Turning on the news lately has been a depressing affair: riots near St. Louis, terrorists taking over Iraq, and tension in Ukraine ... There seems to be no end to the cruelty and suffering. The world of “The Giver,” however, is one in which the pain of the human experience is gone.
There’s no war or crime because mankind lives in peace. There’s no hunger because climate and population controls are in place. And there’s no unemployment or homelessness because everyone is given a job and a place. Even death is seen as simply “going elsewhere.”
It sounds ideal, doesn’t it?
Perhaps. But there’s also no choice, no love, and no color, as everyone sees in black and white. The movie even suggests there’s no sex. People wake up, take their injection, and then spend their day doing their assigned job and their evening exchanging pleasantries with their assigned family.
By presenting a world in which people have been reduced emotionless automatons ruled by an autocratic council, the makers of “The Giver,” a new film based on a 1993 children’s story by Lois Lowry, suggest pain is part of being human – that it comes hand in hand with joy, love, wonder, ecstasy, and hope.
It’s a good message, and a timely one, given everything that’s going on. I just wish it had come wrapped up in a better movie.
With the exception of one glaring lapse in logic, which I’ll discuss in a moment, there’s nothing really wrong with “The Giver.” The filmmakers did interesting work in creating a community that reflects both tranquility and menace: every day is beautiful, every home looks the same, and the mountaintop on which mankind now lives is surrounded by a sea of clouds. But drones hover everywhere, keeping an eye on the populace, and a soothing voice continually reminds citizens of the rules via intercom, including when to eat, when to go to bed, and that touching someone other than a family member is “impolite.”
The performances are good as well. Jeff Bridges continues to be fun to watch in everything he does. He brings a much-needed touch of humanity to the title role, and gives his all to every scene. Meryl Streep does a nice turn as the chief elder. Her performance is colorless by design, but she manages to give her character just enough villainy to seem like a viable threat. Finally, Brenton Thwaites, unknown to me, delivers a decent performance as Jonas, the central character of the story.
I also liked the direction by Philip Noyce (“Clear and Present Danger,” “The Bone Collector,” and “Salt”). It’s solid, if not flashy, and visually graceful.
But “The Giver” has a sheen of blandness. Certain scenes and exchanges between actors feel clumsy, and there are moments when the movie should be exciting or tense but isn’t. The movie isn’t “Twilight” bad, but needed polishing.
“The Giver” also could used a bigger dose of logic. One of the central conceits of the dystopian world the movie creates is the lack of history and memory. People simply know mankind was able to survive and rebuild after “the ruin.” Everything else about the past is a big, gaping blank. No one remembers weddings, the ocean, or the Vietnam War.
Well, almost no one. Each generation has a Receiver of Memory, someone who knows all of history and the human experience. This person passes down the memories to the next Receiver by pressing wrists, allowing them to experience the memories first hand. Here’s my question: If you want to create a society in which you eradicate memory, emotion, and feeling, why would you allow such a thing to take place? You’re only asking for trouble.
Jonas becomes a handful of trouble after he becomes the Receiver. He starts asking questions, skipping injections, and – gasp! – singing and dancing. Having never heard music or seen anyone express emotions, his family and friends think he’s nuts.
The ending of “The Giver” also relies on a goofy idea: If Jonas can cross a forbidden boundary beyond the compound, he will “release” mankind’s memories, allowing everyone to remember, and to see color, feel emotion, and experience pain. By stepping across a line, he can return the human experience to every man, woman, and child.
The movie doesn’t bother to explain how this will work, but, yeah, okay.
“The Giver” isn’t a bad movie, but it could’ve been better. That said, I believe it’ll play better at home than in a theater, so if what I’ve described intrigues you, watch it once it hits rental and streaming outlets. It’ll certainly beat the news.
Two-and-a-half stars out of four. Rated PG-13 for a mature thematic image and sci-fi action and violence.