The Giver

After the Ruin, the Community was build as an utopia where everybody is the same, emotions are suppressed and memories of the past are restricted. When Jonas turns 18, he's selected to be the community's Receiver of Memories. His best friends Fiona and Asher also turn 18. He goes to train with The Giver (Jeff Bridges) to learn the memories of the past. Meryl Streep plays the Chief Elder. Katie Holmes and Alexander Skarsgård play Jonas' parents. The previous Receiver Rosemary (Taylor Swift) 10 years ago came to a tragic end.

The idea of colors and memories are interesting. I especially like the idea of memories which reminds me a little of 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind'. This is not nearly as artistic or compelling. There is just enough that one gets a small taste of something much better and what this could have been.

I also have questions about this world. This world feels incomplete like the author explained it in a paragraph and the reader fills in the gap. The movie just hasn't filled those gaps with enough precision. I do have to praise this franchise. It seems to be a little bit more ambitious than the others but I wouldn't say it's complete. Also it fails as a movie to be intense. The climax is there but without much excitement. The final scene is really just asking for a sequel which is probably not coming.

The acting is functional. Most of them are required to be distant and controlled. Jeff Bridges, Odeya Rush and Brenton Thwaites are the only ones required to act out emotions. Meryl Streep may actually be acting too much. I have to say that I like Katie Holmes acting removed which kind of fits her. Thwaites is asked to calibrate his acting and he does a reasonable job. Rush is pretty effective and quite touching. Jeff Bridges is doing basically the same note.

"I know there is something more, something that has been stolen." It is choosing day and Jonas (Thwaites) is told that he is to be a receiver of memories. He meets The Giver (Bridges) and is amazed at what he shows him. Jones learns quickly that the Utopia that everyone lives in is not as perfect as it seems. After experiencing color and emotions Jonas wants to show everyone what he knows. The Elders are not happy with what is going on and they do all they can to stop Jonas, but he will stop at nothing to make everyone remember. I had no idea what to expect from this movie at all. I never read the book and only caught glimpses of trailers. I expected another teenager-y save the world movie so I sat down with pretty low expectations. I have to say that I was very surprised at how much I liked this. The easiest way to describe this is a combination of Divergent and Pleasantville. When you watch you will see exactly what I mean (as long as you have seen both of those movies). This is a great family movie and my entire family loved it. It is rated PG- 13 and I think it is because of one small part but you will not have to have your hand on the pause or fast forward button if you are watching this with your family. Overall, this is just a good movie that the whole family will enjoy. I give this a B+.

Based on the 1993 novel of same name by Lois Lowry, 'The Giver' is a well-made film, that has dazzling visuals as well as soul. The only problem in this Social/Sci-Fi film, is its slow-pace, which needed some serious persuasion!

'The Giver' Synopsis: In a seemingly perfect community, without war, pain, suffering, differences or choice, a young boy is chosen to learn from an elderly man about the true pain and pleasure of the "real" world.

'The Giver' makes good use of its interesting premise, by translating it into a good effort cinematically. But, as mentioned before, the slow-paced narrative bores, at least in the first-hour. The story moves on a lazy tone & that definitely puts you off. The second-hour is engrossing & the culmination, also, is very engaging.

Michael Mitnick & Robert B. Weide's Adapted Screenplay takes its own time to catch momentum, but once it does, it arrests you with force. Phillip Noyce's Direction is fantastic. He has handled the entire film commendably. Cinematography is excellent. Editing is lazily done. Art Design & Visual Effects are flawless.

Performance-Wise: Jeff Bridges as The Giver, is restrained. Brenton Thwaites as Jonas/The Receiver, is earnest. Meryl Streep is masterful, in a negative role. Cameron Monaghan is impressive. Katie Holmes is alright.

On the whole, 'The Giver' isn't without its flaws, but it also has enough merit to earn itself a viewing.

If you think that the world that George Orwell created in 1984 was a rigid one they were positively hedonistic compared to the society shown in The Giver. Playing the title role is Jeff Bridges who is called that because he has a very special duty to be the one entrusted with the memories of the past. The ruling body of the society has to be able to refer to the past to be guided in making decisions. But we can't have everyone knowing about lest they long for the good things of the past. It's all been abolished the good and the bad, conformity and sameness is the order of things. Color is not even allowed everyone wears drab clothing like they were in prison. The family is abolished, kids are born and then assigned to nurturers, women particularly go into that occupation and it is an occupation like being a plumber.

A new group of young people are being given new assignments and young Brendon Thwaites sits eagerly awaiting his occupation. He gets the prize as he is chosen to be the Receiver of all the past knowledge from Bridges. His training is to telepathically connect with Bridges all the experiences of the past, the good and the bad.

The use of color in film is never thought of this day, it's simply assumed that films now will be photographed that way. But The Giver takes its place along side Schindler's List and Pleasantville in using color sparingly and to make a point. Color comes into Thwaites world as it has been in Bridges' and the equation of knowledge with color is a point well made.

When Thwaites decides that there's something more out there than what he's grown up with, society shakes. None other than chief elder Meryl Streep wants measures to be taken to stop Thwaites from questioning the order of things.

Thwaits, Streep, and Bridges head a cast that tells a thought provoking tale of curiosity and rebellion and curiosity in seeking something better always proceeds rebellion. The film ends abruptly and I suspect there's some box office soundings being taken to see if a sequel is to be made. I hope one is, but if it's not The Giver can certainly stand on its own.

I know, I know, that score makes you want to hate on me already. First, let me say that I have read the book and really enjoyed it. It was thought provoking, emotionally engaging, and intelligent. Second, while I enjoyed the book, I am not passionate about it like some people are. So I went into the movie with a completely open mind, just wanting to experience the movie.

First, the positives. Jeff Bridges and Meryl Streep are fantastic as expected. Both bring wonderful layers to their character. Also, the use of going from black and white to color was used real well to demonstrate what the characters see. The film looks good and is acted well.

Now my complaints. First of all, the setup of the supporting characters felt off to me. The society they live in have a certain set of rules that everyone follows because they were taught to their whole lives. But all the characters broke the rules multiple times in the beginning of the film. That takes you out of the overall feeling the movie is supposed to give you, the message it has to offer.

Next, while the book got you emotionally attached to Jonas and what is happening to him, the movie falls flat. Their are certain moments that have to have the audience fully involved emotionally, but just don't. That is a big negative unfortunately, because you want to care, but the film is too lazy setting you up for the emotional blow.

Finally, the pacing is way off. The middle part with Jonas coming to the realization of what is really going on, is rushed and he makes up his mind like that. That is the most important part of the movie, and sadly it is rushed. Then the movie slows down, and that leads to a VERY anti-climactic ending.

Overall, if you are a die hard fan of the book, then obviously you should see it. Who knows, I may be the only one who doesn't drink the coolade for this movie. But the tone and storytelling are to sloppy and the movie fails to get you emotionally attached. So the result is a mediocre film for me. I still recommend you see for yourself, but just ask yourself: Did I love the movie or did I want to love the movie because of the book?