The word "insurgent" means to actively revolt, implying some distinctiveness that sets its participants apart from the norm. Ironically, the film Insurgent, a faded photocopy of other teen- scifi-dramas, doesn't have a single unique bone in its body. Not that it's aggressively terrible. There are some decent scifi elements and even a couple of mildly intriguing moments. But like clockwork, every slight turn for the better is quickly overwhelmed by extreme boredom. Like a forgettable SyFy channel series masquerading as a blockbuster film, Insurgent is simply a dull and uninteresting sequel. That word "sequel" should connote a progression of sorts, but no. As little as I remember about the previous entry in the Divergent Series, I can tell you this: shaky cam action scenes, bloviating about "special ones", and constant fighting for the McGuffin-of-the- week were the focus and are still in full form here. At the center is Woodley, an actress with a whole heckuva lot of talent that simply doesn't have the presence of strength to carry this sort of role. She presents a microcosm problem for an entire film full of great actors terribly miscast. Teller and Elgort manage some natural charisma and charm from their otherwise absent characters, Watts and Spencer are all but completely missing, and Winslet is just plain wasted. It's none of their fault; they just can't make the embarrassingly constant melodrama palatable. Even if it was laughably bad there might be something to cling to, but it's not bold enough to even warrant that reaction. Insurgent only serves as a lame, achingly dull placeholder until the next Hunger Games installment.
256 Reviews
A Disney dystopia, what rubbish
randymcbeast8 July 2015
There's nothing more annoying than a movie that sets itself in a dystopia and then has a bunch of pretty people running around doing unbelievable things. Maybe if I was a third grader I would appreciate this fantasy but as an adult it was torture to watch.
This movie would need some serious surgery to actually pass as something I could make all the way through. I didn't make it all the way through by the way. The casting, direction and writing would all have to be redone. Basically, throw it all out and start over. Otherwise, this could possibly work as a Yahoo TV movie.
File this one in the folder of movies that think the audience is dumb and will just be wow'd by ridiculous action and young heroes. So annoying and such a waste of my time.
This movie would need some serious surgery to actually pass as something I could make all the way through. I didn't make it all the way through by the way. The casting, direction and writing would all have to be redone. Basically, throw it all out and start over. Otherwise, this could possibly work as a Yahoo TV movie.
File this one in the folder of movies that think the audience is dumb and will just be wow'd by ridiculous action and young heroes. So annoying and such a waste of my time.
The mystery box and the power hungry leaders!
Reno-Rangan14 July 2016
This is not a bad sequel, I quite enjoyed it, but I think I liked 'Divergent' better. The story continued a very short after where it ended in the first. In this part, it was all about power hungry where many try to get that top post. On the other side, there will be an attempt to open a mystery box that found which might reveal some important detail about them.
Looked like a very good storyline, unpredictable stuffs, but not utilised to its full potential. Though the actors were good, especially Shailene was sexy in her short hairs. I think she came straight out of 'The Fault in Our Stars' to take up this role where her brother in this film was a boyfriend in that.
Visually as well very captivating with those great graphics and it is first digital 3D film in the series. It has numerous small twists, especially during decrypting the mystery box. So I felt the middle parts were the best part of the film.
I thought this film would take place outside the wall, but a new story was developed and still kept the mystery about the rest of the world. I don't know the book, but that's my disappointment. I hope the next film in the series would go beyond the wall and explore some new things. So I'm looking forward for the 'Allegiant'.
6/10
Looked like a very good storyline, unpredictable stuffs, but not utilised to its full potential. Though the actors were good, especially Shailene was sexy in her short hairs. I think she came straight out of 'The Fault in Our Stars' to take up this role where her brother in this film was a boyfriend in that.
Visually as well very captivating with those great graphics and it is first digital 3D film in the series. It has numerous small twists, especially during decrypting the mystery box. So I felt the middle parts were the best part of the film.
I thought this film would take place outside the wall, but a new story was developed and still kept the mystery about the rest of the world. I don't know the book, but that's my disappointment. I hope the next film in the series would go beyond the wall and explore some new things. So I'm looking forward for the 'Allegiant'.
6/10
It's fine. Just fine.
wackywookie2 May 2020
My brother and I are fans of the books and we generally enjoyed the first film. However, this film doesn't amount to either. Sure, the visuals aren't bad, I especially like the look of the film and the action wasn't bad. The big problem with this is mostly just the storyline. It just seems quite bland.
That's really all I can say. This film is just bland.
That's really all I can say. This film is just bland.
Do you have 119 minutes to waste?
EdinBajric9 July 2015
On what grounds does this movie have 6,9 rating on IMDb? This insults the intelligence. Shailene Woodley has no character and acts like she is first time in front of the camera. Action is meaningless. This is what happens when you run out of ideas. 45 minutes before the end I wanted to quit, but...I did not do it. Why? Because I had hoped it will improve, and then... nothing. This is the most honest opinion about this movie that I was able to give you. Now, I'm asking you, do you have 119 minutes of your life to waste? Oh what, you do not believe me? No problem! Just remember what I told you and come back after you watch this piece of abomination. As regards of Kate Winslet, first I have to say that I'm fan of her earlier works, but this is something else. This she did not need. A huge step backwards in her career. As someone (Author: siderite from Romania) already said: "Bad enough to make one doubt IMDb ratings forever".
Bad, dull, un-original
samgreer-694-6807408 July 2015
A 4 is probably generous. I'm getting sick of the Elysium genre and this is the same thing with the exception of some vivid dreams. The elites have sequestered themselves on the same planet this time. The plot is the elites can and do openly mind control everyone and segregate the population the way they think it should be separated, but some special people can't be mind controlled and have to be dealt with, by violence of course. Suffice it to say it gets weird. I mean weird. Goofy. Nonsensical. Unbelievable. All accurate descriptions of this out of control mess. I didn't see the first one, and now probably won't because I already want this 2 hours back.
A Laughable Dystopian Thriller
blakiepeterson2 May 2015
In the distant future, an uprising against the government of ends brutally and tragically, forcing those who survive the revolution to (a) form a new political system or (b) conform to the recent totalitarian control. Society is divided into sections called s; each has a certain specialty, like or . But despite the initially seamless system, civil unrest is mounting with slow but capable precision. At its lead is a young man or woman who bears unique traits, like or ; they are the only hope for a democratic future as the ruthless government will do everything they can to deter change.
If you haven't guessed it already, I have just written the formula for creating a brand new Hunger Games/Divergent series (or run-of-the-mill video game at worst). Post-apocalyptic setting? Check! Attractive young people who want to be free at last? Check! A governmental head honcho who wants nothing more than to see those attractive young peoples heads on sticks? Check!
Where The Hunger Games and Divergent split apart is specifically at the fault of their makers. Suzanne Collins concocted a series that held enough interest for the moody youths all the while pressing thought- provoking political questions; the novels, along with their film counterparts, feel timely, and most importantly, smart. Veronica Roth made a franchise of silly but entertaining (and obviously YA oriented) books more intent on action and romance instead of something deep. There's nothing wrong with that, but in the realm of film, the Divergent movies somehow feel dated. The Hunger Games films smash the box-office along with audience and critical expectations; the Divergent projects, on the other hand, limp along in comparison, looking like a crowd of Jans attempting to be one big Marcia.
As much as I knew the first Divergent was manipulative formula that told me that things were more urgent than they actually were, I liked it. I liked its full-blooded action, its futuristic aromas, and most importantly, Shailene Woodley (who is on her way to becoming a major star). It wasn't great, but it didn't underestimate our intelligence, either. But months later, I couldn't remember many of the plot points: All I could recollect was a lot of running, punching, breathy kissing, brightly lit technological colors, and most importantly, Kate Winslet scowling her ass off.
Insurgent suffers from the dreaded sophomore slump (not to suggest Divergent was an unmatchable masterpiece). Like its predecessor, things are kept moving at lightning speed, and we're never bored; but unlike its predecessor, the weak links in the storyline and dialogue are much more noticeable. The first time around, we were just starting to get used to this new (yet somehow familiar) dystopian world, but in Insurgent, we've adjusted ourselves, and like someone who's lived in the same house for thirty years, flaws become much more apparent than they were before.
Divergent ended with leading heroine Tris Prior (Woodley) hastily escaping the murderous government after a violent confrontation that left the Divergent hating villain Jeanine Matthews (Kate Winslet) with a knife in her hand (a constant reminder, as Winslet dons a distractingly large bandage). Now in hiding with love interest Four (Theo James), her brother (Ansel Elgort), and a recent ally (Miles Teller), Tris is trying to regroup; as a rose in a sea of white daisies, she is Public Enemy #1.
Meanwhile, Jeanine finds herself in the possession of an ancient box that was hidden centuries ago by the creators of the Faction system. Inside The Box (it deserves a title) is a message that will come in handy in a time of crumbling systematic function; problem is, only a Divergent has the ability to unlock it. Desperate, the government begins testing every single person who resides in the Factions, hoping to find a Divergent in the crowd who has strong enough abilities to eventually get their paws on the secret message. But because Tris is the most powerful Divergent of them all, Jeanine begins a cutthroat quest to find the woman who hurt her poor little hand.
If the plot sounds slightly weak, it is. It can barely hold itself together, as it wants to find an excuse to have as many loud action sequences and uninspired bits of dialogue as it possibly can. It connects the dots with hesitation. Yet, I find myself sounding way too harsh. Yes, I laughed at much of the unintentional seriousness, and yes, the script ranges from embarrassing to bland. But I had a good time at the theater, even if much of that good time was brought unintentionally. I guess that's what counts. I'm in the wrong demographic anyway (as a movie critic, I lit up at the very sight of Watts). This is a film for young teenage girls (I went with my 14-year-old sister, after all), and if I look or act anything like a teenage girl than I sincerely apologize.
Insurgent doesn't quite suck, but boy is it dull. Not dull like boring; dull like a recycled joke is. It's mildly diverting, sure, but it's also kind of lame. For most established names (ahem, Kate Winslet, Naomi Watts, Octavia Spencer), the film is merely a roadblock in an impressive career. But for rising talents like Shailene Woodley and Miles Teller, it's a challenge; to transcend middling material is a hugely difficult task. But Woodley and Teller are going to be stars; Insurgent will be the film they silently chuckle at when they win their Oscars someday.
If you haven't guessed it already, I have just written the formula for creating a brand new Hunger Games/Divergent series (or run-of-the-mill video game at worst). Post-apocalyptic setting? Check! Attractive young people who want to be free at last? Check! A governmental head honcho who wants nothing more than to see those attractive young peoples heads on sticks? Check!
Where The Hunger Games and Divergent split apart is specifically at the fault of their makers. Suzanne Collins concocted a series that held enough interest for the moody youths all the while pressing thought- provoking political questions; the novels, along with their film counterparts, feel timely, and most importantly, smart. Veronica Roth made a franchise of silly but entertaining (and obviously YA oriented) books more intent on action and romance instead of something deep. There's nothing wrong with that, but in the realm of film, the Divergent movies somehow feel dated. The Hunger Games films smash the box-office along with audience and critical expectations; the Divergent projects, on the other hand, limp along in comparison, looking like a crowd of Jans attempting to be one big Marcia.
As much as I knew the first Divergent was manipulative formula that told me that things were more urgent than they actually were, I liked it. I liked its full-blooded action, its futuristic aromas, and most importantly, Shailene Woodley (who is on her way to becoming a major star). It wasn't great, but it didn't underestimate our intelligence, either. But months later, I couldn't remember many of the plot points: All I could recollect was a lot of running, punching, breathy kissing, brightly lit technological colors, and most importantly, Kate Winslet scowling her ass off.
Insurgent suffers from the dreaded sophomore slump (not to suggest Divergent was an unmatchable masterpiece). Like its predecessor, things are kept moving at lightning speed, and we're never bored; but unlike its predecessor, the weak links in the storyline and dialogue are much more noticeable. The first time around, we were just starting to get used to this new (yet somehow familiar) dystopian world, but in Insurgent, we've adjusted ourselves, and like someone who's lived in the same house for thirty years, flaws become much more apparent than they were before.
Divergent ended with leading heroine Tris Prior (Woodley) hastily escaping the murderous government after a violent confrontation that left the Divergent hating villain Jeanine Matthews (Kate Winslet) with a knife in her hand (a constant reminder, as Winslet dons a distractingly large bandage). Now in hiding with love interest Four (Theo James), her brother (Ansel Elgort), and a recent ally (Miles Teller), Tris is trying to regroup; as a rose in a sea of white daisies, she is Public Enemy #1.
Meanwhile, Jeanine finds herself in the possession of an ancient box that was hidden centuries ago by the creators of the Faction system. Inside The Box (it deserves a title) is a message that will come in handy in a time of crumbling systematic function; problem is, only a Divergent has the ability to unlock it. Desperate, the government begins testing every single person who resides in the Factions, hoping to find a Divergent in the crowd who has strong enough abilities to eventually get their paws on the secret message. But because Tris is the most powerful Divergent of them all, Jeanine begins a cutthroat quest to find the woman who hurt her poor little hand.
If the plot sounds slightly weak, it is. It can barely hold itself together, as it wants to find an excuse to have as many loud action sequences and uninspired bits of dialogue as it possibly can. It connects the dots with hesitation. Yet, I find myself sounding way too harsh. Yes, I laughed at much of the unintentional seriousness, and yes, the script ranges from embarrassing to bland. But I had a good time at the theater, even if much of that good time was brought unintentionally. I guess that's what counts. I'm in the wrong demographic anyway (as a movie critic, I lit up at the very sight of Watts). This is a film for young teenage girls (I went with my 14-year-old sister, after all), and if I look or act anything like a teenage girl than I sincerely apologize.
Insurgent doesn't quite suck, but boy is it dull. Not dull like boring; dull like a recycled joke is. It's mildly diverting, sure, but it's also kind of lame. For most established names (ahem, Kate Winslet, Naomi Watts, Octavia Spencer), the film is merely a roadblock in an impressive career. But for rising talents like Shailene Woodley and Miles Teller, it's a challenge; to transcend middling material is a hugely difficult task. But Woodley and Teller are going to be stars; Insurgent will be the film they silently chuckle at when they win their Oscars someday.
The reviews made me think twice, I wish i didn't.
fiverrmoney17 August 2015
This movie was almost better then divergent. I guess 1 guy wrote a bad review and everyone else just followed the train.
I never written a review until now, because it has to be done.
Everything with this movie was great, i was entertained throughout the full movie. And at the end (without spoiling anything), The movie got me extra excited for the follow up allegiant.
The acting was great, and the animations were wonderful. This movie was not a waste at all. You should really see this movie if you liked divergent. So stop hating and appreciate the good movies out there.
8/10 because there are better movies out there, right. But this movie is not bad at all. Definitely watch it if you want to know what happens after divergent.
I would recommend this to my friends and family.
I never written a review until now, because it has to be done.
Everything with this movie was great, i was entertained throughout the full movie. And at the end (without spoiling anything), The movie got me extra excited for the follow up allegiant.
The acting was great, and the animations were wonderful. This movie was not a waste at all. You should really see this movie if you liked divergent. So stop hating and appreciate the good movies out there.
8/10 because there are better movies out there, right. But this movie is not bad at all. Definitely watch it if you want to know what happens after divergent.
I would recommend this to my friends and family.
Not Great; but Not Bad
cattjones20 March 2015
This film pretty much picks right up where the last one ended with very little time lapse. Jeanine's (Kate Winslet) has issued an order that all divergents need to be killed until her soldiers find a box that was kept in Tris (Shailene Woodley) parents' house and she has discovers that she will need a divergent to open it. Tris, Four (Theo James), Caleb (Ansel Elgort) and Peter (Miles Teller) have found refuge in a little village governed by Johanna (Octavia Spencer) until the hunting begins. Eric (Jai Courtney) and Max (Mekhi Phifer) have retained their blind loyalty to Jeanine; however I think that Eric has gotten even nastier whereas Max is just trying to do his job. I have to say that loyalty is a big element in this film
.. you just never know. This film actually kept up a good pace and there was very little lull time. They said that there would be a lot more action in this film. I don't know about "a lot" more, but there was definitely more than the last one. I was also glad to see that Tris was no longer wimpy when it came down to fighting, however emotionally she was feeling pretty guilty. They really beat that dead horse throughout the film. I did not see this film in 3D, but because of all the special effect, that might have been a mistake. Man, computer generated imagery has sure come along way. It really makes me look forward to some of the upcoming films this summer like Jurassic World and Terminator. I am happy for my fellow German director Robert Schwentke who has successfully bounced back from that armpit of a film, Rest in Peace Department, RIPD for short, that he directed back in 2013. You can only go up from that one. Anyway, I think that this film will do well especially with the "tween" crowd; and once you've invested in the series it's kind of hard to not find out what happens next. Do I think that this film was one of the best films I've seen this year
. Nope, but it was entertaining and didn't suck. I don't recommend that you see this film if you haven't seen Divergent. This one holds its own, but you'll enjoy it more if you've seen the first one.
Grand and exciting follow up
phd_travel19 March 2015
This is a well done sequel that is grander (no more endless training) and more urgent than the first. The simulations are visually inventive and engrossing without being too spectacular to pull apart the story.
Compared to Hunger Games, I prefer the premise and characters in Insurgent. It's less revolting and less irritating. The cast is more attractive too. At least you felt like you were getting a complete enough movie in itself here not chopped off when things started getting interesting.
Naomi Watts is attractive as a brunette and though she looks too young to have a son of Theo James's age, it's just so good to see her on screen. Maggie Q doesn't have enough lines but she is welcome presence and believable. Miles Teller has a few comic relief lines and is quite good as the a******. Ansel Elgort is suitably weak looking as the brother. Sometimes their romantic roles in other movies with Shailene come to mind. Shailene's action is quite convincing here and although she still maintains the vulnerable girlishness that makes her role more sympathetic. Theo James and her do have a good on screen believability as a couple. Kate Winslet plays her character just loathsome enough without being a caricature.
Overall a good part 2 grand exciting and satisfying with a likable attractive cast. Much more palatable than Hunger Games.
Compared to Hunger Games, I prefer the premise and characters in Insurgent. It's less revolting and less irritating. The cast is more attractive too. At least you felt like you were getting a complete enough movie in itself here not chopped off when things started getting interesting.
Naomi Watts is attractive as a brunette and though she looks too young to have a son of Theo James's age, it's just so good to see her on screen. Maggie Q doesn't have enough lines but she is welcome presence and believable. Miles Teller has a few comic relief lines and is quite good as the a******. Ansel Elgort is suitably weak looking as the brother. Sometimes their romantic roles in other movies with Shailene come to mind. Shailene's action is quite convincing here and although she still maintains the vulnerable girlishness that makes her role more sympathetic. Theo James and her do have a good on screen believability as a couple. Kate Winslet plays her character just loathsome enough without being a caricature.
Overall a good part 2 grand exciting and satisfying with a likable attractive cast. Much more palatable than Hunger Games.
Better Than the First
3xHCCH18 March 2015
"Insurgent" picks up right where the first film of this series "Divergent" left off. The tense peace inside the walls of dystopian Chicago is shattered when the Abnegation faction was invaded and destroyed. Tris and Four are rebels on the run, seeking refuge among the other factions. Ruthless Erudite leader Jeanine needs a perfect Divergent in order to unlock a certain box which contains an important message about their current existence, which Jeanine wants to suppress. This special Divergent is, of course, is Tris.
The first film "Divergent" was a pretty good film interpretation of the book. I found this second film to be even better than the first film. I did not get to read the second book so I could not assess its faithfulness to the original material. We get to see better the rest of the other factions, like Amity (with Octavia Spencer as their leader Johanna), Candor (with Daniel Dae Kim as their leader Jack Kang), and the Factionless (with Naomi Watts as their leader Evelyn). I can see the same limitations of the first book here, especially with the unusual behavior and decisions of Tris, but hey, she is a special girl, the chosen one.
I thought Shailene Woodley did very well to play Tris, with her guilty conscience, disturbing nightmares and the reluctance as a heroine. Theo James though is less noticeable here than before, as Four is seemingly relegated to be Tris' consort in this installment. Ansel Elgort looked very ill at ease and awkward in his scenes as Tris' confused younger brother Caleb. Making more of an impact were Miles Teller as the snake- like turncoat Peter and Jai Courtney as the vicious Dauntless officer Eric. Kate Winslet owns every scene she is in with her strong screen presence.
A new director Robert Schwentke (known for previous mainstream hits like "Flightplan" and "RED") took over from Neil Burger (who directed "Divergent"). Schwentke guides us through the criss-crossing web of events, building up effectively to the climactic five Faction simulation that Tris had to hurdle. The simulations in this film looked more sophisticated and complicated, with over-the-top visual effects, especially in that exciting Dauntless "sim" where Tris had to rescue her mom from a burning house hurtling in the air.
This film is rated PG, but there are pretty intense violent scenes, including point-blank shooting of defenseless people, and a character pointing a gun at his temple. There was also a scene which had the young kids around me uncomfortably covering their eyes showing prolonged kissing between the leads, with clothes being removed.
I think this film fully satisfies expectations for a second episode of a franchise. It was visually grand with mind-blowing special effects. It stands very well on its own, even if you have not yet seen the first film. It tells a complete story, with a defined resolution of events. It ends with a cliffhanger which makes you anticipate the next film. The last book in the series "Allegiant", in true Hollywood style, will again be split into two parts to make more money. Schwentke is already on board to direct Part 1, due out next year already. 8/10.
The first film "Divergent" was a pretty good film interpretation of the book. I found this second film to be even better than the first film. I did not get to read the second book so I could not assess its faithfulness to the original material. We get to see better the rest of the other factions, like Amity (with Octavia Spencer as their leader Johanna), Candor (with Daniel Dae Kim as their leader Jack Kang), and the Factionless (with Naomi Watts as their leader Evelyn). I can see the same limitations of the first book here, especially with the unusual behavior and decisions of Tris, but hey, she is a special girl, the chosen one.
I thought Shailene Woodley did very well to play Tris, with her guilty conscience, disturbing nightmares and the reluctance as a heroine. Theo James though is less noticeable here than before, as Four is seemingly relegated to be Tris' consort in this installment. Ansel Elgort looked very ill at ease and awkward in his scenes as Tris' confused younger brother Caleb. Making more of an impact were Miles Teller as the snake- like turncoat Peter and Jai Courtney as the vicious Dauntless officer Eric. Kate Winslet owns every scene she is in with her strong screen presence.
A new director Robert Schwentke (known for previous mainstream hits like "Flightplan" and "RED") took over from Neil Burger (who directed "Divergent"). Schwentke guides us through the criss-crossing web of events, building up effectively to the climactic five Faction simulation that Tris had to hurdle. The simulations in this film looked more sophisticated and complicated, with over-the-top visual effects, especially in that exciting Dauntless "sim" where Tris had to rescue her mom from a burning house hurtling in the air.
This film is rated PG, but there are pretty intense violent scenes, including point-blank shooting of defenseless people, and a character pointing a gun at his temple. There was also a scene which had the young kids around me uncomfortably covering their eyes showing prolonged kissing between the leads, with clothes being removed.
I think this film fully satisfies expectations for a second episode of a franchise. It was visually grand with mind-blowing special effects. It stands very well on its own, even if you have not yet seen the first film. It tells a complete story, with a defined resolution of events. It ends with a cliffhanger which makes you anticipate the next film. The last book in the series "Allegiant", in true Hollywood style, will again be split into two parts to make more money. Schwentke is already on board to direct Part 1, due out next year already. 8/10.
"Tweenie" dystopia copycat of Hunger Games/Battle Royale 2
turdbadge26 March 2015
Oh dear god why'd I go see this movie?! If I wanted Hunger Games: Catching Fire, I should've went to see Hunger Games: Catching Fire. Wait! No, I take that back. If I wanted Hunger Games, I should've watched Battle Royale 2.
Cause if I'm honest, this movie is a copycat of a copycat. Oh how I miss the good old days! The good old days where if you went to see a movie set in a dystopian future where a corrupt government put its citizenry in peril on a whim, it was rated R because it contained great special effects, gritty foul language laced dialogue, and contained adult themes. But this! Okay! I understand the concept of movie studios dumbing this type of film down so tweens can partake in something that makes them feel like they are cool, or makes them feel like their rebelling.
Even though they aren't really, they're just soaking up things that have been rehashed from what was cool 25+ years ago. Please! Tween society, realize that when everyone is a rebel, the only true rebellion is against rebellion itself!
Cause if I'm honest, this movie is a copycat of a copycat. Oh how I miss the good old days! The good old days where if you went to see a movie set in a dystopian future where a corrupt government put its citizenry in peril on a whim, it was rated R because it contained great special effects, gritty foul language laced dialogue, and contained adult themes. But this! Okay! I understand the concept of movie studios dumbing this type of film down so tweens can partake in something that makes them feel like they are cool, or makes them feel like their rebelling.
Even though they aren't really, they're just soaking up things that have been rehashed from what was cool 25+ years ago. Please! Tween society, realize that when everyone is a rebel, the only true rebellion is against rebellion itself!
ImproveGENT
ThomasDrufke21 March 2015
Setting your expectations low for a movie is always a good idea. That way you never come out disappointed. With Insurgent, I figured it was just the same film as Divergent, just rehashed. It's not exactly a fresh and bold new idea, but it did feel different than the first. And definitely better. With newcomers Octavia Spencer and Naomi Watts the film gets elevated by terrific performances across the board. The cast is great but the CGI doesn't look as fake and the story is less(ish) confusing than Divergent. I will say it didn't bother me at all later in the movie, but it was quite funny and awkward to see Ansel Elgort, Miles Teller, and Theo James all with Shailene Woodley on screen together, considering they have each been a film love interest.
The main problem with Divergent was the screenplay. I thought it was too confusing for someone who wasn't familiar with the book series. While Insurgent will be puzzling for newcomers, I felt less confused this time around than last. There's a lot going on. Whole lot of characters that fall in and out of the story without much to do at times, but the performances saved the film. I think if you try to forget about the unexplainable elements of the film your viewing experience is enhanced. For example, I don't remember too much about Tobias' back story or even the exact intentions of Jeanine, but I let the movie play out without complaining. Jai Courtney's character, though terminator like, was an improvement over the one-note character in Divergent. I also thought the chemistry between the leads of Miles Teller, Theo James, and Shailene Woodley were much better this time around. Woodley one again gives an emotionally powerful performance, even if not all of it is actually real, it felt legit. I keep talking about her ability to cry on screen but it's true, the woman can shed a tear.
I think one of the main problems with the film is the inconsistencies with some character decisions. I didn't read the books but I just became baffled with some of the directions that Miles Teller and Ansel Elgort's characters. There is too much back and forth for my liking. Kate Winslet and Naomi Watts both steal each of their respected scenes. And although for the former there isn't a whole lot to do, I enjoyed watching her character arc unfold. The ending is a big animal to tackle. And without spoilers I cant talk too much about it, but I will say I was pretty indifferent. I almost feel like they could end the franchise right there. But at the same time I guess there is more of this world to explore, no pun intended. So with a few unneeded characters and with plenty of confusing character decisions, Insurgent turns out to be an okay sci-fi. It's nowhere near as poor as the reviews and much better than the first, but there's still plenty to improve on for the next.
+Performances
+Watts & Winslet on screen together
+Intriguing ending
+Better CGI
-Similar to first
-Occasional unnecessary characters and plot decisions.
7.0/10
The main problem with Divergent was the screenplay. I thought it was too confusing for someone who wasn't familiar with the book series. While Insurgent will be puzzling for newcomers, I felt less confused this time around than last. There's a lot going on. Whole lot of characters that fall in and out of the story without much to do at times, but the performances saved the film. I think if you try to forget about the unexplainable elements of the film your viewing experience is enhanced. For example, I don't remember too much about Tobias' back story or even the exact intentions of Jeanine, but I let the movie play out without complaining. Jai Courtney's character, though terminator like, was an improvement over the one-note character in Divergent. I also thought the chemistry between the leads of Miles Teller, Theo James, and Shailene Woodley were much better this time around. Woodley one again gives an emotionally powerful performance, even if not all of it is actually real, it felt legit. I keep talking about her ability to cry on screen but it's true, the woman can shed a tear.
I think one of the main problems with the film is the inconsistencies with some character decisions. I didn't read the books but I just became baffled with some of the directions that Miles Teller and Ansel Elgort's characters. There is too much back and forth for my liking. Kate Winslet and Naomi Watts both steal each of their respected scenes. And although for the former there isn't a whole lot to do, I enjoyed watching her character arc unfold. The ending is a big animal to tackle. And without spoilers I cant talk too much about it, but I will say I was pretty indifferent. I almost feel like they could end the franchise right there. But at the same time I guess there is more of this world to explore, no pun intended. So with a few unneeded characters and with plenty of confusing character decisions, Insurgent turns out to be an okay sci-fi. It's nowhere near as poor as the reviews and much better than the first, but there's still plenty to improve on for the next.
+Performances
+Watts & Winslet on screen together
+Intriguing ending
+Better CGI
-Similar to first
-Occasional unnecessary characters and plot decisions.
7.0/10
Terribly Disappointing
michaeldfishel19 May 2015
Loved the first Divergent movie. Then read all the books and thought Neil Burger did a great job turning the first book into an accurate and entertaining film. I was so sad to know he was not directing Insurgent. And after seeing Insurgent, that sadness was justified.
Robert Schawkle or whatever his name is did an awful job making the 2nd book into a movie. The 2nd book was lamer than the first, but it had a much easier plot to deal with. This movie strayed so far from the story in the book, title should be Insurgent Undone.
They even had a bigger budget for this film, yet made it shorter in length, cramming scenes in with minimal creativity and almost zero character development. Almost everything that occurs is not true to the narrative in the book. Johanna appears to have no scars on her face and she's fat, wtf. The entire villain of Jeanine is tarnished by a completely different take on her motives. Book readers of this story should not watch the film nor appreciate its utter suckiness. Did the director even glance at the book? Did Veronica Roth really approve this movie? I am appalled?
Robert Schawkle or whatever his name is did an awful job making the 2nd book into a movie. The 2nd book was lamer than the first, but it had a much easier plot to deal with. This movie strayed so far from the story in the book, title should be Insurgent Undone.
They even had a bigger budget for this film, yet made it shorter in length, cramming scenes in with minimal creativity and almost zero character development. Almost everything that occurs is not true to the narrative in the book. Johanna appears to have no scars on her face and she's fat, wtf. The entire villain of Jeanine is tarnished by a completely different take on her motives. Book readers of this story should not watch the film nor appreciate its utter suckiness. Did the director even glance at the book? Did Veronica Roth really approve this movie? I am appalled?
One of those sequels on the same level with the original
bellino-angelo20147 February 2023
While I didn't loved DIVERGENT I still liked it for what it was, and since the cast members I like returned in this sequel I had to watch it as well and it was on par with the original.
It begins with Jeanine Matthews (Kate Winslet) that gives a speech declaring martial law and that the Divergents are the enemy, and after finding a box that only the Divergents can open she orders that all Divergents have to be hunted down. Tris (Shailene Woodley), her brother and Four (Theo James) are on the run until they meet Johanna Reyes (Octavia Spencer), leader of the pacifics that gives them shelter and Four will be reunited with his mother Evelyn (Naomi Watts) who has become the leader of the Factionless. Since Tris is the only one who can open that box she goes to Jeanine and will do some tests freeing all the captive people and stopping Jeanine's conspiracy forever.
In the first 30 minutes it looked very slow but after nearly an hour it improved. Lots of action scenes and the tense moments when Tris has to do the tests were a plus that compensated the waiting. The acting was decent just like in the original, with Kate WInslet having the lion's share as the villain (in the first one she appeared some moments) and the sets were very futuristic looking and original.
If you liked the original then you'll like this one as well, but as for the third one, I have heard mostly bad things and most of the cast members of the first two movies didn't returned, so I don't want to see it for cringing my way through. Still, these first two chapters are competently made and as for entertainment value, they serve their purpose well.
It begins with Jeanine Matthews (Kate Winslet) that gives a speech declaring martial law and that the Divergents are the enemy, and after finding a box that only the Divergents can open she orders that all Divergents have to be hunted down. Tris (Shailene Woodley), her brother and Four (Theo James) are on the run until they meet Johanna Reyes (Octavia Spencer), leader of the pacifics that gives them shelter and Four will be reunited with his mother Evelyn (Naomi Watts) who has become the leader of the Factionless. Since Tris is the only one who can open that box she goes to Jeanine and will do some tests freeing all the captive people and stopping Jeanine's conspiracy forever.
In the first 30 minutes it looked very slow but after nearly an hour it improved. Lots of action scenes and the tense moments when Tris has to do the tests were a plus that compensated the waiting. The acting was decent just like in the original, with Kate WInslet having the lion's share as the villain (in the first one she appeared some moments) and the sets were very futuristic looking and original.
If you liked the original then you'll like this one as well, but as for the third one, I have heard mostly bad things and most of the cast members of the first two movies didn't returned, so I don't want to see it for cringing my way through. Still, these first two chapters are competently made and as for entertainment value, they serve their purpose well.
basic problem with the premise
SnoopyStyle6 December 2015
Erudite leader Jeanine (Kate Winslet) has instituted martial law to hunt down the supposed Divergents. Her people recover a five-sided box that is the key to the struggle which only a Divergent can open. Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley) escapes the Abnegation massacre with Four (Theo James), Caleb (Ansel Elgort) and Peter (Miles Teller). They hide among the Amity until Dauntless attack. Peter returns to Dauntless and Caleb tries to return to Abnegation. Four reveals that he is Tobias Eaton, the son of Factionless leader Evelyn (Naomi Watts).
I still don't buy the central premise that people don't go outside the wall. I'm willing to put it aside but it still feels wrong. I keep wondering why they don't simply migrate outside the wall. Hiding out is a good option but going back is a horrible one. It makes it hard to connect to a story that feels so wrong. It may make more sense if they're stuck on an island or in a vast underground complex. A wall doesn't make it impenetrable unless it's built by Trump. The other central premise that society is divided seems too simplistic and unreal. It may work for a teen novel but I can't imagine people as these simplified cliques. It's more compelling for high school kids.
The set designs continues to be superior to others of its genre. Shailene Woodley definitely gives it her all. The actors are never the problem in this franchise. I can understand what the premise is suppose to be but I don't see how any of it is logical. After Tris is taken prisoner, the movie stops its forward momentum and it becomes one meaningless simulation after another. It's beautifully rendered but it doesn't have any real intensity. It takes awhile before the forward momentum returns. Despite the loopy story, Shailene maintains my rooting interest. There is a basic structural problem with this series. The movies make the best of the flaw material.
I still don't buy the central premise that people don't go outside the wall. I'm willing to put it aside but it still feels wrong. I keep wondering why they don't simply migrate outside the wall. Hiding out is a good option but going back is a horrible one. It makes it hard to connect to a story that feels so wrong. It may make more sense if they're stuck on an island or in a vast underground complex. A wall doesn't make it impenetrable unless it's built by Trump. The other central premise that society is divided seems too simplistic and unreal. It may work for a teen novel but I can't imagine people as these simplified cliques. It's more compelling for high school kids.
The set designs continues to be superior to others of its genre. Shailene Woodley definitely gives it her all. The actors are never the problem in this franchise. I can understand what the premise is suppose to be but I don't see how any of it is logical. After Tris is taken prisoner, the movie stops its forward momentum and it becomes one meaningless simulation after another. It's beautifully rendered but it doesn't have any real intensity. It takes awhile before the forward momentum returns. Despite the loopy story, Shailene maintains my rooting interest. There is a basic structural problem with this series. The movies make the best of the flaw material.
Homogenized science fiction for bored teenagers
moonspinner5521 December 2015
Nothing in "Insurgent" looks original; it's an expensively-produced scrapheap of not just clichés but scenes and dialogue from other movies. Everything has been programmed to appeal to as wide a teenage audience as possible, with multi-racial young actors so trendy-pretty they are practically embalmed. Adapted from the second book in author Veronica Roth's trilogy, this sequel to the 2014 film "Divergent" is sketchy on narrative and even sketchier on developing what plot there is and the characters it involves. Shailene Woodley (a Jennifer Lawrence hopeful) and Theo James return as Tris and Four, here running through post-apocalyptic Chicago to evade the Erudite army and its leader, Jeanine (played again by Kate Winslet, as if she were sucking on a lemon). This futuristic war for power is fraught with inanities, head-butting fight scenes, and a box of unknown origin--sort of a Pandora's Box of historical data--that can only be opened by a Divergent. These teen rebels seem inexhaustible, and are tanned, tattooed and groomed to a fare-thee-well; it seems almost a crime to expect them to act. Casting directors are still of the ancient mindset that prettier people on the screen (their lips as puffy as possible) will reel in the youngsters, not realizing that better scripts and more plausible rebels are enough to bring in not just the target audience but curious grown-ups as well. This computer-designed adventure is glossy and shiny and fake, but some viewers are hypnotized by that artificial sheen, conned into believing that what they've just witnessed is an experience, something of value. ** from ****
Barbie and Ken in Dystopia!
Coventry28 January 2019
Last week, my dear wife and I watched "Divergent", which was a predictable and daft but nevertheless endurable dystopian thriller targeted at teenage girls. My wife wanted to see "Insurgent" now, even though I tried to persuade her that it's never a good idea to watch a sequel in a series where the original is already just so-so. "Divergent" was predictable, which pretty much means that "Insurgent" is an open book entirely. Evidently heroine Tris and her lover boy Four are blamed for Evil Queen Kate Winslet's genocide scheme that went awry. Of course they will have to seek help from people they swore never to speak with ever again. And, unmistakably, they will have to reach out to the cowardly leaders of the other fractions and convince them to stand up against the megalomaniac Jeanine and her elite Erudite army. Will they succeed? Gee, what do you think?
Okay, maybe I shouldn't sound so arrogant. I'm a 37-year-old male who preferably watches mean-spirited horror movies and obscure cult cinema, so I'm not in the target audience group of Veronica Roth's books or these hi-tech film adaptations. Notwithstanding, the quality level of the screenplay for "Insurgent" forces me to think the producers and the director underestimate the intellect of their target audience. Even after the approximately 47th simulation sequence, the writers still think they can fool us into believing Tris' next ordeal is reality, for sure. These simulation sequences are utterly grotesque and preposterous, by the way. We're talking floating houses on fire and dead-mother holograms. And, seriously, what's with all the shattering glass and pulverizing decors? Is this supposed to be cool? Are we supposed to be impressed? All it does is establish that the responsibility of the special effects was in the hands of immature digital nerds. Shailene Woodley still doesn't look like a convincing and brave heroine, not even with her hair cut short, and particularly Theo James must have felt quite ripped off when he got hold of the script. In "Divergent" he was a tough and hunky rebel, but in "Insurgent" he is downgraded to Tris' docile and obedient sidekick. They are kind of like Barbie & Ken, in fact.
Okay, maybe I shouldn't sound so arrogant. I'm a 37-year-old male who preferably watches mean-spirited horror movies and obscure cult cinema, so I'm not in the target audience group of Veronica Roth's books or these hi-tech film adaptations. Notwithstanding, the quality level of the screenplay for "Insurgent" forces me to think the producers and the director underestimate the intellect of their target audience. Even after the approximately 47th simulation sequence, the writers still think they can fool us into believing Tris' next ordeal is reality, for sure. These simulation sequences are utterly grotesque and preposterous, by the way. We're talking floating houses on fire and dead-mother holograms. And, seriously, what's with all the shattering glass and pulverizing decors? Is this supposed to be cool? Are we supposed to be impressed? All it does is establish that the responsibility of the special effects was in the hands of immature digital nerds. Shailene Woodley still doesn't look like a convincing and brave heroine, not even with her hair cut short, and particularly Theo James must have felt quite ripped off when he got hold of the script. In "Divergent" he was a tough and hunky rebel, but in "Insurgent" he is downgraded to Tris' docile and obedient sidekick. They are kind of like Barbie & Ken, in fact.
A thrilling & action packed follow-up to Divergent.
Anurag-Shetty20 March 2015
Insurgent continues with the story of Tris(Shailene Woodley). Following the events of Divergent, Tris is on the run with Four(Theo James), Caleb(Ansel Elgort) & Peter(Miles Teller) from Jeanine(Kate Winslet), who is the twisted leader of the Erudite faction. Jeanine obtains a prophecy that can only be read by Divergents. Jeanine will stop at nothing to capture all Divergents & find out what the prophecy has to say. Now, it is up to Tris & Four to stop Jeanine & put an end to her reign of terror.
Insurgent is a brilliant movie. This film surpasses its predecessor in every way. The special effects are mind blowing. I loved the fact that the movie is in 3D. The 3D is totally worth it. This film had me on the edge of my seat throughout. Unless you have read the books, you really can't predict what's going to happen next. Shailene Woodley is excellent as Tris. Woodley portrays Tris' inner struggle with her emotions, flawlessly. Theo James is great as Four. Ansel Elgort is super as Caleb. Miles Teller is outstanding as Peter. I really wish Teller's character was given more screen time. Zoe Kravitz is impressive as Christina. Octavia Spencer is good as Johanna. Daniel Dae Kim is awesome as Jack Kang. Naomi Watts' talent is wasted in her miniature role as Evelyn. Mekhi Phifer is effective as Max. Jai Courtney is menacing as Eric. Kate Winslet is irresistibly evil as the antagonist, Jeanine. The supporting characters are awesome as well. Insurgent is a must watch for fans of Divergent. Can't wait for Allegiant Part 1 & Part 2.
Insurgent is a brilliant movie. This film surpasses its predecessor in every way. The special effects are mind blowing. I loved the fact that the movie is in 3D. The 3D is totally worth it. This film had me on the edge of my seat throughout. Unless you have read the books, you really can't predict what's going to happen next. Shailene Woodley is excellent as Tris. Woodley portrays Tris' inner struggle with her emotions, flawlessly. Theo James is great as Four. Ansel Elgort is super as Caleb. Miles Teller is outstanding as Peter. I really wish Teller's character was given more screen time. Zoe Kravitz is impressive as Christina. Octavia Spencer is good as Johanna. Daniel Dae Kim is awesome as Jack Kang. Naomi Watts' talent is wasted in her miniature role as Evelyn. Mekhi Phifer is effective as Max. Jai Courtney is menacing as Eric. Kate Winslet is irresistibly evil as the antagonist, Jeanine. The supporting characters are awesome as well. Insurgent is a must watch for fans of Divergent. Can't wait for Allegiant Part 1 & Part 2.
Fans of the first one will love this one, I thought this was much much better than Divergent.
cosmo_tiger3 April 2015
"It's time we fight back." After Tris (Woodlley) escapes Jeanine (Winslet) and her army of Erudite's she becomes a fugitive. Now forced into hiding Tris and the rest of the Dauntless faction try to start their lives all over. When people begin to die because of her Tris has to decide if its best to stay hidden or to find the truth. This is a movie I was not looking forward to seeing. I have stated many times that this is not a genre I am a fan of. I did admit that the last Hunger Games was fantastic and it made me want to watch the others again to catch up and pay attention this time. After seeing this movie I had the same feeling. This one was much better then Divergent, which is different as most of the middle movies in a series tend to be the weak ones. I can't fully describe why I liked this one so much, and it may have been my low expectations for it, but I was entertained and interested the entire time. I am now actually looking forward to the next one. Overall, fans of the first one will love this one, I thought this was much much better than Divergent. I surprisingly give this a B+.
Hope there'll be no "Resurgent" after this
f-rabit22 July 2015
The movie is very bad. fell asleep several times. I liked the first one; not one of the best ever, but it was fine to watch. This didn't capture my attention one bit. Didn't like the visual effects too, nor the atmosphere of the movie. The story is boring and some of the scenes are ludicrous. I didn't see it till the end, hence I don't know if the final suggest another sequel. Hope not. I don't know what's happening, but generally the sci-fi movies are getting worse. The plot, storyline, or whatever are close to nonsense or, at least, vague and superficial, and the action is all over the screen. I used to like watching "superman" or "spiderman", now: avengers, thor, ant-man, transformers are full of crap. Explosions over explosions, shitload of fights that makes me look somewhere else than the screen. Expecting "tomorrowland" now. Hope I don't get frustrated again.
I tried my best to like it.
mike_moor19 July 2015
I rather like watching sci-fi movies. This is the genre I prefer watching. I watched the first one and it was really bad. Since I like watching sci-fi movies I decided that I should give this movie series a second chance. Boy was I disappointed. The second one was just as bad as the first.
Really boring, predictable, bad acting, weak plot, etc. are all the tit bits you will find in this movie ... guaranteed to irritate when watching through it all. To say it was really, really bad is an understatement. It was so bad that I felt inspired to write this really bad review about it. A true shame. I'm sure it could have been much better.
Really boring, predictable, bad acting, weak plot, etc. are all the tit bits you will find in this movie ... guaranteed to irritate when watching through it all. To say it was really, really bad is an understatement. It was so bad that I felt inspired to write this really bad review about it. A true shame. I'm sure it could have been much better.
I wanted to like it, I really did
pedpal8214 July 2015
I'm a fan of sci-fi and fantasy. Its what I read and what I love to watch. This movie franchise took a great premise, swallowed it whole and then charged movie goers to look at the digested remains for 2 painful hours. Yeah, I'm comparing this film to fecal matter. It's harsh but fitting. This movie is so terrible that it inspired me to write my first review on IMDb. Which is saying something, being that I also saw After Earth and this is my 1st review.
The dialogue hurt my ears, Woodley and James acted as if acting as actors who had no idea what acting was, the action sequences were weak at best, and then they wrap it all up with a predictable safe ending.
Basically, if your IQ contains 3 digits, run from this movie. Simply Horrendous.
The dialogue hurt my ears, Woodley and James acted as if acting as actors who had no idea what acting was, the action sequences were weak at best, and then they wrap it all up with a predictable safe ending.
Basically, if your IQ contains 3 digits, run from this movie. Simply Horrendous.
Darker, action packed sequel that feels like a closer
FlorisV18 March 2015
This is not a disappointing sequel for me, I haven't read the books so I can judge the film on it's own. While the first movie needed to explain more things and spent a lot of time on what the Dauntless are about, this one shows some facets of other factions: Amity and (more interesting) Candor. Abnegation is virtually destroyed and Erudite is pretty much the enemy. I have always found this division between 5 factions what makes Divergent really interesting, besides the theme of not fitting in a system. Because those themes were already covered in the first part, most of the film shows either chasing, surrendering or attacking, but it does those things well. It's pretty much an action film and one that looks great.
Once more, the lead character, though a very good actress, is not very believable when she floors men twice her size in hand to hand combat. Cutting her hair short for a more boyish appearance (Tris looks very girlie and wide eyed) cannot change that. Fortunately she is not too much of a Mary-Sue and has to accept some losses and show vulnerability.
The movie clearly had a bigger budget and threw in a lot of neat special effects and spectacular sights. It was a pleasure to look at. I don't really care for fx that much but for a futuristic sci fi...design and visuals can be very important and they certainly didn't cut corners in that department.
The movie can be very dark, much more so than the first installment, and both innocents and antagonists get killed without mercy.
The ending of the film is however very positive, it feels almost like an end to the trilogy and it makes me curious what's next.
This film is getting bashed on a bit too much. It's not brilliant, but neither are the Hunger Games (which were hardly original, considering ). It's aimed at a teen audience. And yet, the political structure and the societal order are much more interesting in the Divergent series. I found this film entertaining from beginning to end and it had some nice twists in store.
Once more, the lead character, though a very good actress, is not very believable when she floors men twice her size in hand to hand combat. Cutting her hair short for a more boyish appearance (Tris looks very girlie and wide eyed) cannot change that. Fortunately she is not too much of a Mary-Sue and has to accept some losses and show vulnerability.
The movie clearly had a bigger budget and threw in a lot of neat special effects and spectacular sights. It was a pleasure to look at. I don't really care for fx that much but for a futuristic sci fi...design and visuals can be very important and they certainly didn't cut corners in that department.
The movie can be very dark, much more so than the first installment, and both innocents and antagonists get killed without mercy.
The ending of the film is however very positive, it feels almost like an end to the trilogy and it makes me curious what's next.
This film is getting bashed on a bit too much. It's not brilliant, but neither are the Hunger Games (which were hardly original, considering ). It's aimed at a teen audience. And yet, the political structure and the societal order are much more interesting in the Divergent series. I found this film entertaining from beginning to end and it had some nice twists in store.
Better, but dumber.
bryllefajardo20 March 2015
"Insurgent" continues shortly after the events of the first movie, having Jeanine finding a box that can only be opened by a Divergent and searching for all the Divergents (Which was previously shown in the trailers.) and also discovering that not all Divergents are equal as some Divergents are better than the others and obviously, the latter was Tris.
Honestly, I was surprised that I liked this better than the first since I knew that I had lower my expectations for it because I knew that the first one was horrible and also because I had no faith for the new director "Robert Schwentke" who's known for R.I.P.D which was absolutely awful. This movie had good moments, but the movie was mostly a bore. The cinematography was okay, acting was good but wasn't enough to feel attached to the characters. (I didn't feel like connecting with the protagonist.)
VERDICT: I'm not saying that I didn't like the movie, but it really could've been better. I didn't like it that MUCH because everything was too surreal. Everything was too coincidental.
Honestly, I was surprised that I liked this better than the first since I knew that I had lower my expectations for it because I knew that the first one was horrible and also because I had no faith for the new director "Robert Schwentke" who's known for R.I.P.D which was absolutely awful. This movie had good moments, but the movie was mostly a bore. The cinematography was okay, acting was good but wasn't enough to feel attached to the characters. (I didn't feel like connecting with the protagonist.)
VERDICT: I'm not saying that I didn't like the movie, but it really could've been better. I didn't like it that MUCH because everything was too surreal. Everything was too coincidental.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews