Allegiant
Beatrice Prior and Tobias Eaton venture into the world outside of the fence and are taken into protective custody by a mysterious agency known as the Bureau of Genetic Welfare.
-
- Cast:
- Shailene Woodley , Theo James , Miles Teller , Zoë Kravitz , Naomi Watts , Jeff Daniels , Ansel Elgort
Similar titles
Reviews
This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place
Sadly Over-hyped
Great Film overall
This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.
They deviate so much from the book that the only things they have in common is the name. They obliterated the whole plotline by their stupid happy ending. Without her death Four doesn't grow, doesn't become what he needs to be. You just made everything they went through meaningless by letting her live. THIS is why people hate movies made out of books, because people ruin them!
This was an OK sequel to the Divergent series, though it kind of suffered from the movie series version of "jumping the shark." Once again, Shailene Woodley's performance carries the film, as does an outstanding ensemble cast and a good series of action sequences. I liked the gas being released towards the end and the people being locked in. However, there wasn't too much in terms of story. I felt like they could have done better with that. The first two films did that better. Stick to the first two films for that department. The overall series is good though.** out of ****
Watching this sequel I found myself often speaking to the screen stating - "knew that was coming". If this is the reaction I have to a movie, then it is pretty bad and this one is. But, let's get one thing out of the way first. Say what you will about Shailene Woodley but casting her as the lead in this series was wrong. She does not have the fire that a Tris should have. There are moments of determination that she displays in the appropriate scenes but that was about it. So this has been a distraction for me throughout. As far as knowing what would happen ahead of time, there are multiple scenes where this is the case. I like to be surprised by the depth of thought that a writer had in constructing a scene to show that my simple mind was not imaginative enough to determine an ending to a scene which was unexpected. This is OK because that is what I pay for to see a movie. But in this one, I was rarely surprised with dramatic outcomes of critical scenes. This leaves me wondering who watched this before releasing it to the public, children ? I mean some adult executive had to screen this movie and had said - great, let's go with it. If you're wondering about the 4 star rating, I am a sucker for special effects and there were a few in this movie that were pretty good and enjoyable. Otherwise, pass on this one and hope another sequel is not in the works.
It was a decent movie, but my colleagues and I did manage to find some problems. Firstly, we were unclear on how the regular, non- genetically modified people were able to dispatch the corrupted, genetically modified security guards in hand to hand combat with relative ease. It seems if humanity had developed advanced genomic modification technology, employing security guards who cannot be manhandled by Theo James would be a fairly simple task. Unrelated, it seems like Miles Teller's character, Peter, turns evil in like every movie. His character's lack of meaningful development really is a downer for all the pretentious kiss-ups who watch these movies, who may be led led to believe that they can never change. Also, why do the main characters keep letting him make decisions? It doesn't really make sense. Finally, the film revolves around the so-called "Chicago Experiment," which, if I may be candid, seems like one of the most egregious examples of researchers ignoring the scientific method and all control standards put in place by the organizations that govern international science. I don't understand why a study of that global significance would be organized in a non double-blind procedure without multiple control groups and extensive peer review. In the movie, however, there doesn't even appear to be an independent variable. Also, the entire approval process is four people talking to two other people, one of which is literally the result of said experiment. It just seems like they're asking for bureaucratic overreach. Anyways, we've already sent our concerns to Lionsgate, and we assume they are working tirelessly to fix these problems.