Finished May 2019

The Sad Story of The Divergent Series

How an initially promising franchise of films imploded from the inside out

By Zac Langridge

Chapter Six: Reflection/Who’s to Blame?

As of writing this chapter, it’s been over five years since the release of the original Divergent and over three years since Allegiant’s failure. Now it’s time to reflect. The previous five chapters have pretty much summarized just what happened to the series; how an initially intriguing franchise crashed and burned due to many circumstances that ultimately set its penultimate installment to fail from the get-go.
And now it’s time for the more unpleasant side of things. It’s time to start pointing fingers.
The YA fatigue was pretty much uncontrollable, and no-one could’ve realistically prevented it from happening. But all the same, there were many fatal mistakes made from many people involved that ultimately helped doom the series. If said-mistakes had been avoided, then the eventual mess that the Divergent franchise found itself in could’ve also been avoided. Essentially, we need to nail down who’s to blame for the failure of The Divergent Series, and what future filmmakers/studios can learn from their missteps.

The invisible force in suits...

Truthfully there are multiple culprits, the first of which being the studio that distributed the films: Lionsgate.
The fashion in which Lionsgate and its underlier Summit Entertainment handled the series, frankly smacks of both arrogance and cockiness. It’s perfectly understandable to adapt a series of books to capitalize on a trend. Massive franchises are after all the bread-and-butter of Hollywood currently, and Lionsgate didn’t want to be left behind with no other tentpole films to attract big bucks that they’d experienced previously. However they handled it with such carelessness. It’s quite amazing to me that their film chiefs Rob Friedman and Patrick Wachsberger made the decision to split Allegiant into two parts directly after the release of the first film, without waiting to see if the second film grossed any better (as it was projected to). And even when it’s opening weekend was lower than expected they still decided to press on. There was no reason to split the final installment up other than money, and the fact that Lionsgate was (at the time) the only other studio besides Warner Bros. that had attempted the two-part maneuver before, made it really come off to onlookers as a greedy move on their part.
And then there’s the fact that the studio insisted on a one-movie-a-year schedule, effectively putting the franchise’s production team on a consistent scramble to get the movies finished in time. Once Divergent was out the door, there was no breathing room; a follow-up needed to be made within a year. After that, another, and then another again. An insider reported that “to make their date, they were just racing forward (....) The whole company is much more interested in delivering product than maintaining quality control (....) the whole thing is just, ‘Move it forward, move it forward, move it forward.’” It’s understandable that the studio would want to get a film out early, so that audience hype doesn’t dwindle, but surely it’s not such a bad idea to give the filmmakers at least 6 months of extra production. Otherwise, far less people will pay for tickets if the film turns out to be a rushed, poorly-received, corporate product.
And after the third film flopped, they decided to keep the TV movie plans hidden from the cast members. As a result, none of them knew what was going on, and the main star of the franchise found out about it when she was getting off a freaking plane! The lack of effort and respect that Lionsgate had for their series is astonishing to me, and it ended up utterly embarrassing them by exposing the studio as an assembly-line production that stifled creativity for the sake of making money, and forcing them to cancel the fourth movie in a series that only had one installment left to go. And with recent films of theirs like Power Rangers (2017) and Robin Hood (2018) also bombing and failing to start franchises, plus the tiny fact that the company's stock has fallen a whopping 44% in the last year alone, it only goes to prove how out of touch Lionsgate is when it comes to the shifting tides of mainstream Hollywood.

The exhausted artist...

The next culprit that could be blamed are the actual filmmakers themselves.
It’s very easy for people - fans especially - to place the blame on Insurgent and Allegiant director Robert Schwentke, as it was his flawed newer approach to the sequels that threw many people off. Regardless of what some may feel about the first film, director Neil Burger clearly put his soul into it, going so far as to shut down major streets in Chicago to film the movie, not to mention re-adding iconic scenes from the book that had initially been removed. Burger displayed a sense of pride in his film, as well as a level of passion/understanding for the fanbase - something which cannot be said for Schwentke. Unlike his predecessor, Schwentke rarely takes interviews and doesn’t talk much about the Divergent films, only occasionally appearing publicly to promote his work. It’s been a genuine struggle to actually find interviews of him where he talks about the series, and only recently has far more material surfaced. With all due respect to Schwentke, he has admitted that he doesn’t like being in the public eye (which I can absolutely understand), but that doesn’t change the fact that it just feels as though he signed onto the series to experiment and add a new genre to his catalogue, in contrast to Burger whom I feel actually was passionate about the books.
Even so, I don’t feel as though he’s entirely responsible for the series’ shortcomings, and it’s rather unfair to lay it all on him. Most of Insurgent’s flaws originated from its script, not its direction. Schwentke himself was not responsible for the stilted dialogue, plot-holes and degrading portrayal of secondary characters in that film - however he was responsible for some admittedly beautiful visuals, well executed action scenes, as well as Shailene Woodley’s best performance in the series by far. As for Allegiant, he was clearly burnt out and weighed down by Lionsgate’s impossible schedule, and apparently no longer had the energy in him to get out a decent film. And for all Allegiant’s flaws, he was still responsible for its stunning design and visuals. He also made the excellent decision to hire Joseph Trapanese as the new composer for the series, which resulted in phenomenal musical scores for both sequels.
Even so, it was his abundant focus on fancy visuals and action over the original themes and characters (integral to the books and first film), as well as his disregard for Burger’s original vision which angered and off-put the fanbase. It seemed as though he was far more passionate about creating a futuristic world than faithfully adapting from the novels, which translated into what the screenwriters wrote, regarding their deviations from the novels in terms of story and character.

However….

Someone higher up allowed and apparently encouraged Schwentke to make the changes that he did. And that all can be placed on the producers for The Divergent Series: Douglas Wick and Lucy Fisher.

The tragic culprits...

I would like to be clear here when I say I truly believe that Wick and Fisher had good intentions from the very beginning. As I’ve described previously, these two were clearly incredibly passionate about Veronica Roth’s books, and had enormous respect for the source material and the author’s vision. They’d made it clear that they were making the films for the fans, whom they clearly had an understanding with (like Neil Burger did). And they’d both mentioned numerous times in interviews that if the fans remained happy and satisfied, then the series should be a success, as the fans are the core audience that will actively pay to see the movies over critics and general audiences. By all means, I truly feel that Wick and Fisher were (and still are) very caring and wonderful people who wanted to make the series the best they could.
Unfortunately, despite their efforts, this didn’t happen. The series declined in quality rapidly, and I feel as though they both are largely to blame. The two producers both seemed to really like Schwentke’s special effects-heavy vision for the sequels, and they cite it as one of the main reasons they hired him in the first place. Instead of requesting him to stick to the template previously established in the first film, they granted him free creative control to expand and re-imagine Burger’s original vision. They too, working with author Veronica Roth, also had the opportunity to course-correct after Insurgent proved divisive with fans and critics. Instead of doing so, they doubled down, which only further alienated the fans.
I also can’t fathom why Wick and Fisher would allow the screenwriters to divert from the original plot of the books so severely. They clearly have a lot of respect for the source material, so I cannot wrap my head around how they were okay with so many essential character elements being basically disregarded in the sequels. A great example of this would be how Four’s fear of heights completely disappears in the Allegiant film, despite him being shown in locations very high off the ground, and despite how this fear is still so very prominent in the original book. Why would the two producers let the filmmakers actively do this? Did they not understand that this apparent disregard for the source material would anger the handcore fans? It certainly seems as though they got carried away as they got further into the series, and lost sight of what really mattered. As if they assumed that since the first film had been a success, they didn’t need to put the same level of attention-to-detail in the others. I can’t be sure, but if this is the case, they were mistaken.
And the truly gut-wrenching thing, is that Wick and Fisher’s unintentional betrayal of the fanbase was what contributed to the ultimate failure of the series. It’s such a difficult thing to stomach because the producers clearly didn’t mean for this to happen, and they obviously put their blood, sweat and tears into the films. One can almost imagine their devastation when they finally found out that there would be no big finale, that the ending would have to be cancelled entirely. I have nothing but sympathy for them, and just imagining how they would’ve reacted when they found out about Ascendant’s cancellation is quite heartbreaking on its own.

Please note that I’m not trying to personally attack or belittle any of these people I’ve just mentioned. I do, however, feel the need to point out the mistakes they made in the making of the series, so we can understand some of the core elements as to where the Divergent films went wrong.

Overall here are the main mistakes The Divergent Series made:

• Splitting the final film into two parts; it was done purely for financial gain, and onlookers knew it.
• Diverting from the source material too much; never a good plan, as it alienates the fanbase and turns supporters against the brand.
• Abandoning the original vision for the sake of visual panache; it felt disrespectful towards the first film and completely turned attention away from the series’ soul.
• Really poor timing; the YA craze had faded by the time the third film came around, and no-one cared anymore.
• YA oversaturation; contributed to the point above.
• Rushing the films to hit release dates; quality is more important than quantity….unless your Lionsgate, of course.

James and Woodley in a still from the original Divergent

As of May 2019, it’s safe to say that The Divergent Series is officially dead, and so is the YA post-apocalyptic genre, with much of our current entertainment saturated by superhero franchises in the likes of Marvel and DC.
The final YA franchise to close its doors was Fox’s The Maze Runner, which finished in early 2018 with the release of The Death Cure. Unlike The Divergent Series, the filmmakers made a smart decision and decided not to split the final film into two parts. The final film was also delayed for about two years, due to its star Dylan O’Brien having to recover from a horrific onset accident during shooting. As awful as it sounds, this delay from the 2016 release to a 2018 release was actually somewhat of a good thing, as it ended up saving the movie in my opinion. Because in 2016, a year where audiences were fed up with those sorts of films, I feel The Death Cure might have easily been a flop too. Fortunately, the two year hiatus allowed fatigued audiences a break, and the final Maze Runner film was a box-office success, albeit to mixed critical reviews.

Ever since then, the YA post-apocalyptic genre hasn’t resurfaced and the obsession Hollywood had with those sorts of films, plus the act of splitting a finale into two parts, are practically extinct.
Thank goodness they learned from Divergent!

THE END

Finished May 2019

The Sad Story of The Divergent Series

How an initially promising franchise of films imploded from the inside out

By Zac Langridge

Chapter Five: How to Kill a Franchise

The Divergent Series: Allegiant (again, to use its full title) was released on March the 18th, 2016 in the US and numerous other countries worldwide. For some reason, the release date was delayed in my home-country of New Zealand, as well as Australia, where it was released a month later. It was released head-to-head with Disney’s Zootopia, and mere weeks before the gargantuan premier of DC’s Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice. Clearly Lionsgate was still confident in their brand. They desperately needed the movie to be a hit, as the first months of 2016 were pretty desperate and embarrassing for the company. Almost all of their major tentpole films had bombed hard, losing huge amounts of money, and many of them had been received disastrously by audiences and critics. These films included Gods of Egypt, Norm of the North, Dirty Grandpa, The Choice and The Perfect Match.

If the reviews for Divergent had been mixed and the reviews for Insurgent had been negative, then the reviews for Allegiant were most certainly along the lines of scathing. The film was near-universally panned by critics, with the film currently sitting at a dismal Rotten Tomatoes score of 11%. While there were a few mildly positive notices, even fans of the series appeared to resign to the fact that a Divergent movie was now officially considered terrible. The unnecessary splitting of the final installment into two films was condemned, and seen as a sure sign of the cynicism that has consistently plagued Hollywood throughout its history. The film’s uninspired and lackluster direction was also slammed by reviewers, as the exhaustion/desperation of the director/screenwriters respectfully became ever so apparent onscreen. Even the cast's performances - which were initially considered to be the highlight of the series at a point - were now subject to merciless mauling by unimpressed audiences that had, by all accounts, finally decided to call it quits on the endless stream of mediocre YA adaptations. The audiences had simply had enough, as had the critics, and even hardcore fans were beginning to check out too.
And with this final round of poor reviews to add to the already long list of bad decisions and circumstances that resulted in Allegiant being put in the difficult position that it was, it all culminated in the film’s box-office. The film opened to a gross of $29.1 million in the US, almost 44% down from the $52.2 million opening that Insurgent experienced. The film’s total opening gross was $89 million, only making $54 million overseas. It was overrun by Zootopia, falling into second place on the box-office lists, and after it was all over it eventually managed to release a worldwide total of $179 million. With the film’s reported budget being $110 million, Allegiant had - to the surprise of some and no-one at the same time - become a box-office flop. To make matters even worse, it’s failure resulted in Lionsgate’s stock plummeting at least 3% after it’s release, something the struggling studio certainly didn’t need at the time. It wouldn’t have been so bad if all of Lionsgate’s previous attempts at creating franchises over the previous year hadn’t been disasters too. Yet here was the studio, hungry for franchises, but starved of results entirely. In essence, Allegiant was a disaster that dealt Lionsgate a serious blow.

Stars Woodley and James promote Allegiant at an event

Things moved slowly and painfully for The Divergent Series after that.
Less than a month after the film’s release, The Hollywood Reporter announced that the budget of the final movie, Ascendant had been slashed. This was clearly down to Lionsgate hesitating whether it was worth committing a huge budget to a film that may already be an even bigger dud than what they’d experienced already. Interestingly, the film’s original release date of March 2017 was pushed back to June, reportedly to accommodate Lionsgate’s Power Rangers reboot (or perhaps to give newcomer Lee Toland Krieger more time to prep the film).
And then the big news arrived in July: Ascendant wouldn’t be made into a theatrical film at all! It would instead be released as a television movie which would result as a springboard for a reported Divergent TV series that would act as a spinoff. According to Variety, “Lionsgate’s television group will handle production (....) The idea is to finalize the storylines involving the current cast and to introduce a new cast, who would then continue the series on either a traditional or streaming network.” It was huge news that outraged the core fanbase and surprised many onlookers - including the main cast themselves! Shailene Woodley herself was reportedly getting off a plane when she was told what was going on. Miles Teller also responded that the news “caught us all by surprise.” When other cast members such as Ansel Elgort, Octavia Spencer, Theo James and Jonny Weston came out stating that they also didn’t know what was going on, it became very clear that Lionsgate had little intentions of dedicating huge effort towards the new direction the franchise was apparently heading in. “At this point, it's a different set of circumstances (….) We'll see. I honestly haven't talked to anybody,” elaborated Teller at the time.

Slowly, as the months went by, the cast members began to announce that they wouldn’t be returning. Fans of the franchise (that had still stuck around) were losing hope fast. An optimistic report in August announced that the storyline of Ascendant would play out across ten to thirteen episodes, but it was immediately followed by Woodley claiming a month later that “Out of respect to the studio and everyone involved (….) I’m not necessarily interested in doing a television show.”
As time ticked by, the final installment of the franchise appeared to pass out of people’s minds. Finally - a year later - it was announced that the Lionsgate-owned TV network, Starz, would be bringing the finale to life. And then another year promptly passed with absolutely no news surrounding the film at all.
Finally, in December of 2018 - over two years after the film’s original planned release date - news broke that Starz had no further plans to release Ascendant as a TV movie, or a series.

And that was that! The Divergent franchise had officially had its plug silently, and unceremoniously pulled.

To be concluded...

Finished May 2019

The Sad Story of The Divergent Series

How an initially promising franchise of films imploded from the inside out

By Zac Langridge

Chapter 4: Buildup to Failure

From May 2015 to March 2016, numerous key factors would build up like an army of archers, bows drawn and pointing towards Allegiant’s release. These factors are long and complicated, but they’re key to understanding just what caused the spectacular collapse of Divergent.

Interestingly, one of the major factors took place, not in the year that followed Insurgent’s release, but around the time Divergent was still filming. Veronica Roth released Allegiant, the final novel in her trilogy in October of 2013. It was positively received by book critics, but the response from the fans was another story.
After the book was released, angry tweets and messages began appearing online directed towards Veronica Roth as detailed in a famous article. Fans of the trilogy who were eagerly awaiting to see how the story would end, were outraged and upset at many of the revelations and twists that took place in the book. Among several of those, was the idea that the Allegiant novel renders the events of the previous two books largely meaningless. The book's slower pace and largely different tone also threw readers off guard, in a very similar fashion to the reaction to Suzanne Collins’ Mockingjay. And above all, most upset reactions were initiated by a very, very divisive shock ending which I won’t spoil.
The result of Allegiant’s reaction was that it left a bad taste in the mouths of many diehard fans, to the point where some expressed a sense of betrayal by the author. A group of them even expressed desire to boycott the movies, especially Allegiant. Many didn’t want to relive the strong sense of emotion they felt after reading the book, while others wanted to demonstrate their anger towards Roth by refusing to pay and see the film. Whether the boycott was a real thing or not is unclear, but one can’t help but wonder if the poor fan reaction to the novel helped slam the lid shut on the series’ coffin.

Found this online - thought it was funny (I actually liked the
Allegiant book, though).

In September of 2015, the second Maze Runner film, The Scorch Trials, dropped in cinemas. And it was around this time that the fatigue that had been swirling around YA adaptations for some time, began to settle in. The second film in Fox’s franchise grossed less than the first installment, with a worldwide total of $81 million in comparison to the $102 million that the first film grossed. And although fans were generally satisfied, critics who initially praised the first film, gave its follow-up far more mixed reviews as well. It certainly seemed as though YA movies were everywhere in the mid-2010s - some good, some bad. Some mediocre. But there was most certainly an oversaturation that was being felt sorely by audiences. Declining grosses were becoming apparent with most franchises, and it wouldn’t only affect Divergent and The Maze Runner.
As 2015 drew to a close, Mockingjay - Part 2 was released, drawing The Hunger Games films to a breathtaking success of a closure. Except….it wasn’t a breathtaking success. The final film underperformed at the box office, making a mildly disappointing $101 million in comparison to the $121 million of the previous film’s grosses. The downward trajectory of grosses was now even more apparent than ever, and while Mockingjay - Part 2 received more favourable reviews than Part 1, it certainly seemed as though the underwhelming reaction to the previous movie caused by the two-part splitting of the story, had hurt its follow-up. It appeared as though the final release of The Hunger Games series and the closure of the year 2015 signified the death of the YA film genre. With an oversaturation of franchises that many were deeming too similar to Hunger Games, or too mediocre in comparison, it certainly appeared as though the initially fresh appeal of sci-fi YA adaptations had worn off. And if the final film of The Hunger Games - a franchise that many considered to be the gold standard of such a genre - could be affected by the fatigue, then there was surely no hope for the other contenders.
This was pretty much confirmed by the 2016 release of Columbia Pictures’ The Fifth Wave. The film was expected to be the kickstarter for a new franchise based off of Rick Yancey’s trilogy of novels, however it was largely panned by critics and tanked at the box-office. Any hopes of a sequel were obliterated. If The Fifth Wave had come out earlier when audiences were hungrier for young-adult sci-fi films, would the film have been a success regardless of its critical mauling? It’s hard to tell, however it certainly seemed as though the fan-base had less of an impact than it did for the other three franchises. Regardless, the failure of the movie certainly would spell the end of the dystopian YA genre in movies, and would be a bad omen for the fast-approaching release of Allegiant.

These franchises were only three of many YA franchises in
the mid 2010s! Fatigue was inevitable.

A mere two months after the release of the second film, production moved back to Atlanta to start filming for Allegiant, with Robert Schwentke once again at the helm. Pre-production had been completed simultaneously during post-production for Insurgent, and the film’s script had been written by a team-effort of four different (credited) screenwriters. Among them was Maze Runner penner Noah Oppenheimer. Once again, some new names were brought on as cast. Jeff Daniels would be the biggest name to join. Swedish actor Bill Skarsgard, who would go on to play Pennywise in It (2017) also joined, along with Nadia Hilker and Andy Bean. Other than that, much of the same cast and crew would return for the penultimate film. Filming for Allegiant reportedly started in May and concluded in August. It was the shortest production date for any Divergent movie so far, taking into account the fact that both prior installments reportedly had gone through reshoots, while Allegiant apparently had gone through none.

Unlike the previous films which had been heavily publicized, the production of the third film was oddly secretive in comparison. Very little was revealed about it. The fact that it was the penultimate film in a franchise that the studio was expecting to be hyped up may have been a contributing factor to that.
However many may start to wonder if the apparent and rumoured production issues were a cause of this strange behind-the-scenes silence.
Please note that the next paragraph contains heavy speculation. I have no confirmation that any of these theories are true!

Woodley and Kravitz on the set of 2016's Allegiant

Many knew full-well that there was no need to divide Allegiant’s adaptation into two parts, and that it was done solely to force more money out of audiences. When watching the final movie, it appears that no-one was realising and experiencing this more than the screenwriters themselves. Oppenheimer and the three other screenwriters were having to somehow squeeze a full movie, out of half a book that barely had enough story to do so. Not only this, but they were having to deal with the consequences of the changes made to Insurgent that would carry over into their movie. Their only option was to deviate from Veronica Roth’s novel even further to cope with said-changes, and expand the story to fit two movies. In essence, they would be completely rewriting the story and all of its arcs to fit their requirements.
It’s unknown just how long the group of writers spent on developing their script for Allegiant, but one gets the impression that it was an incredibly short period of time. One also gets the impression that the writers had little idea where the story was headed for the fourth film, Allegiant - Part 2 (soon to be renamed Ascendant), due to their near complete rewriting of Roth’s story. Douglas Wick cited that “Allegiant, if you've read the book, has (….) two climaxes. One is a climax in Chicago, which is basically for the lives of everyone in the city, and the other one is Tris facing off with David in the Bureau. It just felt like we had plenty of story to do this one, then a lot more story to tell for the final collision.” Suddenly it seemed as though the two-part finale wasn’t adapted from the original novel, but loosely inspired by it.
One must surely feel sympathy towards the four writers of Allegiant. They had effectively been forced by both the producers’ and studio’s decisions to divert from the core of the series, and delve into near-original material that hadn’t been written yet. If anything, the bare minimum of the book’s plot-line would be present in Allegiant, and entirely new storylines would have to be invented. It’s unknown as to what the Ascendant film would’ve been like, but it’s easy to imagine that over 50 percent of the movie would’ve been completely original material invented by the filmmakers. Said Douglas Wick of the changes: The movies we didn't want to make were those annoying ones in which they just stop in the middle of the story. So we very much wanted the movie to work as a separate piece." Essentially in what appears to be mere months, four different writers had to scramble to figure out how Allegiant would work with their guide being a book that wasn’t appropriate for the two-part finale format. On top of that, they would need to write competent material. You be the judge of whether the Allegiant script was any good or not.

The cast of Allegiant prepare for a crucial action scene

The next hurdle that the third film would face has pretty much been confirmed by The Hollywood Reporter, so the next points I will make hold more validity.
Robert Schwentke, director of Insurgent, had also signed on to direct the third and fourth films in the series. As mentioned before, it was a similar strategy that Lionsgate used for Hunger Games; director Francis Lawrence signed on to direct the second film, and then agreed to film the two-part installments afterwards. With the Mockingjay films, Lawrence and his crew would produce and film both movies at the same time, effectively in one supersized production. It would’ve been like shooting one six-hour long movie, except it would be released in two parts - a beginning and an end. This would be used to save money, as they would be able to use the same sets, costumes, locations and production companies for both films, instead of letting them go after the first film finished and then rebuilding/rehiring them when the second film got underway.
For some reason though, the studio and producers decided to do Divergent differently. They made the decision to film the two-part finale, Allegiant and Ascendant as two movies, with two completely separate productions. Instead of shooting simultaneously, they would shoot them one after the other. It wasn’t a very cost effective decision, and to make matters worse, Schwentke appeared to be suffering from the same post-filming exhaustion that Neil Burger experienced during Divergent. As stated before, in such a franchise production on a sequel often starts exactly when a preceding film is in post-production, putting extreme pressure on the already drained filmmakers involved. Neil Burger opted out of directing Insurgent for this exact reason, and now Schwentke who was locked into directing Allegiant immediately after Insurgent, was apparently feeling its effects quite severely.
One can’t really blame Allegiant’s faults all on its director. As mentioned before, the screenplay was subpar and Lionsgate had put its crew under an extremely tight schedule with little wiggle-room. However the exhaustion that Robert Schwentke was carrying into Allegiant directly from the aftermath of Insurgent seemed to bleed into his direction of the penultimate film. A production source claimed that “....between visual effects — which were on an impossible schedule — and music, he was working seven days a week, then had to start work on the next one….He put on weight. He was really wiped....” When one watches the third film after reading such reports, the final product is quite revealing. Many moments in Allegiant appear to have had little-to-no direction, or competent direction at that. There is a lack of enthusiasm and passion that was - for all its flaws - even on display in Insurgent. One has to wonder if his drained state of mind may have had to do with Allegiant’s uninspired and often apparently lazy direction. Many of the cast members give off their worst performances in the series. Shailene Woodley comes off more as a bored high-schooler in a romcom, rather than the brave warrior she was in the previous two films. Ansel Elgort has some cringe-inducingly awful moments of line delivery, and Naomi Watts would receive a Worst Supporting Actress nomination for her performance. Other particular examples of this include a young boy struggling to remember his acting abilities - er, sorry - his father after having his memory wiped, and an infamous trial scene with some extras trying and spectacularly failing to seem menacing and bloodthirsty.

The lack of character growth and nonsensical worldbuilding can be attributed to the screenwriters, but in any scenes without flashy action and visuals, there is an overwhelming level of cliched and uninspired direction to it all. Once again, the focus appeared to be all on the look of the film. The filmmakers appeared to want an even more science fiction-type twist to Allegiant, and the result was the most CGI-heavy film in the Divergent Series. Woodley elaborated in an interview that in “the first film, all of the sets were built. This time it was 50% with the actors and 50% added in post-production (....) It was hard to imagine what it was going to look like.” When watching the film and its behind-the-scenes featurettes, one does get the idea that much of it was filmed indoors, on a soundstage with most of the blue-screen blanks filled in later. Due to much of the film’s new locations being “not specified in the book”, Wick and Fisher once again appeared to grant Schwentke free creative control to make Allegiant as futuristic as possible. It was, according to the producers, “a Schwentke contribution to make the Bureau as futuristic as it is, in terms of more technology….”, and the overgrown abandoned remains of Illinois outside Chicago was reimagined into a barren desert-like wasteland drenched in red acid rain. Accompanied by a barrage of personal defense drones, plasma globes, and aircrafts that are never mentioned in the original novel, the resulting filmmaker-invented futurism required a huge increase in CGI and visual effects. Once again the grounded, almost rustic aesthetic that Neil Burger originally established for Divergent, appeared to have been either forgotten about or ignored entirely here. And to make matters even worse, the cast was now being upstaged by the superimposed graphics that the visual effects teams were desperately churning out before the March release date. A perfect example of this would be this wonderful sentence in a page dedicated to the movie: “Like the Fear Landscapes in Divergent and the simulation scenarios in Insurgent, drones define a signature technology advance in Allegiant.” It appears as if the filmmakers had completely misunderstood what drew people to the books and films in the first place. Fancy effects and beautiful designs weren’t part of the initial appeal for Divergent, but yet here was a Divergent film that appeared to have had more effort put into its design than its characters’ motivations and dialogue.

Schwentke directs Woodley onset

Schwentke’s reported exhaustion, and focus on visuals over characters reportedly led to conflict behind the scenes. In early February 2016, it was revealed that he had exited the franchise entirely and had declined to direct Ascendant. Considering his situation it was no surprise he’d decided to exit. He had after all, directed two multi-million dollar pictures back-to-back and had yet to direct another whilst simultaneously completing pre-production on Allegiant. This was cited as the sole reason for his exit, as he wanted to spend more time with his family. “It was just exhaustion. In his deal, there was a trigger time where he had to decide if he was going forward. He was very torn, because he loves his team. But it wasn't possible.” However, not long after the actual release of the third film, The Hollywood Reporter released an article that detailed another reason why he might’ve decided to leave the project. Star of the franchise, Shailene Woodley herself was reportedly “dissatisfied” with his work, and was unhappy with the way the franchise was being driven forward with no time to polish scripts. The article’s source claims that "she was complaining about him, but she was equally complaining about the speed of the movies and not taking the time to get a script right." It’s unknown if these reports are true, but they certainly seem pretty legitimate. It’s not hard to believe that an actress who stars in a massive franchise and, as a result, lives and breathes the source material in a way, would be unhappy with the diversion from said-material as well as the vision of the original director (who, after all, was the one who cast Woodley in the franchise in the first place).
So with Schwentke leaving the project, Ascendant would need a new director. It must’ve been a particularly urgent rush to find a new helmer, considering Ascendant should’ve been starting pre-production around about that time, and any delays would force them to push back the release date from March 2017 (which actually did end up happening). In that same month it was announced that Lee Toland Krieger, the director of The Age of Adeline (2015), would be the one to finish off the franchise. It would reportedly be Krieger’s first blockbuster, as he hadn’t directed a major tentpole film before, with most of his major past credits being lower budgets pictures released in film festivals (some of which ended up winning awards). Interestingly, Woodley appeared to have the final say in Krieger’s hiring, as The Hollywood Reporter’s article states that he was brought on only after the actress gave her stamp of approval. The source said that "the different contestants were discussed with her (....) and we knew he was someone who was sensitive to actors." Regarding the choice of director, Woodley stated: “....he hasn't done anything action-wise, so I think that will enable us to have the story revolve around character more instead of action.”

An early teaser poster for Allegiant

A teaser for Allegiant was released in September of 2015, and a main trailer in November. The main responses from fans were mixed, with much of the base appearing to be in a state of confusion. Although half of the fanbase appeared to be hyped for the film (which is to be expected from such a franchise), the other half appeared to be off-put by the bizarre sci-fi angle that the film was going for, and how none of it appeared to be from the book at all. By the time a third trailer was released in early 2016, even the most hyped fan responses weren’t enough to silence the rumblings of a growing backlash towards the direction the franchise had appeared to be taking since Insurgent’s release.
One of the catastrophic mistakes that the filmmakers made I feel, was the decision to set the majority of the movie in a barren lifeless desert, for one very important reason. The second Maze Runner film, The Scorch Trials was set in a vastly similar location, with a vastly similar setup and premise as Allegiant. With The Scorch Trials not even a year old at that point, and with many audiences beaten down by dystopian YA franchises, the idea to set and market Allegiant around the premise of the characters leaving their society to enter another post-apocalyptic society, was a decision that very well may’ve hurt the film in hindsight. Cynical audiences fed up with YA movies would’ve probably looked at the Allegiant trailers and thought, “Welp. Now they’re gone from ripping of Hunger Games to ripping off Maze Runner.” Or, “Meh. I’ve already seen movies like it. I’m gonna skip.”

Essentially as its release approached, Allegiant was in a worst-case scenario position. Very little was done to help the movie’s reputation and if anything, the producers had doubled down on the mistakes the previous installment had made. Wick and Fisher were betting on the fans being the core audience for the movies, and yet here was a fan-base split down the middle, with many feeling betrayed and frustrated that their favourite books were being butchered seemingly without a care. And the audiences wouldn’t save the movie either. After sitting through Hunger Games, Twilight, Maze Runner (which was still unfinished at this point), and The Fifth Wave, would they really feel any desire to see another cash-in on a genre trend that had died off at the end of the previous year?

The stage was set. Everything was in place. All arrows were pointing at Allegiant, just waiting for its March release date. And when that release date arrived, many would simply sit on their couches at home and watch the fireworks from afar.

To be concluded...

Started December 2018

The Sad Story of The Divergent Series

How an initially promising franchise of films imploded from the inside out

By Zac Langridge

Chapter 3: Sequel

Filming of The Divergent Series: Insurgent (to use its full title), began in May of 2014 with director Robert Schwentke at the helm. With an eager fan-base clamouring for any news of the film, and news outlets such as Hypable reporting on the progress of the franchise, the production moved underway swiftly and completed around December that year. It was an incredibly tight schedule; one can only imagine how quickly pre-production must’ve been, considering Schwentke was brought on around February and filming was set to start a mere four months down the line. In comparison, Neil Burger was brought on to Divergent in August of 2012 (filming started April 2013 and the film was released in March 2014), so there was at least six months less time during Insurgent’s production.
There were a few changes. New cast members had obviously been brought on to play new characters introduced in the books. Just like with the first film, the names were big; Naomi Watts, Octavia Spencer and Daniel Dae Kim were among them. Insurgent had also been assigned to a 3D release, a format that was purely experimental and would be dropped for the third film. Schwentke also brought on frequent collaborator from his home-country of Germany, Florian Ballhaus as the cinematographer. A new composer was also hired; Joseph Trapanese replacing Junkie XL.

It now appeared as though, since the characters and world had been set up in the first film, less effort was being put into the second film. Douglas Wick summarised the behind-the-scenes motives in a featurette: “In Divergent we created a world. In Insurgent we’re gonna tear it up!” Ansel Elgort elaborates: “We already have all the characters introduced. Now we can just tell a great story.” A new running theme began throughout the publicity of Insurgent; it would be a film much larger in scope than the first film, with far more room for action and excitement. Typical sequel-bate. Bigger and better.
With Lionsgate clearly anticipating the franchise to be their next Hunger Games (with the finale of that brand being released in December 2015), they made the decision to increase Insurgent’s budget to an estimated $110 million. The producers appeared to jump at the opportunity to make Insurgent far more action-heavy and special effects-freaky than its predecessor. One of the main selling points that convinced the two producers on Robert Schwentke’s vision for the sequel, was his ideas for the film’s look and visuals, particularly during its famous simulation sequences. Wick proclaimed: “One of the most exciting visual possibilities is always the fear landscapes, and he had really extraordinary visual ideas. That’s always been one of Veronica’s great creations, that allows you to sort of play in the world of ‘Inception’.”
Schwentke himself revealed that they gave him and cinematographer Ballhaus free creative control when it came to their expansion on Burger’s interpretation of Roth’s world. "We were free to elaborate, expand, and build upon what Neil and Divergent cinematographer Alwin Küchler had done….Plus, we have new locations….That freed us to invent in ways we thought were right for the narrative. We got to widen the world quite a bit."
Perhaps Wick and Fisher wanted to differentiate their franchise from Lionsgate’s other two, or perhaps they wanted to attract more diverse audiences. Either way you look at it, less attention was put into the story of the film than the technical side of it.

Atlanta was used as a stand-in for Chicago in 2015's Insurgent

There was a downside to this though. Despite having a far larger budget than before, the production would need to save money for the increased action and effects that the producers wanted. In order to reserve money, the series moved production from the city of Chicago (where the books were based, and the first film was shot) to the Georgia-based city of Atlanta, due to its far cheaper and more film-friendly incentives. The consequence of this: Atlanta is not Chicago. Therefore the production would need to find new locations to replace the original locations that had already been established in the first film, as well as incorporate heavy visual effects to “extend sets and unite Chicago skylines with Atlanta locations.” This incentive would throw many fans off, as it caused a feeling of incohesiveness and clash of vision between the first and second films. It’s ironic that Neil Burger chose to film the original movie in Chicago to differentiate his film from other sci-fi adaptations. “You see these movies and they’re set in the future….they all seem to have the same kind of computer generated cityscape….It always seems painted or fake. So I thought, ‘How could I make this movie different? Let’s use Chicago as Chicago, this monumental landscape skyline.'” Some fans would feel a sense of betrayal, as if Burger’s more faithful and better executed vision had been forgotten about and tossed under the bus by the producers, a newer director, and a larger budget.
A particular challenge that the filmmakers were facing with the second film, was adapting a novel that was far more complex than the first book. The Insurgent novel contains far more plot threads, as well as a variety of newer characters fixed in with the surviving characters from the previous book. Screenwriter Goldsman, in mere months, was having to rewrite Duffield’s original script, whilst presumably trimming material and adding newer elements that were invented purely for the movie. In an interview Schwentke discussed the troubles of adapting a novel such as Insurgent. “You can imagine that it is difficult to compress a 500-page work into one film, fortunately we have been given absolute freedom, it was only important to remain true to the characters….In the first part, Tris asked the question: Who am I in a world that I do not know? In the second one it gets more active, the movie actually works according to the rules of a "Lovers On the Run" movie, which I like very much. The concept of looking into someone's head was expanded because it fascinated me. This works as a kind of visual psychotherapy.” Effectively, the story would be changed to fit its on-screen format. The movie would revolve around a McGuffin plot-device, a box that Tris needs to open, where the theme of the movie (learning to forgive oneself) would be conveyed by a barrage of special effects extravaganzas that correspond to our heroine’s emotions.

A teaser trailer for Insurgent was released in late 2014. The overall reaction to it from fans, was mixed to say the least. While some were excited, many responses were confused and speculative. Others were verging on concern. Many highlighted the fact that the scene the teaser entailed (Tris trying to save her mother from a floating, burning house) wasn’t in the book, and it seemed like a far cry from the faithful route that the first film took when adapting the book. Some people however did point out the change in vision and overuse of CGI as off-putting for them. An article from Andrew Sims of Hypable summed up the overall mood.
It should be noted that the filmmakers intended the visual effects sequences in Insurgent to be symbolic of the emotional trauma Tris was going through in the film. Schwentke explained how they tried to “use these Sims to externalise the inner landscapes of the characters, to translate their emotional states and their fears into dramatic sequences….We wanted to find a visual correlative to an emotion.” For example, the slow motion scene of disintegration when Tris fails the Amity Sim, is supposed to be symbolism regarding Tris’ emotional state. The shattering nature of the environment surrounding her could correspond with the idea that her world is falling apart as she apparently dies, and the violence of her raw anger towards Jeanine.
But the trouble is, it’s not made clear. Particularly when you're watching a trailer online, no-one is going to pick up that the special effects have some hidden meaning behind them. Even when you're watching Insurgent from beginning to end, it just comes off as the filmmakers just exploiting their use of CGI to the maximum to demonstrate their huge budget.

Winslet and Woodley face off on the sleek set of Insurgent

Several trailers and several months of fan speculation later, Insurgent was released in March of 2015.
Box office wise, it opened lower than the first film, despite being projected to gross higher. It made a worldwide total of $297 million; it grossed less in North America with $130 million, but it grossed higher overseas with $297 million (largely due to its 3D conversion). Clearly audiences were more hesitant to view this film than the first one.
Critically, Insurgent’s reception was less kind than its predecessor’s. Many critics again cited the film’s similarities to previous YA franchises, as well as its generic premises and plot-points. While Woodley’s performance was praised yet again, and appreciation was shown towards the film’s action sequences and visuals, many pointed out plot-holes, poor dialogue, and characters that had been regressed into cookie-cutter stereotypes for pacing’s sake. Clearly less care had been put into the sequel. And although there were those that enjoyed Insurgent, the core fan-base itself was largely split over the movie. Many were thrown off at the sudden deviations from the source material, as well as the shift in direction and vision for the series. It was a no-win situation; half the fans loved the movie, half were disappointed with it. If Divergent had created a semi-stable foundation to construct a franchise upon, Insurgent had indefinitely cracked or destabilized said-foundations.
Douglas Wick and Lucy Fisher had made it clear that if they had a satisfied fan-base, the series would be successful. Despite skeptical critics and unimpressed moviegoers, if the core group of fans stuck around, the series should stay afloat. Therefore, the divisive fan reaction to Insurgent was certainly something the franchise could’ve done without. Adding on the negative reviews and the poor reputation that the series had as nothing but a Hunger Games cash-in, The Divergent Series wasn’t exactly in the strongest position.

And in the year that would follow, a chain of events would take place that would ultimately determine the tragic fate of a series that had started off well, but was deteriorating at an alarming rate.

To be continued...

Started December 2018

The Sad Story of The Divergent Series

How an initially promising franchise of films imploded from the inside out

By Zac Langridge

Chapter 2: New Talent and Release

Production on Divergent was running smoothly, and the film began post-production after it wrapped filming around July 2013. However, as the end of the year neared, its director found himself in a difficult position. Lionsgate had enough confidence in the first film to greenlight an adaptation of its sequel, Insurgent. It’s release date would be March 2015. Exactly a year after Divergent’s release. With the ball rolling on the planned franchise, Neil Burger would need to consecutively work on post-production for Divergent and pre-production for Insurgent. Burger stated that “originally I was going to do the second one and we were making my directors deal and it was always going to be tough because I was going to be finishing this one at the same time….And then we decided on this one to shoot some additional scenes to better kind of explain the world because we needed that. And once we did that, that was like the straw that broke the camel’s back.” As explained in an article detailing the troubled production of Suicide Squad (2016), it becomes very difficult to push back a tentpole movie’s release date: “....the whole process would have benefited if Ayer, 48, had been given more time to work. But another source closely involved with the film says once it was dated, pushing back the release was not an option….” Slightly mirroring what David Ayer would face with Warner and DC several years later, Burger was facing a daunting problem. “I was like, I can’t be prepping additional shooting on this movie at the same time I’m prepping the next movie….”
In December 2013, it was revealed that Burger had parted ways with helming the Divergent franchise, and while he would stay on as executive producer for the sequels, the directing reigns would have to be passed onto someone else.
Not long later, in February of 2014, it was revealed that Lionsgate had found their new director. Their choice was Robert Schwentke.

Schwentke, who would go on to write and direct the acclaimed WW2 film, Der Hauptmann (2017), was not an obvious choice, nor an expected one. It did however mirror the method Lionsgate used on The Hunger Games franchise. In that situation, original director Gary Ross opted out of directing the three sequels. As a result, Frances Lawrence was hired to direct the following films with great success. Similar to Lawrence, Robert Schwentke is known as a “journeyman” director, with his career flip-flopping between different genres and experimenting with different styles. Amongst his catalogue of movies is several comedies, a romance, several action movies and a thriller. The Divergent Series would be his first, and so far, only attempt at science fiction.
A script had already been written up for Burger’s planned adaptation of Insurgent, penned by Brian Duffield. However with a new director onboard, and with filming for Insurgent scheduled for May 2014, Schwentke brought in screenwriter Akiva Goldsman to rewrite Duffield’s screenplay to fit his new vision and ideas for the sequel. Speaking on their choice of director, producers Wick and Fisher said: “....Robert came in with both a really great gut sense of Tris’ emotional journey, and he was really fascinated by her recovery and triumph from post-traumatic stress, and he also has great visual instincts. We were very stimulated by his ideas….”

German filmmaker Robert Schwentke

Many news outlets were “baffled” at their choice. Schwentke’s most recent film, R.I.P.D (2013) had been the biggest box-office bomb of the previous year and had been near universally panned by critics. His overall track record was also sketchy. While his other projects were financial successes, most of his Hollywood films have been dismissed by reviewers as generic and unremarkable. The choice to bring in Akiva Goldsman as screenwriter was also criticized. He was one of the talents responsible for the reviled Batman and Robin (1997), as well as many, many panned, dismissed or forgotten films. It seemed to be a curiously bad combination of talent for a film that was supposed to be a major tentpole for Lionsgate, and the successor to their third franchise starter that they were banking on.
Regardless, Lionsgate and the two producers seemed happy enough with their choices. The series was now full steam ahead, with Burger adding his finishing touches to Divergent, while Schwentke and Goldsman were scrambling to rewrite Insurgent in a mere several months.

In March of 2014, Divergent was released in theaters with much publicity and fanfare. Many were anticipating it to flop critically and financially, believing it to be too similar in premise and theme to previous YA films such as Hunger Games and Twilight. Trailers hadn’t impressed too many people other than hardcore fans, so many onlookers were preparing for a dud.
So it was a surprise to many people when the film found itself at Number 1 spot on the box-office. On its opening day it grossed $22.8 million in the US, and it’s overall worldwide gross was $288 million, eclipsing its budget and sweeping aside any doubts of a sequel.
The critical reaction was mixed. It could’ve been worse, but it also could’ve been better. While fans of the books and general audiences seemed entertained enough, the film currently rests at a mediocre 41% on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes. Reviews cited its execution as generic and somewhat derivative of other YA properties, an unavoidable criticism when following the heels of two recent franchises distributed by the same studio. However praise was given towards the performances of the cast, as well as its concepts of a divided far-future Chicago, and its action sequences. Some even claimed it to be better than the book itself. Woodley and James, along with the other cast members, were embraced by fans as the definitive onscreen versions of their heroes, while Burger’s vision was praised for being faithful to Roth’s worldbuilding and themes.

Woodley, James, Winslet and Burger at Divergent's UK premiere.

Lucy Fisher summarised who the film was made for. “It’s a surprise how much some of the reviewers don’t seem to appreciate it. It’s well-made and beautifully acted, the cast is fantastic. It’s a happy situation to know for certain that people will want to see movie no matter what, that fans are happy with the movie….” In another interview: “Remember the book become a publishing phenomenon while we were shooting….Where the fans became really useful was to say why, out of all the millions of books, is this book speaking to so many people? We were very respectful of the fact that it was resonating with millions of people….”
Again, here it becomes obvious who the producers are making the movies for. Wick and Fisher clearly love the fanbase and want to satisfy them with the best movies possible. Even the harshest critics of Divergent can’t deny that they and Neil Burger put in the effort to show their respect for Roth’s books, and the result was a box-office success that fans loved for its faithful interpretation of a book they also loved. To me, it seems as though the two producers trusted the fans to be their core audience. If they kept the fans satisfied, they’d keep coming to the films and the series would be a smash hit.
This is important to remember, as it ultimately comes back to bite the Divergent films later on.

In April 2014, a month before the second film was scheduled to start filming, Lionsgate made an announcement. They had made the decision to split the adaptation of the third and final installment of the series, Allegiant, into two parts. Fans and moviegoers reacted to the predictable news with an eye-roll. It was the third time the studio had decided to pull a trick like that on audiences, and there was no disguising the cynicism this time around. The final book in the trilogy, while having more pages than Mockingjay, was considered by many readers to be slow. The fast paced action and character motives of the first two novels was bogged down in the finale, as Tris and her allies explore a completely new society that turns their former world upside down. There was absolutely no reason to split Allegiant into a multipack movie other than trying to squeeze more money out of audiences. And unlike Harry Potter, Twilight or even Hunger Games, audiences saw right through it. In a report, co-chairmen at Lionsgate, Rob Friedman and Patrick Wachsberger said: “Veronica Roth brings her captivating story to a masterful conclusion in ‘Allegiant,’ a rich, action-packed book with material that is ideally suited to two strong and fulfilling movies….The storytelling arc and world of the characters lend themselves perfectly to two films….”
It couldn’t have been a more half-hearted statement if they tried.

Beatrice, Katniss and Thomas - the leads of the trilogy of YA trilogies

Meanwhile, in September 2014, 20th Century Fox released their own competitor to Lionsgate's two franchises. The Maze Runner, featuring a male lead this time around, had an interesting premise similar to Divergent. Amongst its similar themes and tropes of other sci-fi YA adaptations, was a mix of camaraderie and brotherhood, and a bout of gruesome horror and scares. The reviews for the film were generally positive, with many considering it better than other YA attempts in previous years, while still inferior to Hunger Games. This new franchise was now grappling with Divergent, and had already floored it in most critics’ minds.
Later that year, Mockingjay - Part 1 was also released. The penultimate film to The Hunger Games franchise, it was another hit at the box-office. However while it’s reviews were generally positive, something was leaving critics and audiences slightly unsatisfied. The consequences of the unnecessary finale-splitting trend were finally catching up to the studios. To this day, Mockingjay- Part 1 is the lowest rated in the franchise, largely due to its slow pace and its plot, which has little consequence on the greater impact of the story. Many audiences were now starting to realise what the studios were doing. The movie multipack was now a trick to rinse people’s wallets so that studios could gather more profit, whilst the films themselves declined in quality as a consequence of these actions.

It would only be a matter of time.

To be continued...

Started December 2018

The Sad Story of The Divergent Series

How an initially promising franchise of films imploded from the inside out

By Zac Langridge

Chapters:

The YA Genre’s New Contestant

New Talent and Release

Sequel

Buildup to Failure

How to Kill a Franchise

Reflection/Who’s to Blame?

Introduction

In the long history of Hollywood, there have been flops. There have been box office disasters, movies that lost a studio so much money that they ultimately went bankrupt or were landed in financial trouble. However as the American film industry becomes more and more attached to franchises and big-name, high-profile properties that, in their eyes could spawn potential sequels and spinoffs that are all financially supported by an unwavering dedicated audience, the higher the dangers are of forgetting the fundamentals to keep audiences engaged.
And in recent years, no higher example has there been than The Divergent Series.
Based on the bestselling novels by Veronica Roth, the Divergent franchise was kicked off in 2014 with its makers, Lionsgate, convinced that it would become the next big thing. But down the line, something went clearly very wrong. As of the 23rd of December, 2018, the Starz cable network reported to Buzzfeed News that the planned final entry in the series, Ascendant (originally scheduled for a March 2017 theatrical release) was apparently cancelled entirely from its reported TV movie status.

How did this happen, and why? How did a planned franchise with high-profile actors, passionate producers, and a dedicated loving fanbase deteriorate so spectacularly?
In this piece, I am going to go through the long and fascinating story of the series’ birth and production, the overall story of the YA genre’s boom in the 2010s, and the resulting buildup of factors that I personally feel, are responsible for the failure of the Divergent franchise.


Chapter 1: The YA Genre’s New Contestant

The Divergent trilogy was written by American author Veronica Roth. Published between 2011 and 2013, its three main novels (Divergent, Insurgent and Allegiant) revolve around 16 year-old Beatrice Prior, who lives in a dystopian Chicago that is split into factions determined by different personality traits. The series was a bestseller, with many hailing it’s strong characters, rich worldbuilding and - along with it - subtle metaphors for modern society as the successor to Suzanne Collins’ The Hunger Games. The books were generally praised by critics and garnered a strong fanbase. By the fall of 2013, the first two books had sold over 5 million copies worldwide, proving her trilogy (regardless of what some readers may feel) to be a hit.
Perhaps enough of a hit to warrant a big-screen adaption.

Veronica Roth's Divergent trilogy

Hollywood likes to follow trends. Trends are safe, and trends are profitable. If mainstream audiences are leaning towards a certain style/genre (ect) of film, studios tend to notice this and attempt to capitalise on said-trend by mimicking its success to ensure that they don’t take unnecessary risks that could prove unsuccessful. Once the trend dies, Hollywood moves on to the next trend (eg: sci-fi adventure movies after the release of Star Wars (1977), or shared cinematic universes after The Avengers (2012).)
In the early 2010s, the trend was leaning towards adaptations of young-adult books. Films geared towards teenagers that portrayed said-age group rebelling against oppressing societies in a largely post-apocalyptic setting, were proving to be the bread-and-butter of studio films at that time. The two main franchises around that time were Twilight and The Hunger Games, both based off popular book series, and both distributed by the same studio: Lionsgate.

While Lionsgate and its underlier, Summit Entertainment reigned with their adaptations proving to be big box-office successors, other studios tried time and time again to replicate the success of the genre, by acquiring other properties to adapt. Many were unsuccessful. Chasing success, and trying to fabricate the quality of previously made films and series just isn’t the same as taking time to craft a well-made film that clicks with the right audiences. A famous example would be Sony’s The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones (2013), which was planned to be a franchise, but never got past its first installment.
As other studios failed to replicate Lionsgate’s success, the studio that kicked off the YA trend looked to continue their list of YA franchises. Divergent seemed to be their best bet. Since it was in the vein of the two previous series they had acquired, Lionsgate was convinced that this was the way to go.

Author Veronica Roth sold the Divergent film rights in March 2011 to Summit Entertainment. Douglas Wick and Lucy Fisher would utilize their production company, Red Wagon Entertainment to produce the films, which would also be distributed by Lionsgate. Wick and Fisher, married since 1986, would also be the credited producers of the films. In 2012 it was revealed that Neil Burger, director of Limitless (2011), would helm the first film. Casting began that same year, with Shailene Woodley (nominated for best actress in The Descendants) cast as the main character Tris Prior, while Theo James was cast as the second lead, Tobias Eaton. Other cast members included Kate Winslet, Miles Teller and Ansel Elgort. Filming began in April 2013, with the film scheduled to be released in March the following year.
One notices a recurring theme that resonates throughout the production and publicity of the first film: that being the dedication and passion that the cast and crew have for the source material.
Douglas Wick and Lucy Fisher clearly have a love for Roth’s books and the story she tells. It’s very evident from interviews they took, that they genuinely cared from day one. In an interview Fisher proclaimed that the “movies are held up as a beacon on the hill. Because the book is so successful we already have an audience for the movie, which is a wonderful feeling. We know people want to see it…..Red Wagon got sent the manuscript by the agent before it was published. We read it and saw a phenomenally interesting voice and premise, with rich veins of identity and conformity.”
Similarly, director Neil Burger displayed a real sense of showmanship and respect for the story he was going to adapt. He explained, regarding the book, that “something really struck me in it, and I was in. You still have to present your take on it, which I did.” Regardless of what people may think of the first film, Burger’s care for the story and characters bleeds onto the screen in the final product. Among many of the boundaries he pushed, he managed to include the infamous zip-lining scene - an important character defining moment in the book - that was originally excluded from the script. He also pushed for other scenes that were cut out. “Those have to be in the movie. They’re such iconic scenes. And I understood why they tried to cut them out when they were developing the script, but they had to be in there. So often, it was trying to fight to get everything into the movie, which was the real challenge.” He even went as far as to keep and film the most gruesome scene in the book, which was cut for the movie’s rating to be kept at PG-13.

Burger directing Woodley on the set of 2014's Divergent

As Divergent’s production was underway, the second film in Lionsgate’s Hunger Games series, Catching Fire, was released. It was a smash hit, and in a rare twist, critics hailed it as being an improvement over its predecessor. A sequel surpassing the original in a franchise could only mean that interest in the property was building. After the success of the Twilight franchise, Lionsgate had placed their next bet on The Hunger Games, and it had looked as if it had already paid off. Clearly the YA genre craze wasn’t going away, so a third time’s a charm. Lionsgate could either leave it as is, or they could boost Divergent to grade A franchise status. Ultimately they decided to increase the budget for Divergent from $40 million to $85 million.
Notably, back in 2012, Lionsgate also made the decision to split the final Hunger Games adaption of Mockingjay into a two-part finale, a tactic originally used on the final Harry Potter adaption of The Deathly Hallows. The overall motive for doing such a thing, was to create a fully fleshed-out cinematic experience that wasn’t rushed or clunky - since J.K Rowling’s final novel was a total of 607 pages. However Suzanne Collins’ final novel was only 440 pages long in comparison. Lionsgate was the only other studio aside from Warner Bros. to attempt the two-part finale move, initially with the final Twilight installment. Now with The Hunger Games thriving, it seemed like their move to split its finale up had little to do with creative urges, and more to do with milking a brand and craze for all its worth. One could almost see the eyes of the studios glinting at the prospect of making more money for their companies to survive and thrive. With Divergent next in line to carry on the YA franchise tradition, the executives’ gazes were fixed on the success of the first film.
Simultaneously, 20th Century Fox was preparing their answer to Twilight and The Hunger Games: an adaptation of James Dashner’s Maze Runner series. This would star a male lead, a difference from Lionsgate’s three female-led franchises. Meanwhile, Columbia Pictures were preparing their own adaptation of Rick Yancey’s The Fifth Wave, set for release much later on in 2016. As of 2013, it seemed as though the young-adult adaptation craze would never wear out, and different studios were picking up different properties to capitalize on its success.

But nothing lasts forever.
Time would tell just how long its grip over audiences would remain.

To be continued...