I can't provide much in the way of comparison between "The Giver" and the young adult novel it's based on--I haven't read the book since middle school. I remember liking it well enough, but I think I liked the movie more. Being "required reading" in school always necessitated stopping every chapter for discussions and analysis, which could wreak havoc on a book's pacing. The movie, unsaddled with this external handicap, is exciting throughout, keeping up a brisk pace that, if anything, is a little too fast.
The film establishes its world quickly and effectively, mostly through "showing" rather than "telling". Getting to observe the rules and customs of the emotionless society depicted is more interesting and makes a stronger impression than if all of that information had been relayed by voiceover. The unsubtle, yet effective, technique of having the opening act of the film be almost entirely black and white serves both the narrative and tone of the film, making for some powerful moments when color begins to be utilized.
One of the best things book to film (or television) adaptations can do is at times expand on what was in the book. Such expansion is done to good effect here. If I recall correctly, the book is entirely from the main character's viewpoint, and the reader is never privy to what is going on when he is not present. The film expands the scope a bit, giving us some scenes between Jeff Bridges and Meryl Streep that lend gravitas to the proceedings. Especially well done is the brief hint of a shared history between their characters. The audience is left to fill in the blanks and decide exactly what the hint means, and it adds deeper layers of resonance to the story. The climax of the film also benefits from adaptation expansion, creating a "ticking clock" scenario as the actions of the main character are intercut with one of his friends facing imminent peril.
While I found the film to be very fast paced and exciting, I would have preferred that if it had been allowed to breathe just a little bit more. I think that several months are supposed to have passed over the course of the film, but I never really got that impression. It was slightly jarring when I realized that what I had thought had been a matter of weeks had actually been much longer. A brief time passage montage could have solved this problem.
I also wish there had been a little more to the ending. While I know they were faithfully adapting the somewhat abrupt ending from the novel, I felt the film needed a little more. Especially since the adaptation expansion had allowed us to know some of the supporting characters in greater detail, I was disappointed that we didn't get much beyond their initial reactions to the events of the climax.
In spite of these few quibbles, I found "The Giver" to be a largely successful book to film adaptation. It created an interesting new world and was exciting from start to finish.
B+
"Being "required reading" in school always necessitated stopping every chapter for discussions and analysis, which could wreak havoc on a book's pacing." Brilliant observation. I wonder if that is one, among other reasons, that required reading was never quite as fun. I'll have to check out this movie sometime!
ReplyDeleteThanks, Beth! Another reason was probably just because it was "required" reading. I understand that such readings and discussions in school were in some ways necessary, but when I hear people say that they "don't read", I wonder how much school conditioned them to view reading as a "not fun" activity.
ReplyDelete