Jeff Bridges, Meryl Streep, Brenton Thwaites, Odeya Rush, Katie Holmes, Alexander Skarsgard and Taylor Swift
Based on the novel by Lois Lowry
Screenplay by Micahel Mitnick and Robert B. Weide
Directed by Phillip Noyce
Rated PG-13 (for a mature thematic image and some sci-fi action/
In reviewing The Giver, I feel the need to make a few qualifying statments that may not endear me to anyone
1. I really liked the book, but I was not blown away by it
As opposed to many of my close friends, I didn't read it when I was in the 10-12 age range. When the book was released in 1993 I was 18 years old and I was reading Schindler's List and trying not to give up on Tom Clancy as he became more overblown and self indulgent. I wasn't reading young adult fiction, I thought I was too old for it. Now, more years later than I care to admit, I have developed a major fondness for literature for younger readers that started with the Harry Potter series. Three Christmases ago I was given a copy of this book, and I finally read it about two months ago. I found Lois Lowry's acclaimed novel utterly captivating and thought provoking, but also a little heavy handed, cheesy, predictable and maybe even just a tiny bit pedantic at times in its allegorical elements (much like one feels if they read The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe for the first time when they are older.). I do think it's a genuinely great book for young adults, it just didn't rock my world the way it seems to have for so many.
2. I don't love Meryl Streep
I know, I know. Disturbance in the force. Millions of flamboyantly gay voices just cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. Don't misunderstand: of course I think she is a good actress, but she is far from without peer, and in truth I believe part of the reason she gets so much attention is because she has a tendency to go mostly for attention getting roles rather than great stories. I think she's in it for the glory and acclaim.
3. I think the idea that "the book is always better than the movie is the worst kind of rubbish
This popular form of attempted snobbery is actually extreme ignorance. It comes from the fact that books require a certain level of thinking to get into, while most people make the mistake of watching movies with their brain turned off (unless it is a book adaptation, in which case their brain is entirely devoted to "this character had red hair in the book" and other such distractions, some of which are very relevant, some of which really are not.). In addition, everyone who reads puts something of themselves into a book. When you read a book, you are the director, and you get to decide which elements are the most important. The idea that putting something of yourself into the way you view a film is decidedly foreign to mass audiences, but it's something that those of us who truly love the medium as a art form do all the time, and I believe it is something everyone does on occasion, but usually unconsciously.
Sorry to shock anyone, but there you go. I had to say it. Now for the movie, which, is unfortunately, just the sort of book to film adaptation that makes sure the stereotype stays alive.
Jonas (Brenton Twaites) lives in "The Community," along with his "family unit." Father (Alexander Skarsgard) Mother (Katie Holmes) and sister Lily (Emily Tremblay.) Jonas is apprehensive about the upcoming graduation, where he will be assigned his job or his "assignment in the community." His best friends, Asher (Cameron Monaghan) and Fiona (Odeya Rush) are graduating as well. When it comes time for the ceremony, Fiona is assigned as a nurturer (taking care of infants in the community until they are ready to be assigned to a family unit) and Asher is made a pilot. But Jonas is skipped over, until the Chief Elder (Meryl Streep) reveals that he has been saved for a very special assignment: Jonas is to be the new Receiver of Memories, a job he is told will be filled with pain and the training for which will isolate him from his family and friends forever.
Yet, under the guidance of the present Receiver (Jeff Bridges), a surprisingly kind man who has the same rare, pale eyes as Jonas, the boy absorbs memories that induce for the first time feelings of true happiness and love. Since Jonas is now The Receiver, the older man suggest that Jonas call him "The Giver," as he is passing on the memories to his new pupil. Also, for the first time, Jonas knows what it is to see a rainbow, and to experience snow and the thrill of riding a sled down a hill. But then he is given the painful memories: war, pain, death, and starvation. These are memories of the Community's deep past. Jonas learns that the Community engineered a society of "sameness" to protect its people against this past, yet he begins to understand the tremendous loss he and his people have endured by giving their memories away, embracing "sameness", and using "climate control".
1. I really liked the book, but I was not blown away by it
As opposed to many of my close friends, I didn't read it when I was in the 10-12 age range. When the book was released in 1993 I was 18 years old and I was reading Schindler's List and trying not to give up on Tom Clancy as he became more overblown and self indulgent. I wasn't reading young adult fiction, I thought I was too old for it. Now, more years later than I care to admit, I have developed a major fondness for literature for younger readers that started with the Harry Potter series. Three Christmases ago I was given a copy of this book, and I finally read it about two months ago. I found Lois Lowry's acclaimed novel utterly captivating and thought provoking, but also a little heavy handed, cheesy, predictable and maybe even just a tiny bit pedantic at times in its allegorical elements (much like one feels if they read The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe for the first time when they are older.). I do think it's a genuinely great book for young adults, it just didn't rock my world the way it seems to have for so many.
2. I don't love Meryl Streep
I know, I know. Disturbance in the force. Millions of flamboyantly gay voices just cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. Don't misunderstand: of course I think she is a good actress, but she is far from without peer, and in truth I believe part of the reason she gets so much attention is because she has a tendency to go mostly for attention getting roles rather than great stories. I think she's in it for the glory and acclaim.
3. I think the idea that "the book is always better than the movie is the worst kind of rubbish
This popular form of attempted snobbery is actually extreme ignorance. It comes from the fact that books require a certain level of thinking to get into, while most people make the mistake of watching movies with their brain turned off (unless it is a book adaptation, in which case their brain is entirely devoted to "this character had red hair in the book" and other such distractions, some of which are very relevant, some of which really are not.). In addition, everyone who reads puts something of themselves into a book. When you read a book, you are the director, and you get to decide which elements are the most important. The idea that putting something of yourself into the way you view a film is decidedly foreign to mass audiences, but it's something that those of us who truly love the medium as a art form do all the time, and I believe it is something everyone does on occasion, but usually unconsciously.
Sorry to shock anyone, but there you go. I had to say it. Now for the movie, which, is unfortunately, just the sort of book to film adaptation that makes sure the stereotype stays alive.
Jonas (Brenton Twaites) lives in "The Community," along with his "family unit." Father (Alexander Skarsgard) Mother (Katie Holmes) and sister Lily (Emily Tremblay.) Jonas is apprehensive about the upcoming graduation, where he will be assigned his job or his "assignment in the community." His best friends, Asher (Cameron Monaghan) and Fiona (Odeya Rush) are graduating as well. When it comes time for the ceremony, Fiona is assigned as a nurturer (taking care of infants in the community until they are ready to be assigned to a family unit) and Asher is made a pilot. But Jonas is skipped over, until the Chief Elder (Meryl Streep) reveals that he has been saved for a very special assignment: Jonas is to be the new Receiver of Memories, a job he is told will be filled with pain and the training for which will isolate him from his family and friends forever. Yet, under the guidance of the present Receiver (Jeff Bridges), a surprisingly kind man who has the same rare, pale eyes as Jonas, the boy absorbs memories that induce for the first time feelings of true happiness and love. Since Jonas is now The Receiver, the older man suggest that Jonas call him "The Giver," as he is passing on the memories to his new pupil. Also, for the first time, Jonas knows what it is to see a rainbow, and to experience snow and the thrill of riding a sled down a hill. But then he is given the painful memories: war, pain, death, and starvation. These are memories of the Community's deep past. Jonas learns that the Community engineered a society of "sameness" to protect its people against this past, yet he begins to understand the tremendous loss he and his people have endured by giving their memories away, embracing "sameness", and using "climate control".
Walden Media, the same company that leaped on the chance to capitalize on the success of The Lords of the Rings by bringing The Chronicles of Narnia to the big screen is trying to do the same thing here by getting in on the current popularity of young adult distopian future fiction. But with Narnia, what they had was really a kiddie Lord of the Rings. This is decidedly not The Hunger Games. The two biggest mistakes made in adapting the book to film are: 1. greatly upping the government paranoia thriller aspect in order to provide more action and suspense, to make Meryl Streep a lead and to give the story a more literal villain, and 2. adding a full fledged romantic subplot. Both of these elements are done to sell this as the next Divergent, which is a more than unfortunate choice. In the book, Jonas has a fondness and a strong attraction to his friend Fiona, but it never materializes into a genuine romance (in the book they were only 11 years old, after all.). This change doesn't serve the story well and leads to at least to the film's single worst moment as Fiona is placed in grave danger. And while Fiona becomes more of a focal point in the film, she is a much more interesting presence in her small role in the book. They also make the mistake of chickening out on the overtly sexual element to his attraction to Fiona, which is played very tastefully in the book as Jonas has a dream about Fiona and discovers longings he has never felt, and is told he is experiencing "the stirrings," which his mother explains happens to most people, and he is given medication to correct the "problem." While there is a throwaway reference made to this incident, the movie plays "the stirrings" more as feelings of romantic attachment than as puberty and the beginings of sexual desire (likely because they are afraid it would be too suggestive on film) but it undercuts the story of Jonas' development into an adult, looses an important element of honesty that made and the book so relateable to its readers, and clumsily alters the nature of the control the community has taken over everyone.The over emphasis on the "thriller" elements make the community more sinister but less disturbing, and add too much of a blatant Hollywood touch. In addition, a seemingly sensible simplification of events makes the ending feel silly and far too literal. In truth, if this movie had dared to play itself as a full blown art film and dropped the clunky voice over narration and mainstream pandering, it actually had to the potential to be even better than the book, and a true science fiction classic. But it was made for mass audiences, and you can't really blame the filmmakers for that, it's the nature of the industry. But it's still a crying shame.
The performances are capable, especially from Bridges, but largely forgettable. Streep is good as always, but her character is instrusive and one dimensional. I have to admit that I have never been a Katie Holmes fan: I find her bland and lacking in maturity as an actress. Still, I wanted to give her a chance in this movie because I think it would be nice if she got past the whole distraction of her personal life, but she just can't. Her ex-husband may be the crazy one who caused the baggage in the first place, but he's such a talented actor that I don't think about that stuff when I'm watching his films. When I watch her in a film I am constantly coming up with Mystery Science Theater 3000 style jokes, especially when the movie is about a strict society that controls everyone's lives. Fears that Taylor Swift would be an annoying distraction are, thankfully, not nescesary. I actually forgot that she was in the film and had to check the credits to see who she played. Unfortunately, that does have something to do with the facts that she makes no lasting impression for bad or good in terms of acting, and that this rather small but pivotal role is handled very poorly by the screenwriters. In its final third, The Giver becomes far too much of an action suspense movie as Jonas's escape from the community is turned into a manhunt. For a society where no one breaks the rules or questions autority, this community suddenly has an extensive police force. Director Phillip Noyce has proven very adept at action in the past, but it's so forced here that it feels like he can't get up much enthusiasm.
The cinematography is a real strength, and the sequences where The Giver shares his memories with Jonas are when the movie works best. The choice to put Jonas inside these memories (wearing a helmet and carrying a rifle in Vietnam, for example) is a very effective way to create the feeling that he's not just seeing these things, he's experiencing them. Ironically, at the time this book was first getting its following, Noyce was directing the Harrison Ford Jack Ryan movies and I was watching them and obsessing over every little change for better or worse. It took me a while to judge to figure out what to think of the version of Patriot Games he directed as opposed to the one I had, and his Clear and Present Danger is arguably a great example of movie that is better than the book upon which it was based. This only added to my sincere desire to let this film prove to me it could be as good as the book and me giving it every chance to do so, but sadly, this was not to be, and the film is a big disappointment.
No comments:
Post a Comment