The Giver... Book vs. Movie

I wanted to re-read "The Giver" before the film came out in order to compare the most recent book to film adaptation appropriately.

Didn't we all read "The Giver" in grade school? I'm pretty sure that I glossed over it and pretended that I actually read this because while going through it again recently it was like reading an entirely new book. I figure, I'll start with my thoughts on the book. PS did you know that this was a series?

THERE WILL BE SPOILERS FOR THE BOOK AND MOVIE SO BE WARNED!

"The Giver" BOOK

Jonas is a sweet, innocent twelve year old who takes the rules completely literal in everything he does. Actually, that is what all of the citizens in this town do. It's a perfected, stress-free, worry-free, pain-free, color-free, depth-free closed off environment without weather or hills that Jonas lives in. The book is told from third person but still describes Jonas' thoughts, I.E. "Jonas thought it was strange that The Giver was separated from the community". Annoying. Just write it in first person, Lois. Sheesh.

The Giver book cover. I don't get the trees?

Anyway, everyone in this community is assigned a "position" to be trained in when they reach Year Twelve. Some are teachers, some are doctors, some take care of the old, etc. Also, if any of the new babies that are born are "imperfect" as in too small or are a twin they are "released"... yeah like released from existing. (PS if it's a twin, the smaller twin gets the boot. Cruel.) This community feels like the best way for them to keep this perfect society is to have harsh rules that are heavily enforced with people who have no memories of the "real world" (our world, with pain and love and suffering) because the simple life creates a worry free balance. Everyone knows exactly what to expect from their lives and because they don't know any better they are satisfied with being part of the community and doing their jobs and never having to worry about anything.

Additional book cover. TAYLOR SWIFT Q&A! OMG!

So we follow Jonas, his family life is very normal. Then during this super important ceremony, Jonas is chosen as the new Receiver of Memories. He will be trained by The Giver to be his replacement. Jonas' job is a very important one where he alone holds all the memories from the past of the "real world" and when the community elders need advice on something they come to him for guidance. So basically he alone has to hold all of the suffering and pain and joy and color in the world because this community doesn't want any of that nonsense. Poor Jonas feels this burden and learns the truth about what the community does to "imperfect" new children as well as the old (Yeah, they kill them too). So Jonas makes a plan to run away with all these memories in his head because once he leaves, the memories will be released to everyone in the community. He and The Giver believe that this is the best way to bring about change and help the community to become a more normalized society that doesn't just want perfection but a place that will have real truth with it.

Jonas has to tell his sex dream to his family at breakfast. No I'm not kidding.

In the end Jonas runs away, they search for him, don't catch him and the ending is vague about what actually happens. Jonas kidnaps a small baby named Gabriel because Gabriel was to be released and Jonas didn't want to let him die because Gabriel was special. So they run away together. Jonas carries the 1 year old child with him. They almost died in the snow at the end, some say that they DID die and thats how the story ends. If you take it literally then Jonas and Gabriel make it to "Elsewhere" (Heaven?) and see warmth and music and love ahead. That's the end of the book.

The most frustrating part about reading this for me was that I cared more about what happened in the community after he left. Once all those memories returned what happened? Maybe it talks about it in the other books of this series or perhaps in the movie.

These kids are supposed to be 12 in the book...

"The Giver" MOVIE

I am not going to get into explaining the story again because it's the same as the book. My immediate thought when leaving this film was that I felt that it was lacking. The book works because it has an underlying depth to it but the movie is filled with very little below the surface. The stakes weren't high enough, I didn't really care that much if the communities got all their memories back. It would change their sameness and then everything would go back to how it was, which is what we know as present day. So why should I care whether Jonas passes the "Boundary of Memories" or whatever they call it?

The Giver Movie Poster. Bodiless floating heads.
Also, these kids are about 18 years old in the movie.

Why it works: Well it's more visually interesting than the book has the ability to be. We get to see the memories that Jonas receives and follow on his journey as he learns about war, love and being different. But therein lies the problem, WE already know about war, love and being different. None of this is news to us and there's not really much more to this movie than the memories. Jeff Bridges is great to watch and is the only character who isn't as bland as the community these people are forced to live in. Meryl Streep added some much needed conflict to the story but she could've been more aggressive about her actions. When they are hunting for Jonas in one scene she sees him on a screen but doesn't say anything to anyone. I couldn't understand. Was she just curious to see what he would do next or does she not have as much power as she claims to?

The way this film is shot gives a lot to the movie, actually. As Jonas learns about color the color slowly comes back to the movie and when Jonas leaves, the color disappears again. It was definitely one of the better aspects of this movie. As I mentioned, most of these characters are BOOOORING, it's such a big cast that I was expecting scenes with more tension and emotional depth, even in the lack of emotion that most of these people were feeling. It felt like the movie Lucy when she no longer felt emotions and her performance fell flat (to me) so it goes with this ENTIRE movie. Another good part was Fiona's character standing up for herself at the end saying that she did feel warmth and emotions that Jonas tried to share with her. Good for you, girlfriend.

Jeff Bridges gives this movie more emotion than anyone else does.

Since I've already segued into it anyway.... Why it doesn't work: Well the emotionless characters for one thing, it works in the book as it's written in third person and we feel like observers learning about this town. In the movie we are in Jonas' head (but not consistently) when it's necessary for a voiceover. This brings us directly into Jonas' world, which is great for a movie, but everything here is the same so it's pretty dull and uninteresting. Taylor Swift's character of Rosemary is in the movie for one scene that's about 2 minutes long. Whether you take that as a good thing or a bad thing is a personal choice. I felt that she was hyped way too much to be such a small part of this movie.

Also she has brown hair and isn't very recognizable but she does play piano...

Jeff Bridges is the only one with a few humorous lines thrown in for good measure but in the theater I saw this movie in, no one even laughed at all except for me giving a few sympathy snorts. A for effort. I just wanted more in the movie, it wasn't extreme enough to come close to The Hunger Games or Divergent, which it tried too hard to copy in many ways. Literally, there's a title card in the beginning of The Giver that say something like, "After the devastating and destructing Raid, the Communities were formed with sameness to bring peace and order to society." First of all, what the hell is "The Raid" because that sounds much more interesting than this entire movie's premise. Two how did you build a livable, sustainable, climate controlled environment above the clouds. Three, The Hunger Games called, they want their opening title card back. And Four, what am I supposed to take away from this movie? That the past is important and memories define us? Okay, well I already knew that and didn't need this movie to tell me.

Jonas tries to "force" memories into Fiona. It doesn't work literally or figuratively.

They attempted to boost the romance between Jonas and Fiona. It was awkward because she doesn't feel emotions but when he convinces her to stop taking her injections she is a better character and feels "love" for Jonas too. Jonas' friend Asher seems to come off as jealous but never does or says anything about it, maybe he's just a wuss. Or again, he's too bland to feel emotions. At least he has a redeemable quality at the end by letting Jonas and Gabriel escape and he lies to the Chief Elder. Wait, I thought he was bred not to lie, did he stop taking his injections too? This is never discussed. Maybe it's just that Jonas is impactful and changes people. This would a much more interesting story if it was more about these people's emotions trying to break out from being controlled. I'd rather watch that movie than this one about memories.

They end the movie somewhat vaguely like the book. It does show the community getting the memories and that's cool to see but Jonas' ending is even more strange in the film. In the end of the book it's likely that Jonas has died and thus releasing the memories back to the community. Then he sees the sled and the house and the music and he's dead, blah blah. In the movie, it shows the physical action of him passing the boundary shield (similar to the Other's fence against the smoke monster in Lost) and this shield is what holds in the memories, once Jonas passes it (as the Receiver of Memories) all the memories are released back to everyone in the communities (yes plural, there's a map that shows three separate communities). Then he sees the sled and the house and music. Maybe he still dies? I don't care enough to dwell on it.

Brenton Twaites was nice to look at though, so points there.

So overall, this book to movie adaptation is not bad. It is about 80% true to the book (no idea what scale that percentage comes from, I just picked a number) but adds more "sci-fi" elements likes drones and injections and hologram technologies that try to tell us that this is taking place in the future. The holograms were pretty lame for futuristic technology. They were more like Star Wars technology than Iron Man. Did I like the book? Sure, it wasn't bad. Did I like the movie? Not really, it wasn't that captivating for me. I couldn't relate to emotionless characters and therefore it didn't entice me to want to stick with this world. Luckily the movie is only about 90 minutes.

Did I like the book more or less after seeing the movie? Less. The book is better but not something that I want to go back and read again any time soon. There's not much that was left out and not much more depth to the story, which is something they should've added for a movie adaptation. I love me some Jeff Bridges and I really like all the actors in this movie but if the story had more to it, especially originality, than it probably would've gotten some better reviews.

See it at your own risk, might be more of a "wait for DVD" film though.