Just Another Y.A. Blockbuster

Thanks to the box office success of Twilight and The Hunger Games, we can pretty much expect every semi-popular young adult novel to get big screen treatment in the near future. Every studio of worth out there will spend the next few years purchasing filming rights, throwing them at audiences, and seeing what sticks. We've already seen several examples of failures ranging from I am Number Four to Beautiful Creatures, and if there's something to be said for the adaptation of Veronica Roth's Divergent, it's that it stuck. Not "great" or "wonderful," or even "unique."That's because the story is so derivative of other, better material that it's bound to appeal to not only fans of the novels but any similar moviegoer curious enough to check it out.

The movie follows The Descendants star Shailene Woodley as Tris (God, it even rhymes with "Katniss"), as she navigates the trials of growing up in the ruins of a futuristic, post-war Chicago. Society in this world has been divided into five factions to maintain peace, and Tris is of the age where she can decide whether to stay with her family in the kind and selfless Abnegation faction, or join one of the other four groups, which pride themselves on traits like intelligence, honesty, and peacefulness. This is complicated when the test that helps students decide to what faction they "belong" fails to work on Tris, categorizing her as "Divergent" and unlikely to fit in anywhere. Naturally, Divergents are treated as enemies of the system, and our heroine tries to hide her nature by joining up with the brave, kinda-crazy faction "Dauntless", where she falls for the hunky instructor known as "Four" (Theo James). But when Divergent-hunters come calling... you know what? Forget it, I'm just going to stop right there.

She got tattoos! So you know she has an edge now.

There is barely a single word or sentence in that previous paragraph that could not be used to describe countless titles that have come out just in the past decade (except perhaps Abnegation... learn something new every day!), and that's Divergent's biggest, BIGGEST problem. Whether it's due to the direction of Neil Burger (Limitless), the screenplay by Evan Daugherty (Snow White and the Huntsman) and Vanessa Taylor (Hope Springs), or even Roth's novel itself (Or, most likely, a combination of all three), the biggest sin is that there is barely anything noteworthy or original to grasp onto and declare "Yes, this is why it's special!" For all the crap I give it, Twilight took a familiar concept (supernatural) and put a unique twist on creating its universe. The Hunger Games, while ostensibly a copy of the Japanese book/movie Battle Royale, still made itself original enough to stand alone (not to mention the casting of Jennifer Lawrence). Beautiful Creatures had an amazing and appropriate setting. I am Number Four and the Harry Potter franchise had excellent lore. Divergent DOES have an interesting premise, with the factions and the disparity between them, but barely touches on it in what amounts to a rote, romance/action story. Well, to be fair, it also has... umm... wait a moment... it has... ergh... well, no... I guess... excellent acting?

Why hast thou forsaken us, Kate?

Yes, Divergent is fortunate to have such an amazing cast assembled, because they absolutely needed the best. The characters are so one-dimensional that only someone with the chops of Ashley Judd, or Kate Winslett, or Maggie Q, or Mekhi Phifer, or Ray Stevenson could make it work. When Miles Teller shows up as the generic bully, he actually brings some gravitas to the role. When Tony Goldwyn appears on screen, he isn't just a blank slate as Tris' father, but actually shows some magnetism, through his voice if not in his poorly-written words (one character ironically wonders why people keep asking her the same question; it's because of the inept dialogue, dear). And it's a good thing Shailene Woodley and Theo James are such excellent performers; Woodley plays the worst kind of female heroine, whose actions are entirely based on what is done to her and not on any driving force behind her vanilla temperament; while James' character development begins and ends with "brooding hottie". And yet, both actors make the material work through sheer force of personality. The romance between them, while basic, predictable and cliched, ends up working by virtue of their great chemistry, and they do the absolute most they can with the material. If it wasn't for that, this wouldn't much of a film. Yes, there are a few legitimate duds in Jai Courtney and Zoe Kravitz (sheez, Divergent even has a Kravitz in the cast), but even they don't detract from the story too much when all is said and done.

Where Hollywood thinks women should be: out of sight and silent.

But the acting can't fully save a story that borrows from literally every genre and trope in existence, from The Matrix (one person throwing a system out of whack), to Logan's Run ("I'm hiding my secret from the ruling government!") to Starship Troopers ("Let's get tattoos!"). Seriously, if the villains were as smart as they are supposed to be, they'd have realized that their plot to take over the city has been done a million times before, and BETTER. It's almost as if Roth cobbled together this tale from all the pop culture references and Young Adult novels she had accumulated in her young life, with nary an original thought or idea. To be fair, that might be over-simplifying things a bit; I have yet to read the book, so I can't say how many of Divergent's problems stem from her writing and how much from the adaptation process itself. But if she had ONE original thought when she compiled her novel, it never make its way to the big screen. Even the faction system is not a truly original concept, and that's the closest Divergent ever gets to declaring its independence from standard YA fare. The story is so reliant on coincidence - from Maggie Q's first appearance to just about EVERY major twist and turn - that it defies all expectation for the audience to accept the plot as it develops. And I'd even go so far as to say that wouldn't necessarily a BAD thing, as long as the story itself is told competently and the actors do a good job with the material. In fact, Burger is a pretty good, if not great, director, especially suited to this type of non-risky script, as he proved in 2011's Limitless. Even though the script is the kind of hackery that would demand multiple rewrites if it not for the film's brand recognition, Divergent turns into a competent, if not standout, filmmaking product.

Get it? It's "Red pill, Blue pill!"

Divergent tries to push a moral of anti-conformity and self-identification, but ironically does it in the most conformist fashion possible, stealing from everything that has come before and not standing out even remotely on its way to box office success. Naturally, every YA movie adaptation wants to see the same kind of success as The Hunger Games, but Divergent could only WISH that it was as interesting, compelling and urgent as the movie whose success it would wish to emulate. It's definitely a BAD movie, and yet also a WELL-MADE bad movie that overcomes many of its narrative obstacles through heart and sheer force of will. If only the filmmakers had taken more risks, as the movie does nothing to differentiate itself from the bland, predictable tropes and cliches that have never been so transparently on display as they are here. If it had attempted to deviate from the terrifyingly dull norm it had set for itself, it might have turned into something great. As it stands, Divergent is just okay, and I think we'll see subsequent sequels Insurgent and Allegiant justifiably fall off in audiences as a result. Teen girls (and anyone who identifies with teen girls) will watch and enjoy anyway, but anyone else can steer clear.

Limitless Opportunities

When it comes to choosing films to watch, sometimes it's not about what film you want to see most, but what you're stuck with when all is said and done. If I'd had my way, I probably would have used this morning to see The Lincoln Lawyer, Matthew McConaughey's thriller that hearkens back to his amazing performance in A Time to Kill. I also want to see the adaptation of classic Bronte novel Jane Eyre, and I've been looking forward to Tom McCarthy's latest indie film Win Win for some time now. But, due to no good showings of Lawyer, as well as Eyre and Win Win not making it to my preferred theaters as of yet (soon, I hope), I was left with fewer choices than I would have preferred. Stuck between films I've seen, films I've never heard of, and films I have no inclination to see, I decided to settle on a title in which I had at least a small  interest. Limitless I think surprised many when it went #1 at the box office this past weekend, and the film boasted of its star power in the rising Bradley Cooper and Hollywood icon Robert De Niro. Still, the trailer to me seemed a little weak, with what seemed like an interesting idea doubtlessly bogged down by convention and normalcy, despite it's sky-reaching goals.

Hey, Cooper looks like my 2010, only more greasy.

Based on the 2001 novel The Dark Fields by Alan Glynn and directed by Neil Burger, Limitless introduces the viewer to Eddie Morra (Cooper), a hopeless writer at the lowest point of his life. He lives in a crappy apartment, his girlfriend (Abbie Cornish) has just left him, and to top it off, he is in danger of losing his book contract because he cannot frame a single sentence. When fate introduces him to new experimental wonder drug, NZT-48, his life is changed. NZT-48 allows one who takes it to access 100% of their brain functionality, as opposed to most of us who at most can reach about twenty. Eddie goes from zero to hero faster than an episode of Queer Eye, dropping his slovenly looks, finishing his book and making gobs of dough through the stock market. It isn't long though before his action is threatened by the limited supply of the drug, it's revealing side effects, unscrupulous mobsters and crooked Wall Street goons, led by Street legend Carl Van Loon (De Niro).

Obviously nobody ever told Eddie to not take money from Russian gangsters

Where the film succeeds is showing us how easy it can be for the desperate to cling to anything, ANYTHING, when they are at their most downtrodden. Even though Eddie is competent and sane enough to know that taking an illegal drug is probably not a good idea, once he gets that good feeling coursing through his system he's helpless against it's power. That it allows him to be arguably the best person he can be is almost irrelevant when you factor in all the trouble that brings him. In fact, this film might be seen by many as anti-drug, even going into the hazards of overdosing. Not all the film's details match this hypothesis, however, and in the end the moral of the story is muddled and unclear.

De Niro attempts to wow Cooper with his Taxi Driver skills

And that's Limitless's problem: we're not sure what to make of this tale of sometimes morals and drug dependence. On one hand, Eddie is anything if not a sympathetic character. Even when on his binges, he never does anything I would think of as WRONG. Instead he is practically dragged from conflict to bloody conflict, almost never actively making a move unless coerced, by drug or otherwise. On the other hand, he somehow seems to be addicted to this substance, even if it steadily brings him more trouble. So what's the point of it all? The script doesn't offer any answers to these thoughts, or even the questions asked in its own story. For instance, if 100% of someone's brain is activated by this drug, how in the hell does this guy not think that borrowing money from a Russian mobster (Andrew Howard) is a bad idea? This and other banal problems have no place in the unique realm that this drug is supposed to produce, and yet there you are.

Wishing he had a bigger window

I probably would have walked out of the theater if it hadn't been for the acting talent on display. You might at first accuse Cooper of playing the same kind of playboy he appears to be in many of his films, but in Limitless he actually plays two distinct editions of Eddie Morra. As the "classic" starving artist, Cooper realistically portrays the depression and frustration of being an unaccomplished writer in the world's greatest city. For Eddie's "enhanced special edition", Cooper can be the more confident, affable and charming performer we're used to, which I'm sure is much less of a challenge. Still, his overall ability is rightfully the mainstay of the entire film, and anybody else in the role would have simply felt wrong. Abbie Cornish is slowly turning herself into a genuine superstar, and while smallish parts like her romantic interest role will only help so much, they WILL help if she treats them as seriously as she does here. She's obviously immensely talented, and it would have been nice to see a larger role created for her. She's not the only waste of talent, however. It seems Burger can be lumped in with a multitude of directors who don't know what to do with Robert De Niro in his later years. De Niro is as gravelly and posturing as he can possibly be, but it doesn't make up for the fact that his character is a fairly useless one. Seriously, I kept waiting for Van Loon to become relevant over the course of the story, but the film's biggest fallacy is the idea that they would do anything interesting with this star. Some stronger performances belonged to an unrecognizable Anna Friel as Eddie's ex-wife and Andrew Howard as the film's real human villain.

Cue green screen... and go!

Limitless would probably work fine as a P.S.A. to keep kids from doing drugs if it had managed to fall on that side of the moral spectrum. Instead, it lionizes a drug's effects and seems to indicate that we all might benefit from a bit of chemical help to be our best. That seems like a dangerous philosophy to adopt, and even taking The Gospel of Uncle Benjamin into account, it's an idea tough to justify within the parameters set by the story. But that's beside the point when the film doesn't do enough with the great ideas it puts forward. Far too conventional to take advantage of an otherwise interesting story, Limitless debuts rather low at #8 for 2011. It had the potential to be something; it could have been a contender. Instead it will meet an early exit by the end of next month at the latest.