Insurgent

http://s3.amazonaws.com/bo-assets/production/tiny_mce_photos/26398/original/insurgent.png

I feel like I owe the filmmakers of the Divergent series an apology, because walking in to both of their installments, I had my expectations admittedly low. Last year's Divergent surprised me with its brutal action, entertaining atmosphere, and unexpectedly high quality. So, in terms of Divergent's follow up, was it really fair to me to judge it so harshly beforehand? Let's just tack that one to the societal disdain for young adult novel adaptations. But what movies like Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, and now Insurgent prove is that there's sometimes so much more to this genre than it's given credit for. 

Insurgent picks up with Tris Prior (Shailene Woodley), boyfriend Four (Theo James), brother Caleb (Ansel Elgort), and ally Peter (Miles Teller) hiding from the government following the deadly societal fallout at the end of Divergent. Together, this cast of characters (portrayed arguably by perhaps four of Holywood's most talented and promising young actors) work to evade the autocratic Jeanine Matthews (Kate Winslet) and recover from the loss of their friends and family. Meanwhile, Jeanine recruits those who have betrayed Tris and her fellow divergents to discover the hidden secrets within an coveted artifact that could change dystopian Chicago forever. 

Like Divergent, Insurgent has the potential to surprise you, especially if you continue to hold low expectations for films within this genre. Insurgent is action packed, with sequences that assist the film in boldly emerging from its category. I've only seen 3 other films this year, but the scene where Tris and her friends escape from their enemies with the help of a train is far and above the most intense scene of 2015 (that'll undoubtedly change once we start seeing some summer blockbusters, though). It then goes on to keep the pace it set with gripping moments of Tris in a simulator and continuous twists of character allegiances.

Coming off of more dramatic films like The Fault in Our Stars, Shailene Woodley proves to be quite a badass. Her character's skillset - both physical and intellectual - never fails to captivate or entertain. Tris is relentless, mature, compassionate, and strong. If I had a daughter, I'd much rather see her grow up to be like Tris than Lily James' Cinderella.

Now, it wouldn't be right to say that either Divergent or Insurgent is better than Harry Potter or The Hunger Games when they're all at their best, but Insurgent proves that even when films in this genre aren't perfect, they can still be pretty good. The score is fitting, the visuals are spectacular, the acting is first-rate, and its scope is surprisingly mature. In fact, Insurgent is an improvement on Divergent in many aspects, and so if you weren't expecting much following the 2014 film, you might have your mind changed after this movie. 

To be honest, I am a bit skeptical on how Allegiant will be able to tell an additional story (in two movies :/ ) since Insurgent ended so well. However, if these past these two films have taught me anything, it's not to underestimate the series' production staff. If the filmmakers can match and/or exceed the quality of what they've done so far, we could be in for quite a ride when it comes to the Divergent series' two-part finale. But let's see what happens.

Rating: 3.5/5

Cinderella

http://cdni.condenast.co.uk/810x540/a_c/cinderella_glamour_19nov15_pr_b_810x540.jpg

It's 2015. We don't need a new Cinderella movie. However, if Disney feels so inclined to give us one, I don't think it's too much to ask that we get a new Cinderella movie. But is this what we're given? Nope. The film, its characters, and its messages are just as animated as if they were taken straight out of a classic hand-drawn movie. And when I say animated here, I don't mean "lively" or "spirited," I mean "fake" and "cartoonish."

So why do I hate this movie so much? Well, I wouldn't say I hate it, per se. In terms of the film as a whole, it wasn't terrible - it just wasn't very good. But to make matters worse, there was plenty in this movie to not only dislike, but to loathe. Keeping in mind, once again, that it is the year 2015, the portrayal of Cinderella as a weak-willed and pathetic damsel is anti-feminist, extremely offensive, and possibly quite damaging to the young viewers in the audience. But hey, at least they got to enjoy Frozen Fever beforehand if they weren't standing in the popcorn line for too long.

In this movie, Disney had the chance to improve on the so-so reputation it has in regards to its messages towards young girls. In the past, it's been slammed for painting Belle as a victim of domestic abuse and Snow White and Sleeping Beauty as helpless women in comas who can only be awoken by the kiss of a man they barely know. A retelling of Cinderella was Disney's opportunity to follow the suit of strong females seen in Frozen and Tangled. Instead, they keep the orphaned girl exactly as she's always been, negatively socializing girls into believing the only time they should stand up to someone is when that person is threatening the impressive status of the man they have a crush on. Because, you know, be kind and have courage, and all that good stuff.

But let's take a step back from the harmful approach this movie has, and look at its general storytelling capabilities. Here, too, it's unsuccessful. It takes far too long to get into the grown Cinerella's storyline, and when she's an adult, she's surrounded by a ridiculous group of terribly directed actors. Say what you will of her character, but as Cinderella, Lily James is able to bring her dimension when the writing gives her none. Unfortunately, I can't say this for anyone else. Even two-time Oscar-winner Cate Blanchett, who plays the stepmother, doesn't add much to the movie, especially in the unnecessary and often torturous scenes with her wicked daughters. As the prince, Richard Madden disappoints, especially when compared to his previous fantasy period-piece work in "Game of Thrones."

But what about the artistic aspects, where the movie probably shined brightest? Again, you'd be wrong (unless you're talking about the film's score, which is completely magnificent). While some costumes and set pieces dazzle, others are so clunky they have the appearance of being designed by a high school prom committee. On top of that, the visual effects were laughable, given that it is, once again, 2015.

So in Cinderella, we're force-fed these dated and damaging messages for nearly two hours, whether it be through Cinderella's indifference towards her abuse or through the sight of her waistline shrinking as the Fairy Godmother prepares her for the ball. But even worse is the fact that the film seems to make zero attempts to be original, or that fact that Helena Bonham Carter's Godmother is essentially a cameo. Rats don't live for 18 years, smashing a human-sized pumpkin against a stump while you're inside leads to death, and no one looks under secret floorboards unless they're lead to believe there's something there. Cinderella may look good at times, and might not bore your brains out, but it's offensive, uneventful, and potentially detrimental to the future of some of its young viewers.

Rating: 2/5