To those who have not watched the movie, the movie The Giver is one where the elders have created a world which they feel is superior. One where the people involved are ‘not given a choice because when people are given a choice they choose wrong.’ The elders determine the lives of the kids as they progress through life, and they are satisfied with this life of theirs.
The characters are very ignorant. They kill the old, and the young, and do not realize that they are killing them. Instead they think they are being sent somewhere else, somewhere they would belong better.
The Giver, or The Reciever is a person who is given the responsibility of holding the memories of the past so that someone is there who can be used as a reference for how to proceede with decisions.
For those that don’t know, I am very interested in “The Perfect World,” and I have writen a book on it. It is titled as Zharae on Amazon. Here is my stance on the world this movie creates:
*These momories are very volitile, painful, and fragile. If either the giver or the reciever dies then those memories are gone. Precious or not. Since the memories are damaging, and hard to hold that makes this storage option very fragile.
*The Giver is not given any sort of political influence. Why do they even exist if they are not going to be considered? Someone who is ostracized, and considered different, wrong, is not going to feel included and as though it is politically correct.
*The babies are born, and then given to family households. Mother and father who aren’t together? Killing one child just because it is not as big as the other, not because of any other reason? It seems like needless parts, inefficient. Nurseries, or grades, where the “parents” have no job other than to care for the children seems like the better choice. They even have that job in the movie, the nurturers. They have child-bearers as well. Take the child away from the mother just to give it to another woman just as experienced? Silly.
*The daily injection. It’s good in theory, and how is it different to have child-bearers than to have nurterers for all the women who end up having children. Color does not change much.
*Inconsistant wordings. How do the children know of words like “love” if their parents don’t use them? How do they even know these words exist?
*The “end of the world” was very nice, as is the controlled population. It makes everything more controlled, more statistical.
*The elders work so hard to place everything into a job that they would adore, and it sounds like they are always right. Always, and if they were wrong they could be re-assaigned. Everyone fits in, has a place, and is wanted.
*Biking and walking was popular, which is quite healthy.
*Here, let me repeat it: Everyone was given a place in this world they created. They weren’t left to fend for themselves.
Overall the movie was… interesting, maybe a little bland if you’re not analyzing it. I did enjoy the analysis, and the ideas behind it. It felt a little tossed, and as though they didn’t consider one thing: If the giver was removed, what is wrong with the world? From the outlook of the people in the world? Nothing. No pain, no torment, and the giver doesn’t even have anything to provide them in return for the torment he has to endure.