Big Picture Big Sound

Allergic to "Allegiant"

For a while, you kind of had to feel bad for the "Divergent" movies. Based on the novels by Veronica Roth, they so desperately wanted to create their own world and spawn their own distinct franchise. Unfortunately, for the film adaptations, the shadow of "The Hunger Games" series looms heavily over these films.

But, the "Divergent" films have never really been good and the latest installment, the clunky titled "The Divergent Series: Allegiant - Part 1" is no different. As it goes, the final book of Roth's trilogy must account for two movies. This money-making tactic was the downfall of "The Hunger Games".

The inherent problem with the "Divergent" movies is not how derivative they are but that they are also uninteresting. Everything in these movies appears to be so dire and life-or-death and yet the movies come across as static. Everyone stands around dressed in black with a sullen look on their face; it looks like we are attending a post-apocalyptic funeral. "The Hunger Games" are a picnic at the Magic Kingdom, comparatively.

Shailene Woodley returns as Tris, the series' rebellious heroine. If you've been keeping up, people of the "Divergent" world are divided into factions. Tris never fit the description of any of the factions, which is what made her "divergent". Coming off the last film, the factions have dissipated, leaving Chicago in social disarray. The city is crumbling and chaos reigns throughout.

Some are trying to restore order to factionless Chicago, including Evelyn (Naomi Watts), the mother of Tris' boyfriend, Four (Theo James). With Jeanine gone (played previously by Kate Winslet, whose icy presence was a highlight of those films), Evelyn decides to start killing those who served Jeanine.

Meanwhile, Tris, Four, Caleb (Tris' brother played by Ansel Elgort), Peter (Miles Teller) and a few others attempt to escape fallen Chicago and see the world on the outside. They get caught up with David (Jeff Daniels), who has his own agenda outside of the wall that surrounds Chicago.

I know what you're thinking. Naomi Watts? Jeff Daniels? Previously, Kate Winslet? How do these films attract such fine actors. A franchise paycheck can be persuasive but these movies don't deserve the caliber of talent that they get.

Even the younger cast has previously shown they are better than the material this series offers. Woodley, in particular, seems ready to move on past Tris. The final "Hunger Games" films showed Jennifer Lawrence had outgrown them and the same has happens in "Divergent" with Woodley. These actresses have done far more interesting work in between their franchise films and will continue to capture our attention long after.

We are told so much is at stake in "Allegiant" but as the film plods along for just over two hours. It's never entirely clear what anyone's motivations are, which makes it difficult for the audience to become involved. A film, especially a franchise, should be entertaining and grasp us. These movies must be endured.

Director Robert Schwentke, who directed "Insurgent" but isn't directing the final film, has a vision of dystopian Chicago but this is the first time a movie in this series hasn't even looked techincally proficient. The green screen acting is embarassingly obvious throughout. Schwentke tries to liven things up with multiple camera angles but some are just too awkward, including a low angle shot of Four walking in a crimson rain storm. It's all so heavy-handed.

A great film series is one that has a lasting power, one we will be talking about for time to come. "Divergent" failed to gain any momentum in that direction and once the credits roll on the final film, we will pat ourselves on the back for surviving them this long.