The Divergent Series: Insurgent

Name: The Divergent Series: Insurgent
Genre: Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi, Thriller, Romance
Released: March 20, 2015
Duration: 119 min
Rating: 42
Cast: Ansel Elgort, Kate Winslet, Shailene Woodley, Theo James

2015

METASCORE

Mixed or average reviews based on 40 Critics

See All

USER SCORE

Mixed or average reviews based on 367 Ratings

See All

5.5

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5.5	Your Score
5.5	User Score Mixed or average reviews based on 367 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

The Divergent Series: Insurgent (Trailer 1)

Autoplay On Off

Movie Details & Credits

Lionsgate | Release Date: March 20, 2015

Starring: Ansel Elgort, Kate Winslet, Shailene Woodley, Theo James

Summary: Tris (Shailene Woodley) and Four (Theo James) are now fugitives on the run, hunted by Jeanine (Kate Winslet), the leader of the power-hungry Erudite elite. Racing against time, they must find out what Tris’s family sacrificed their lives to protect, and why the Erudite leaders will do anything to stop them. Haunted by her past choices butTris (Shailene Woodley) and Four (Theo James) are now fugitives on the run, hunted by Jeanine (Kate Winslet), the leader of the power-hungry Erudite elite. Racing against time, they must find out what Tris’s family sacrificed their lives to protect, and why the Erudite leaders will do anything to stop them. Haunted by her past choices but desperate to protect the ones she loves, Tris, with Four at her side, faces one impossible challenge after another as they unlock the truth about the past and ultimately the future of their world.… Expand

Director: Robert Schwentke

Genre(s): Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi, Thriller, Romance

Rating: PG-13

Runtime: 119 min

See All Details and Credits

Awards & Rankings

36	#36 Most Discussed Movie of 2015

Watch Now

Stream On

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

Chicago Sun-Times - Bill Zwecker

Mar 18, 2015

For those looking for non-stop action, pretty dazzling special effects and solid acting by the young protagonists, Insurgent will not disappoint. Read full review

Philadelphia Inquirer - Steven Rea

Mar 20, 2015

Watts' Evelyn is a tricky character - it should be entertaining having her around in the cloven-in-two-to-cash-in-at-the-box-office final installments. Read full review

Total Film - James Mottram

Mar 23, 2015

A competent rather than classic follow-up. If the action feels generic at times, the addition of Watts, more Winslet and the strength of Woodley are worth watching. Read full review

Variety - Peter Debruge

Mar 11, 2015

Considering that Insurgent is meant to represent the series’ great civil war, it all comes across feeling like a tempest in a teapot: a glorified rehash of what came before, garnished with the promise of what lies in store. Read full review

Miami Herald - Connie Ogle

Mar 19, 2015

Unfortunately, Insurgent can’t quite live up to its intriguing set up. Even if you’re curious about it, the movie is often plodding and frequently nonsensical, with action that never feels novel or exciting. Read full review

The Telegraph - Robbie Collin

Mar 12, 2015

It plays like a listless mash-up of every Young Adult franchise movie you’ve ever seen – domineering rulers, anguished, system-smashing teens, and all the purposeful striding through rubble you can handle. Read full review

St. Louis Post-Dispatch - Joe Williams

Mar 19, 2015

There is such a thing as an infinitely bad movie, and this is it. Read full review

SEE ALL 40 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

cloudman

Mar 20, 2015

much better screenplay for the movie than the book. Great special effects. I am not sure how the final movie Allegiant will end compared to the book. Good character acting. Worth a repeat viewing.

9 of 17 users found this helpful98

Jonno_scout

Mar 23, 2015

Better than twilight .

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

MonkiReviews

May 27, 2017

The best in the series, but still not great. In my opinion the acting improved and the story did also. The story is still filled with plot holes. Also, you have to watch the first to understand the story.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

AttentiveCritic

Apr 16, 2015

“The Divergent Series: Insurgent Review”

(Introduction) Insurgent is the next installment in the Divergent series which is another series comprised of young adult novels turned into movies. This particular installment changed directors and is directed by Robert Schwentke who's last“The Divergent Series: Insurgent Review”

(Introduction)

Insurgent is the next installment in the Divergent series which is another series comprised of young adult novels turned into movies. This particular installment changed directors and is directed by Robert Schwentke who's last film was R.I.P.D... yeah that's not a good thing. Last year's Divergent was bad. It did nothing to separate itself from another popular young adult series The Hunger Games and on top of that, the film ripped off The Hunger Games with a very similar rebellious female lead Beatrice “Tris” Prior played by Shailene Woodley. The movie suffered from lack of action, dull characters, and a plot that ultimately wasn't explained. In other words, if you didn't read the book, then the film didn't do much to persuade you to do so. So how does Insurgent stack up against its predecessor? Well I'll tell you now, it's a better movie but not by much.

(Presentation)

The presentation for Insurgent is just as boring and uninspired as the presentation for Detergent, erm, excuse me, Divergent was. Yeah Mr. Schwentke, it was a very good idea to have the “Insurgent” title plastered on screen while we watch a needlessly slow motion opening shot of Tris running through the woods. It was a good idea to have the movie start with an opening monologue by Kate Winslet's character, Jeanine Matthews. It was a good idea to just thrust the viewer into this story with absolutely no build up at all. So if you didn't watch the first movie, you'll have no idea what's going on. Not that it matters because what's going on isn't clear or interesting anyway so... well, it is what it is. Presentation's bad, period.

(Characters and Actors)

So just naming the important characters and actors, Shailene Woodley returns as Tris, Theo James returns as Four, Ansel Elgort returns as Tris's brother, Caleb, Miles Teller returns as Peter Hayes, and Kate Winslet returns as Jeanine Matthews. Some other characters return from the first movie with actors such as Zoe Kravitz and Jai Courtney but because they're given so little to do in the movie to the point of irrelevance, I'm not even going to mention them at all. A notable actress to mention is Naomi Watts whom plays Theo James's mother in the movie. Ultimately however and insultingly for a performer of her talent, her character is wasted in the movie, may as well have been cut entirely.

Performance wise, everyone in this movie besides Shailene Woodley looks bored in this especially Kate Winslet who gives a terrible performance. However, I'm not going to place the blame on Winslet because when you have bad material to work with on top of an mediocre to average director on the project, you're guaranteed to be bad. George Lucas's Star Wars prequels became proof of that. As another word for Shailene Woodley, she really showed her acting prowess in The Fault in Our Stars. That movie for me in regards to her skills as an actress was definitely needed considering the only two movies I saw her in prior to this film is Divergent and White Bird in a Blizzard, both of which are bad, the latter of which is terrible. In here, she gives an acceptable performance and unlike everyone else who appear as if they just showed up to receive a paycheck, Woodley does seem as if she's actually engaged in the scenes she's in but like I said with Dakota Johnson in Fifty Shades of Grey, she's not saving the story in this movie.

(Story)

The most important part of any movie, the story in Insurgent is ridiculously forgettable. This is one of those films where if the film has nothing to offer you as the viewer in regards to character development and cohesive story telling, then it manipulates its audience by chucking a bone at them, that bone being an action sequence. I'll just say it right now, the action in this movie doesn't offer anything that's already been seen before and like the majority of the movie, it's boring. From the train sequence which should've been cut down to the nighttime sequence, when they're being ambushed, it's all boring. The story in this movie is boring and not only is it boring, it's damn hard to follow. When I say that, I mean that this movie and the ultimate problem that I have with the Divergent series to begin with as someone who's never and will never read the novels, I still don't know what they're ultimately trying to achieve. You look at other young adult series like Harry Potter or The Hunger Games. It's very clear, crystal clear what those stories are about. Here, I'm lost as all hell.

Why separate this population into factions? Well to try and control society of course but to what purpose, why? Who's really pulling the strings? What's the true purpose of the factions? Why do these Dauntless jack***** run around randomly performing parkour? Why do these factions seem like a ripoff of the Harry Potter Houses? Why does Tris come off as a try hard Katniss persona? Why does this world have an uninspired dirty aesthetic look which also appears like a ripoff from The Hunger Games? These are all questions and down right issues that I had with the first film and unfortunately, they still apply here.

So from what I understand, the majority of this movie is about Kate Winslet trying to open this box or whatever the hell it is. Now this box will only open for a Divergent which again is someone who contains qualities representative of all the factions, Abnegation, Dauntless, um, Restless, Erudite, Great Value, whatever the hell you want to call them, it really doesn't matter. Now Kate Winslet can't just use any Divergent, this Divergent has to be one hundred percent pure the representative quality of all the factions. Okay movie, yall are just reaching into bs territory right now but I'm still with the movie. And obviously Tris is this pure Divergent and is the only person capable of unlocking this box or whatever it is, there's no spoiler there, it's only obvious. So my point is, the entire movie is about unlocking this thing which will obviously shed some great revelation. And that's the ultimate problem with the plot in this movie.

First of all, this movie is nearly an hour and fifty minutes going on two hours long. The movie bs you for a long time by throwing action sequence after action sequence at you and oh! Remember this character from the first movie?! Oh you mean the characters from the first movie who actually had a role to play in the plot like Zoe Kravitz's character or Jai Courtney's character? Or how about Ansel Elgort whom by the way like many other performers is completely wasted here. There's a scene in this movie which takes place just after the redundant train sequence in which Tris's brother tells both her and Theo Jame's Four, “you know what guys, I'm not cut out for this”. “All this running around and being a fugitive, the factionless, it's not for me”. “I'll tell you what, I'm going to betray you and go over to the dark side”. “At least then, I can take a shower and get some grub”. Obviously I summarized it in my own words but that's pretty much what they do with this guy and after watching Elgort's performance in The Fault in Our Stars, I wanted to see him have more of a dominant role in this movie. But he essentially plays a coward.

Another actor who's wasted in this is Miles Teller. The entire movie he plays an a-hole but then at the end of the movie, something happens with his character that made me go “What?” “That doesn't even make any sense, who wrote this?” All this crap and Teller you can tell doesn't even want to be in this movie. He looks so bored in this. The man just came off an Oscar nominated film Whiplash with J.K. Simmons. He doesn't want to do this ****. That's one of the biggest problems with this movie. Talent is just wasted. Character potential is just spilled from the script like a dirty bucket of water.

The big revelation getting back to it, isn't even satisfying. While it answers the question of what the purpose was in the existence of these factions which the first film didn't even explain, ultimately it just raises more questions. This is because director Robert Schwentke is directing the last book in this series which like damn Harry Potter, Twilight, The Hunger Games, and now this bs is split into two parts. Why do we have all these final installments in these young adult films being split into two films. Because these Hollywood producers and executives know that drones will fill the theater and double their income. With Harry Potter, it made sense. There was enough material in the last book to warrant a big two part finale for a franchise that had been around for ten years. Twilight and The Hunger Games though was not/is not warranted a split because it's not necessary. This is no different and it gets back to the point of this movie which feels shriveled in its story because it feels like they're holding back story elements to save for this two part finale. I mean god damn, is The Maze Runner going to do this too? And what's next after that, oh the Fifty Shades trilogy of course tsk...

Another thing that I've heard is that there are many differences between this film and the novel it's based off of, almost to the point where it's a completely different story. I can't warrant this to be true because I haven't read the book but as a film, Insurgent falls well, short. The only thing that I can say was kinda cool was the simulation sequences near the end with the city breaking apart and everything. It was some impressive CGI but it's nothing that was too mind blowing and when Shailene Woodley comes out and she has to randomly fight a clone of herself, that's when the movie lost me completely. Okay movie! I throw my hands up. I surrender, I throw in the towel because clearly this is not for me. Yall want to act like this story is deeper than what it truly is, I'll tell you what, you filmmakers better strip this and show it the way it is because for the people who actually can appreciate good storytelling, you're not fooling anyone with this. Yes, there may possibly be a good story here, but if it is, it's in the novels tucked away somewhere, it's definitely not in the movies if it even exists in the first place.

(Music)

The music, I can sum this up in one statement. Who gives a god damn? It's copy and paste action movie music. Most of the time you won't even notice it's there. I would advise to skip the soundtrack, cause it's not interesting, at all.

(Enjoyment and Verdict)

Well while a better film came out this time around, this is still a boring movie. The plot is still uninteresting and convoluted simply because it refuses to tell what the “point” to all this is. The characters are still uninteresting and having Shailene Woodley cut her hair doesn't make her more of a badass either if that's what they were going for, I don't know. The soundtrack is copy and paste and it's boring. There're too many action sequences in here and they're uninspired. I mean, this is targeted to a teenage audience, the movie doesn't have to be good at that point. Here's my recommendations, this isn't a terrible movie but I didn't really enjoy it and it's not good by any stretch of the imagination. If you read the book and you enjoy the series then by all means check this out but for everyone else, I recommend a rental at best. Otherwise, if you didn't care for the first movie or even if you skipped the first movie altogether, then skip this.

There's nothing special about this. The Divergent films still come off as if they're trying to be The Hunger Games and that's because the producers behind this want some of that Hunger Games money. Commendable I suppose but that castrates your product in quality if you're just trying to copy what something else has already done with little to no meaningful originality.

Pros

• Shailene Woodley attempts to give a decent performance
• CGI can be cool to look at...

Cons

• Characters are still boring and bland, cut and paste young adult novel caricatures
• Wasted, Wasted, Wasted talent from big name actors • Redundant and frequent action sequences • Boring soundtrack which bleeds like a backdrop into oblivion within the background • Still has yet to find an identity, you're not The Hunger Games, stop trying to be that • What is this series about again?… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

dyshpo

Mar 20, 2015

Waterlogged by slow pace and not much focus on Ideology of factions , barely touch amity or candor this time like first were it barely touched on all factions. Can we ever see a movie that gets involved in source material mythos. Weak CGI probably budgetary reasons so no concern . I wasWaterlogged by slow pace and not much focus on Ideology of factions , barely touch amity or candor this time like first were it barely touched on all factions. Can we ever see a movie that gets involved in source material mythos. Weak CGI probably budgetary reasons so no concern . I was hoping for more character development on secondary characters but NO.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

gozip666

Nov 7, 2015

33 - Equilibrium. 44 - this trash. Critics, what are you smoking?

About film - boring action, lots of plot holes and overall brain numbing script, setting that makes no sense.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

Broyax

Jan 24, 2017

La suite du premier étron, adapté rappelons-le, des livres pour ados qui ne volent pas haut : des factions d'amiches se chamaillent comme des trizos dans un monde post-apo bancal et aberrant.

La réalisation et les effets sont plutôt corrects (donc je mets 2 quand même) mais l'intrigue ouLa suite du premier étron, adapté rappelons-le, des livres pour ados qui ne volent pas haut : des factions d'amiches se chamaillent comme des trizos dans un monde post-apo bancal et aberrant.

La réalisation et les effets sont plutôt corrects (donc je mets 2 quand même) mais l'intrigue ou l'espèce d'intrigue de cette suite est d'une rare stupidité, l'action y est assez rare et le reste est meublé avec du blabla abrutissant.

En outre, l'actrice principale a une tronche de thon : ils ont bien essayé de l'arranger mais rien à faire avec ce regard de poisson mort. Cela dit, son con-pagnon dans l'aventure n'est pas mieux logé à cet égard... en tout cas, un couple de larves bien assorti.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

SEE ALL 97 REVIEWS