, head of the Erudite faction (intelligence), the lovebirds and company escape to Amity (peace faction). Their next move is to discover why Matthews is hellbent on capturing the Divergent - society members like Tris and Four with special traits that make them immune to her mind-controlling substances. (Go with me on this!)

In a future dystopian world, Chicago is the main setting for Roth's story. Fenced in to incorporate five dramatically-different factions, the personality traits seem straight out of Harry Potter Sorting Hat with the characters' adventure taking notes from The Hunger Games. Part of me was grateful that my wish was fulfilled for the sequel to develop it's worldbuilding. Understanding how the science of the technological advancements, and a few of the actually unexpected plot twists, was by far the most improved aspects of the book. By far this was the best improvement to the story (as well as the necessary character development included below).

However, the other part of me wished the writing technicalities lived up to the worldbuilding.  Most of all the prose seemed to repeat itself. I can't count how many times Tris was at "the edge" of crumbling to pieces to symbolize an emotional breakdown or a stone sat in her stomach to emotionalize guilt. Dangerous situations in which the characters found themselves on the "brink of new information that could solve everything" usually lapsed into a catch-up meet and greet in every faction. New characters were often introduced within a few pages that would go on to reappear later to help out Tris in some way. The story would pause, let Tris break down, reignite her fears and determination - then presto, the goal of discovering why Matthews was trying to implement the serums would be back on track.

A major issue I had with Divergent was the dialogue which was cringe-worthy and the inability to tell characters apart - because of the lack of diverse communication. All of the characters' personalities ranging from younger teenagers to adults continued to collide into snarky sarcastic behavior. For a series about intrinsically different personalities, everyone sounded the same. A rolledex of the same insults and comebacks seemed to appear every other page. "Whatever" signified the end of a cutesy quarrel. Two characters that came from the same faction would mock each others' similar traits - repetitively. Tris and Four would gravitate towards honest believable exchanges before the dialogue would return to mush. Relating back to the prose, which did provide more than several chapters of substantial consistent storytelling and exposition, the written tone felt like Roth was capable of accessing deeper material but didn't or wouldn't flush out.

What made the story perhaps the most beneficial was Tris Prior continuing to be a truly refreshing dystopian leading character. I can often see Prior verus Katniss Everdeen (The Hunger Games) are the subject of debates for best leading heroine of the modern YA age. For me, Tris wins hands down. Inhabiting three of the five personality traits that make up the futuristic Chicago; selfless, brave, and smart, Tris is multifaceted in that she makes her own decisions by her own emotions and doesn't do so with the hopes of gaining her loverboy's approval. For the strict confinements that are offered in the setting, it's pretty awesome that she is capable of being more than a one-dimensional character - which everyone else seems to be. There's a constant struggle of standing up for herself and being brave for others in the most dramatic of crises.

Furthermore, I found Four to be a well-developed boyfriend/leading male character. What I find most frustrating in YA fiction is that couples run together on the same dependence trope; giving each other ultimatums, making it seem like the other person's love is all they have to live for. Sometimes they are forced to be so in love they lose their own identity. With Four and Tris, there is a magnetic friendship that blooms into an adolescent romance. Tris is not constantly wondering if what she does or says will lose the attraction he has for her. Four and Tris' emotions and decisions are separate, and where they collide in understanding each other's motives and their violent, chaotic circumstances. But rarely does Four hold Tris emotionally hostage, which makes their relationship an even better partnership.

Divergent was by far one of the most challenging reads to undertake in a long while. Its story and characters seemed so foreign to me, the mega-phenomenon this series has grown to be failed to live up to the hype. With Insurgent, and now thoroughly engrossed with the movies and characters, the world-building factor and main character's evolution was satisfying, even if the writing failed on so many levels. Perhaps even moreso, the material made me question if this story was worthy of three books to reach its conclusion. Is the material strong enough for me to sit through a reading of the third and final book Allegiant? Unlike my first review I truly may just wait for the movie.
Rating: ★ ★

Book vs Movie: Divergent

Set in a dystopian Chicago, the city has been broken up into factions sparked by an old war. The separation of society based on different virtues - Abnegation (selfless), Dauntless (brave), Candor (honesty), Erudite (intelligence), Amity (kindness) - is meant to be the new world's pathway to peace. At the ripe age of sixteen teenagers must choose an official faction and leave their old life behind. Beatrice Prior, the main protagonist of the series, is a member of Abegnation navigating her way through the Dauntless world. However, there is more to her selection ceremony results that force her to realize she doesn't belong in this new compartmentalized society. She is Divergent - a member of the factionless that can't be mindlessly controlled by the government.

Based on the worldwide phenomenon by Veronica Roth, let me be the first to say that I didn't have high expectations for the film adaptation. My book review can be read here, however, let me summarize that I thought the film wouldn't be worthy of anything except to see Shailene Woodley and Kate Winslet. However, my expectations were proven wrong. Director Neil Burger (of the forcefully cerebral Limitless) accomplishes a fun entertaining young adult flick.

Reconsideration: Chicago (2002)

1920s. Jazz. Booze. Adultery. Murderesses on death row. Aspiring vaudevillian Roxie Hart (Renee Zellweger) guns down her lover Fred Casley (Dominic West) after he betrays her with phony show-business connections. When she is sent to jail on a hanging case, her faces off against chanteuse Velma Kelly (Catherine Zeta-Jones) for the help of money-loving lawyer lawyer Billy Flynn (Richard Gere).

Winning six Academy Awards (out of its total thirteen nominations) in 2002, Chicago remains one of the most celebrated and hated musicals of all time. Premiere Magazine named it "one of the twenty most overrated movies of all time", a type of recognition echoed on other prestigious film lists. As one of my favorite musicals, I've tried to understand if the hate is the worth the hype.

Spin-Off Blogathon by Cinematic Corner

Dealing with the loss of a beloved family member, Margaret's blogathon at Cinematic Corner was a welcoming challenge to say the least. As instructed by her post, participants select a minor character from any film that they would wish to see a movie made of their own story and provide the reasons why.

Emma Watson in This Is The End is the first "character" that came to mind. The movie mostly focuses on Seth Rogen and his pals surviving the apocalypse in James Franco's house. Every time I watch this movie, she is definitely one of the major highlights, and I can never stop asking the question how did she get here?

Book vs Movie: Catching Fire

As a reader of The Hunger Games series, but not a passionate enough fan to call myself a "tribute", Catching Fire was my favorite installment of Suzanne Collin's trilogy. Our fictional heroine Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), and her romantic companion Peeta Mallark (Josh Hutcherson), have defied the Capitol's ruling that only one winner can survive their yearly games where competitors fight to the death. Her perseverance and rebellion becomes a symbol of hope, not something President Snow (Donald Sutherland) is willing to stand for.

As victors, Everdeen isnow  forced to realize that winning is more complicated than merely surviving the games. As a regulation for the winners, she must live outside her home of District 12 and mentor future gamers for the rest of her life. To stop another rebellion on his hands, and to end the reign of Everdeen as an inspiration, President Snow summons Everdeen, Mallark, and twenty-four former veteran victors to compete in another round of his homicidal games.

I liked the first movie. Despite the use of the shaky cam and cutting important sequences out of the first adaptation, director Gary Ross created an atmosphere I felt was gritty and raw. When director Francis Lawrence was named to helm Catching Fire, I remained still excited to see what he would make of it.

No doubt the second book tackles more than a new creative vision. By trying to cover more than Everdeen and Mallark struggling with their relationship, the film includes more backstory and undertones of Snow and his new game-maker's plans to annihilate the country's heroine. The practice of showing us how the games were created and manipulated behind the scenes was used in the first film showing, but here it didn't add definition to Everdeen's story.

Even though I finished the series more than a year ago, and know the characters' fates, it was a struggle to feel invigorated by the film. In terms of story and character development, Catching Fire was underwhelming. The bigger scope of the film created distance from the gravity of Everdeen's circumstances and it lost a bit of the story's unpredictability. With steadier cinematography, it's almost like the entire film was harnessed to the ground and never took flight.

In terms of performances, Jennifer Lawrence was never my imaginary interpretation Everdeen. My mind doesn't only accept what I saw her as, but I feel like her acting is unsatisfying. Contrary to John Hutcherson as Peeta Mallark, I feel like she is a blank canvas that knows what to emote but doesn't necessarily have a backstory behind her emotions. When it's her cue to scream, cry, grimace, smile, etc. she does it well but not with conviction. Throughout the film, her well-documented off-screen personality seemed to show through more than the character we saw in the first film.

Digging deep, fleshing out, and making us care about the characters may be where the director loses the ante of this second film. Woody Harrelson as Haymitch falls into a campy personality as the alcoholic mentor. Donald Sutherland pops up as President Snow to emote the strict power of the Capitol. Phillip Seymour Hoffman as the new game-maker Plutarch Heavensbee pretty much phones it in. The acting in general doesn't push boundaries that make me terribly excited except few actors were cast in the right parts and that's about it.

When re-entering the arena, Everdeen essentially has her pick of allies that are older, a bit deranged, and some definitely not reliable. Few of these supporting characters have limited screen-time but make a strong impact. Finnick Odair (Sam Claflin) was one of my favorites, and I felt he accurately interpreted being more than a pretty face through sarcasm, protectiveness, and heartbreak. Jenna Malone as the uninhibited sly Johann Mason is a complete wild card. You never know if you can trust her or if she'll take an opportunity to screw you over, and Malone balances this with having nothing to lose - which is exactly what Mason is all about.

While J. Lawrence continues to shine in both fans and critics' eyes, Elizabeth Banks returning as Effie stole the show. Her character's fluffy personality leads us to believe that she is blinded by the Capitol's violent corruption. Slowly, Effie comes to a heartbreaking realization that her friends are going to die and the games are no longer meager entertainment. Passed being dolled up in Capitol Couture and her luxurious lifestyle, she wears the biggest facade of everyone. Banks superbly translates Effie's epiphany about the deadly reality her friends are facing and her own little rainbow-colored bubble she tries hides in.

The second half of the film establishes Everdeen's journey and political gambits of a Victory Tour that riled up the nation more than subdued it. Teaming up with Peeta, and her pick of the litter with allies, she is thrust into an entirely new arena with reconstructed obstacles. Reading the book, I was so interested in how this would turn out on-screen. As the characters venture on an island shaped like a clock, every hour pours out different challenges such as ferocious monkeys, a toxic fog that makes skin boil, and flocks of birds that mimic loved ones being tortured. If you step over one hour into another, a force field blocks you from escaping until the hour is over.

One of the things that the movie successfully heightens moreso than the book is the visual world of the arena. It's bigger, bloodier, more unpredictably cruel and savage. Besides Everdeen's bow and arrow or more simpler techniques of hunting, technology (mostly in the third book) is a blur to me. The prose isn't laid out in a way that is digestible to see. The movie's interpretation was most dramatic and hair-raising. It inhibits the senses and the environment becomes even more of a threat than her competitors and sketchy allies.

The first film defined Katniss as the unexpected symbol of hope. The second film's script lacked to formalize the importance of her well-being; not only as a solo character but what she means to the resistance as well. As a reader who knew the series' ending almost a year ago, this sequel didn't inspire me to ask how does Katniss dares to move forward. The production itself has the story, costumes, sets, and fanbase, but it took the edge out of guessing how this will end. A change in director was by all means meant to inject new life into the series but I fear it kept it flat. Overall, the movie is an honest adaptation. The story just doesn't tread far enough passed the epic blockbuster scope it was given. More or less it floats on the girl on fire phenomenon but doesn't charges a battle cry forward in support for her.

Winner: Book
Book: ★★★ Movie: ★★

ABC Movie Blog Challenge

Taking a day off from movie reviews, inspiration struck me in a meme sort of way. I really wanted to do an alphabet related movie meme or 30 day challenge, but finding one was more than a challenge I thought it would be. In free moments here and there, I created this meme which I hope everyone enjoys.

As all alphabet memes go, each letter is a theme or question to answer about your love of movies. Feel free to share this on your own blog, and comment with a link to your own list. I'd love to see what your answers and choices are!

Mud (2013)

Two young kids in their motor boat voyage out to an abandoned island on the Mississippi River. Thinking it'll be a day of wandering exploration, it's quite a welcoming surprise to Ellis (one of the two boys) when they meet a lean dirty straggler. He has a few cracked teeth, been living in a dilapidated boat, and owns nothing but the shirt on his back and a glock. His name is Mud.

The mysterious presence around him is what makes us itching to know more about why he is a lone wolf on deserted land. After persistent probing, when Mud finally unveils a passionate confession about murdering a man who had beaten up the woman he loves, Juniper, the intrigue doesn't dissipate. Played by Matthew McConaughey, he pours out the truth with such heartache, you can't help but take him at his word.

But we hear different perspectives of who Mud is. The boys help Mud make connections to his family and Juniper back on the homeland while helping him rebuild a boat for an escape. His father declares that his son is a foolish soul who misplaced his ambitions in life - not just love - to a woman who never cared about him at all. Juniper (Reese Witherspoon), who walks the fine line of settling for Mud and wanting to escape his adoration (or even obsession), says that he is a born liar; one that tells fibs to make himself out to be something he's not. While we may not fully trust Mud, we rely on what he reveals to Ellis to be the truth - for what its worth.

The clock is ticking down. State troopers are setting up roadblocks and plastering his wanted photo all over town. And, the relatives of Mud's victim are ruthlessly searching for him as well - not even stopping at berating Juniper and Ellis in a dirty motel room in a palpable verbal beatdown. Though the story doesn't excuse the violent actions of the bounty hunters nor Mud, there isn't one character who is a true villain. Nobody carries a specific antagonist persona because everyone has something worth fighting for.

In many ways Ellis is a younger version of Mud. When his parents announce their separation, he relies on Mud's faith to Juniper to believe love exists. He's a young boy who is experiencing his first romance to an older teen Mary Pearl, who isn't exactly his other half Like Mud, he only knows the definite feeling of love in his bones. Their physical representation of devotion is swinging in on a vine and flailing their fists in protection against meddlers. They believe this might encourage their feelings to be reciprocated. It can't be controlled and hearts are trampled along the way.

Through the relationships of father and his son, a mother and son, a man and a woman, love and its limitations is weaved by how each character has their own way of protecting one another. Experience and time brings its own expression through different avenues of reciprocation. Sometimes it means standing true to the ones you love, and loving someone enough to leave them behind and go your own route.

The biggest impression Mud left with me was that it's a slow-churning movie about trust. The deep south is a culture of your word being your bond, and the movies' characters and story reflects that. Mud and Ellis' faith and companionship is what the film relies on. Every performance from Matthew McConaughey as Mud to Ray McKinnon as Ellis' father Senior carries the film to its palpable intrigue. And the test of love binds them all together from friends, lovers to children and parents. Director Jeff Nichols' complex story keeps you riding its waves from beginning to end.

Rating: ★★★