Allegiant
discussion
*SPOILERS* Do you think Tris could've done something different?
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
R. Kaye
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Oct 12, 2015 11:20AM
Do you think there was another way for Tris to succeed without... you know?
reply
|
flag
Yes! Veronica Roth could've changed the part where David shoots her. There was no need for it! An interesting plot twist could've been that David erases Tris' memory in order to wipe out the threat of Tris. You ought to read an explanation of why tris'death didn't work by a girl named Lauren. Look at the other discussions on goodreads to find it! Ty
noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
The simplest reason is that the only reason Tris forgot her gun is that the plot required it. If that happened, and if the author did not exaggerate the capabilities of a wheelchair-bound man who likely never held a gun before in his life, Tris would have lived.
Yes, Tris could have "won the day" differently, without her or anyone else dying in the process. From the decision to do what they did to her final actions in the room, every single thing that happened in basically the entire third act of the book made no sense and could have been handled differently. That fact is the main reason why the ending failed and her death was ultimately pointless - all of the circumstances leading to it were illogical, contrived and offensively stupid.
How were they offensive?
Because the plot was so blatantly contrived and illogical, it offends the intelligence of anyone with an IQ over 12.
Haha true. I agree.
Wow. I've been reading reviews for allegiant on amazon. If you think people on goodreads didn't like it, you've got to read these other reviews. I will be STUNNED if Ascendant ends with tris dying. The producers would have to be absolutely, gosh I can't even think of a good enough word, crazy and (career)suicidal to keep book ending.
Have you read Allegiant? @Darlene
Truth-no. We own it. My daughter tried reading it in spite of knowing the outcome but she didn't like it. I know I must sound hypocritical in judging this book without having read it. But honestly, just knowing Tris died pointlessly ruined any desire to pick it up or reread the other 2. Someone expressed what I was feeling in one of those reviews(actually MANY people did!). This series was not that deep-it read like a romance/adventure story, not like Hunger Games. For Veronica Roth to finish with a tragic ending was out of character with the feel of the story. And I was an emotional mess just reading that she died in a spoiler. So as not to be a hypocrite, I will read it. For the record I LOVE Divergent and Insurgent, books and movies. I WANT to love the final book, but can't. I WANT a new ending for the movie!
I also want to add the word realistic to the sentence- for Veronica Roth to finish with a tragic....
Yes it's difficult to grasp that Roth killed off the character that started it all. Yet, it was almost predictable when Allegiant was written in a duel-POV style between Tris and Tobias, especially considering that the first two books were only told from Tris' perspective. Although I agree that killing her off was a terrible ending to a terrific series, (even afterwards when Tobias told the rest of the aftermath) I do think the book as a whole was an enjoyable read like the first two, and it's something other than "hero never dies". It's different. So, terrible in a good way I suppose.Plus, I'm almost positive that the movie will end similarly to the book, otherwise, it's a completely different ending that Roth didn't write, therefore, they most likely will not produce.
But, there have been ending changes to other books- to- movie adaptations. Plus this ending sucked, excuse my bluntness. Who is going to sit through that? Not the young adult readers. And not the parents of said young adult readers. It's too traumatic because Tris is so relatable. Not to mention the agony of seeing Four suffer. I can remember sitting in the theater bawling after the Titanic movie-for like 20 minutes. I didn't go back and see it again and again because it was so sad. This will be similar. A HUGE NUMBER of readers were opposed to this book. How can the producers in good conscience continue to make something the reading/viewing public dont want? Or forget conscience-why would they take a gamble? I don't know what will happen. I have found a fanfiction called Determinate by windchimed to take my disappointment away! Why do you say you are almost positive the producers will keep the book ending?( if you don't mind me asking).
I think you underestimate young readers. And a lot of readers are accepting of Tris's death or will be if written in a way that makes more sense to them. I think a pointless death just adds to the tragedy, I rather they fix all the repetitive plot points (really....more running from/fighting people incharge) and stop Tobias from turning into a idiot that goes against his character.A huge number doesn't mean most. Negative voice tends to be the loudest even if it's the minority. There are plenty of five star reviews on amazon that are accepting or love the ending.
Plus, this is the last part of the franchise, there's no where to go after the ending so there's nothing left to lose if they keep it the same.
When books become a movie, the author has a lot of say of what to change and what to keep, as I'm sure you already know. For Insurgent, Roth agreed to some minor changes for the movie based on fan opinions and what not. But Roth is confident about her ending to the trilogy and she personally does not believe there's any reason to adapt the movie ending to suit the fan's wants. She believes that movies are not supposed to be based upon the audience depicting how the story should go and she wants to retain the ending the same way as the book.Because of her involvement in the script and, well the whole storyline, I do not believe she will allow the ending to change based upon fan outrage.
I think my post got deleted. I said you two had some very good points. However, I will say, as someone else has said elsewhere, an author needs to be aware of her fanbase. When picturing the final book of the series, who thought-I hope Tris goes out with a bang-literally? Who pictured more action, romance, tying up of loose plot points, character growth, etc.? I feel many readers were picturing many different ways the story would unfold and conclude, but death of main character and subsequent profound grief of soul mate wasn't one of them. So the point is, well, I have an opinion about it and so don't you. And that's fine. It's just a book, it's just a movie. I'll live either way it goes. I just won't watch it if it's sad and tragic.
I did a little research...on Google. Here are some titles of books that had different movie endings. 1. Jurassic Park
2. Planet of the Apes
3. A clockwork orange
4. Fight club
5. The Scarlet letter
6. Breakfast at Tiffany s
7. My sister's keeper
8. The mist
9. The lorax
10.red alert
11.Forrest Gump -Jenny doesn't die in book
12.I am legend
13.first blood
14. The body snatches
I do acknowledge that many movie endings are altered or completely changed. All I'm saying is Roth says she doesn't want the ending to change, even based on the louder negative reviews. As Nuran said, there are plenty of 5 star reviews that probably encourage Roth to stick to her original and gut feeling about the ending.An author can't please everyone, so why not please yourself?
Spoilers for I am Legend ahead.I'm not sure I am Legend is a good case, the movie had two potential ending, and they picked the one where the main guy dies. Plus, that movie was more inspired by the book rather than a true adaption. The Mist ending, though I've never read the book, ends quite brutally and depressing.
Those two movies kind of show that the movie industry does have a penchant for sad endings.
To R. Kaye-"Roth says she doesn't want to change the ending....an author can't please everyone so why not please herself?" So I was thinking about your comment today. A personal experience came to my mind.
I am a mom to 3 teenagers. These kids seem to like certain foods which I grow tired of. I've tried making stuff I like, only to find they don't like it. I'm thinking, they just need to expand their tastes and eventually they'll love it. That does not fly. They don't like it and express it. (Not rudely just to clarify!) Should I get defensive and say too bad!! I like it, so you need to eat it? Or should I have thought while I'm planning the meal-I know they won't like xyz, so, because I love them ill be considerate of what they are expecting and maybe save the meal I LIKE for when im by myself.?
The same story applies for ice cream. I like fruity flavor as well as chocolate;, they all like some form of chocolate. Am I being considerate if I bring a flavor home that I like, or that I know we will all appreciate.? The kind thing to do is make it so WE ALL enjoy the ice cream. I've had this happen and I've finally learned.
I'm not trying to sound condescending. My point here is we could ALL be happy if the author allows an alternative ending, even if it's just for the dvd.
@DarleneThat is an excellent example and a very good point. And to clarify, I did not find it condescending whatsoever. :)
Then again, that is only one example.
You could relate it to something more personal. Like, your child for example. Let's just say you named your son Bob. Bob is the name you've had in your head from the start and you love that name and you couldn't think of a better name for your son then Bob. Bob is the best name your son could have.
Now, let's say Bob goes to a new school in the middle of 8th grade. The kids and teachers hear of Bob's arrival, and they are very excited to meet him and hear good things about him, but they hate his name. They don't like it at all, that name that you loved from the start. So they tell you that you should change it to Larry. But that's not what you want. Your child, his name is Bob, and Larry is so different and it doesn't fit what you personally love and are confident in. But everyone else wants Bob to be Larry.
Do you change your son's name because of everyone else?
Changing the ending of your book, is like changing your child's name. I know that might sound crazy and weird but it's very true. When an author writes a book, they are personally connected to it, especially how it ends and especially if it's an ending different than the usual. To most authors, Bob will always be better than Larry.
Aah, I get what you are saying. Very good point as well. We just feel differently about this.
And that's totally okay. I LOVED hearing your opinion and I appreciate you hearing mine as well.
When books become a movie, the author has a lot of say of what to change and what to keep, as I'm sure you already know.Actually, depending on the terms of their contract, most authors have very little say in how their book is adapted. Some have a lot of control, like E.L. James did, because she sold the rights after her (terrible) books were already worldwide bestsellers and so she had a lot of pull in what she could demand of the studio. Same with J.K. Rowling - she sold the franchise rights after the second Harry Potter book was already out and the world was already in a Harry Potter craze, so she could call a lot of the shots and make specific demands in her contract because the series was a "hot" commodity and the studio was willing to do whatever it takes to get it. However, a lot of books, like Divergent, are optioned before the first novel is even published, and because the books are as yet an untested property those authors have little pull in their negotiations as far as how much control they get to have in the filmmaking process and decisions. As such, Roth and other authors in her position have very little to do with the movie's production and enjoy a more or less hands-off approach, which I don't think she minds at all. From what I've read/heard she's perfectly happy to let the people in the know do their thing and call the shots and trust that it's in the best interests of making a good movie. She's "involved," yes, and she visits the sets and meets with everyone and reads the scripts and gives her input, but she doesn't really have any say in what they ultimately choose to do. They can change whatever they want and while she can give her opinion about it, they technically don't have to listen if she says she doesn't like it - they have the right to do what they want, because she sold them that right.
That said, when it comes to "big" changes, I'm sure they take care to involve her in those decisions - as in, bring her into a meeting and hash it out and come to an agreement that everyone can be on board with. If they do choose to change the ending somehow, I'm sure she will be involved in whatever angle they choose to take and they would definitely want to have her blessing/approval - but they don't necessarily need her permission. Regardless of how Roth feels about the way she ended her story, if they want to change it somehow, they could. But I honestly don't know if they would, given that the author has made her feelings clear about her story's conclusion. (Notice how I said "her story," because the movie's story is not the same thing. The movies and the books are two separate entities.) They can do whatever they want, with whatever they want, but would they actually go against the author's opinion on the biggest point in the entire series? I truly don't know. I can't decide if it would be ballsier to change it or ballsier to keep it, and I can't guess what these folks' thought processes would lean them toward since a lot of their choices with this franchise have so far been pretty bizarre anyway. We'll find out soon enough, I guess.
Darlene wrote: "Truth-no. We own it. My daughter tried reading it in spite of knowing the outcome but she didn't like it. I know I must sound hypocritical in judging this book without having read it. But honestly,..."Don't judge a book just by its reviews. Read it first. Sorry to say but your judgement is kind of stupid.. I read the whole series, and personally I loved the ending because it really puts an emphasis on the fact that Tris was very brave and altough her brother done what he done to hurt her she was smart enough to forgive him. Also, she sacrificed herself for the people she loved, she wanted them to know the truth. Tris died a very heroic death. And her death also reflects on how she belonged to Dauntless (for her bravery), Erudite (for being smart) and Abnegation (for being selfless enough to forgive her brother and die instead of him).If Caleb had died instead of her, then I would have hated the books. Veronica Roth is a brilliant author and the plot twists are amazing.
My review is not about the technicalities or writing style of the book. It is just simply my opinion about the author's choice in killing off Tris at the very end of the series. When I found out Tris died in Caleb's place, my first reaction was-she already did that in Insurgent. She already offered herself up to Jeanine to stop the suicides. That act was amazingly brave. To do it again in Allegiant was repettitive and redundant.(in my opinion) and didn't show anything new to me.
It's just my opinion that it didn't feel right for this young adult series. That's all.
Also, she sacrificed herself for the people she loved, she wanted them to know the truth. Tris died a very heroic death.She died to enact vengeance against a group of people that she personally disagreed with by inflicting the same evil thing on them that they were about to do to others. It was a truly villainous act and it's clear that the author was so caught up in trying to invent an "excuse" for Tris to sacrifice herself and satisfy the outline she had laid out, while also tying up the loose ends of the general plot, that she didn't notice how utterly reprehensible and stupid the actual situation was. Tris was not a hero, and she didn't die for the people she loved. It wasn't about the people of the city, and it wasn't even about Caleb. She died for the sake of doing an entirely subjective "right thing," because it's what her parents would have done, because she owed it to them to do as they did in order to honor what they did for her. Her death was all about her.
There's a good article out there called Writing in the Dark, author blog for writer J.N. Duncan. To those who can't understand the reasons readers didn't like the death of Tris, I recommend reading it.Also another good article with exceptional comments following-Hell Hath No Fury Like a Fan Scorned-Allegiant.
I'm not as good at expressing my reasons as others, so I seek out reviews to help me put my thoughts into words.
I agree with Lauren that in many ways, Tris's self-sacrifice was actually a selfish action. Also, Darlene, could you provide links? I'm very interested in what you've brought up.
J.n.Duncan.Wordpress.com/writing in the dark.Bookriot.com/hell hath no fury like a super fan scorned
To Matthew-a quote from jimnduncan- the bottom line here, at least in this genre of storytelling, is that readers want hope. It's the hope that no matter what crap before you, no matter what ridiculous dangerous actions you take, that somehow in someway you'll make it out on the other side survived into adulthood. Ross failed to do that. She took the hope and crushed it. Of course she can write the story anyway she sees fit and is under no real obligation to do otherwise. But readers don't jump into this world for reality. Not sure she expected this kind of backlash but that's going to happen when you mess with something is fundamental as hope. If I had a heroine I was invested in and it was the kind of story where I expected victory and I got the rug yanked out at the end? I'd be pissed too.
Another quote a favorite of mine - I don't buy into Veronica Roth rationalization anyway that your journey is complete you can die now. That is not a round character that's just a dead one.
Nice quotes! By the way, the first link isn't working.I found the second article itself to miss the point and resort to attacking straw men, but the comments were very insightful like you said.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
