Follow TV Tropes

Following

History YMMV / TheGiver

Go To

OR

Added: 492

Changed: 2

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Gabriel. He's a cute, happy kid, but he spends most of the book with his status up in the air because he's not developing as quickly as he's supposed to be. Then it's revealed that [[spoiler:he's going to be [[ReleasedToElsewhere Released]], all because he still has trouble sleeping through the night, and the reader ''knows'' what Release means by this point. And it's cheerfully stated by Jonas's father, who otherwise ''likes'' Gabriel! No wonder Jonas freaks out about it.]] Poor kid.



* AlternativeCharacterInterpretation: Given her expanded role, Chief Elder is subjected to this. Does she truly believe in what she preaches or is she more interested in power? Is it possible that she was [[spoiler: Rosemary's mother]] and that [[spoiler: her daughter's death]] played a role in shaping her character?

to:

* AlternativeCharacterInterpretation: Given her expanded role, Chief Elder is subjected to this. Does she truly believe in what she preaches or is she more interested in power? Is it possible that she was [[spoiler: Rosemary's [[spoiler:Rosemary's mother]] and that [[spoiler: her [[spoiler:her daughter's death]] played a role in shaping her character?

Changed: 102

Removed: 71

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Fixing indentation


-->'''The Giver:''' With your ''legs.''

to:

-->'''The --->'''The Giver:''' With your ''legs.''''legs''.



-->'''Jonas:''' Give me your hands. (He looks at the rainbow in the waterfall). Do you see it?
-->'''Fiona:''' Oh my goodness.
-->'''Jonas:''' You see it?
-->'''Fiona:''' Yes. It's water.
** There's also something pretty funny about how, despite the fact that almost all emotion has been wiped away, she's still capable of being a DeadpanSnarker--in fact, most of what she says is snark! One wonders just how snarky she'll manage to be once she has her full range of emotions back.

to:

-->'''Jonas:''' --->'''Jonas:''' Give me your hands. (He looks ''(looks at the rainbow in the waterfall). waterfall)'' Do you see it?
-->'''Fiona:'''
it?\\
'''Fiona:'''
Oh my goodness.
-->'''Jonas:'''
goodness.\\
'''Jonas:'''
You see it?
-->'''Fiona:'''
it?\\
'''Fiona:'''
Yes. It's water.
** There's also something pretty funny about how, despite the fact that almost all emotion has been wiped away, she's still capable of being a DeadpanSnarker--in DeadpanSnarker -- in fact, most of what she says is snark! One wonders just how snarky she'll manage to be once she has her full range of emotions back.



* RetroactiveRecognition: Who woulda guessed Asher would later become [[Series/{{Gotham}} the clown-themed bringer of disorder and anarchy?]]
** How about a [[VideoGame/{{StarWarsJediFallenOrder}} Jedi fugitive?]]

to:

* RetroactiveRecognition: Who woulda would have guessed Asher would later become [[Series/{{Gotham}} the clown-themed bringer of disorder and anarchy?]]
** How
anarchy]]? Or how about a [[VideoGame/{{StarWarsJediFallenOrder}} [[VideoGame/StarWarsJediFallenOrder Jedi fugitive?]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* HilariousInHindsight: Not so much hilarious as mildly amusing, but the concept of a colorless, controlled world slowly becoming colorful as it becomes more complex, at least from Jonas's perspective, would later be done again in a more widespread way in ''Film/{{Pleasantville}}''.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* StrawmanHasAPoint: Jonas' parents claiming that "do you love me?" is a meaningless question and suggesting a few more specific ones like "do you enjoy me?" is treated as a horrifying sign that they [[MeasuringTheMarigolds don't understand love.]] However, it might be argued that a parent who enjoys and takes pride in their child does indeed love that child according to any reasonable definition, and that it's not the worst thing in the world if they prefer to focus on their specific, individual feelings rather than using the blanket term for them.

to:

* StrawmanHasAPoint: Jonas' parents claiming that "do you love me?" is a meaningless question and suggesting a few more specific ones like "do you enjoy me?" is treated as a horrifying sign that they [[MeasuringTheMarigolds don't understand love.]] However, it might be argued that a parent who enjoys and takes pride in their child does indeed love that child according to any reasonable definition, and that it's not the worst thing in the world if they prefer to focus on their specific, individual feelings rather than using the blanket term for them. That being said, it's also notable that they ''don't'' truly enjoy and take pride in their child, as they're literally unable to have true depths of feeling.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** How about a [[VideoGame/{{StarWarsJediFallenOrder}} Jedi fugitive?]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* TheyWastedAPerfectlyGoodPlot: Instead of staying in the Community to see how Jonas escaping with Gabriel affected them, ''Son'' follows Claire on her ridiculously convoluted quest to find Gabriel.

Changed: 57

Removed: 613

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:


* TaintedByThePreview: The fans are ''not'' happy about the movie's trailer. If you didn't know better, you'd swear it was actually a parody of InNameOnly adaptations that only exist to jump on the bandwagon of young adult dystopias. This lightened up a bit on the movie's release, as it's ''far'' less action-heavy and more true to the book than the trailers let on. That said, the film still ended up receiving predominantly mixed-to-negative reviews.
** YMMV with that take. The film is not at all true to the book. The dystopia is made out to be inexplicably futuristic, plot elements are mixed and matched throughout and out of order, characters are aged up significantly but given the same childish dialogue and direction, the Giver and Jonas’ relationship is very different, many characters are a departure from their original iterations, Fiona’s role is needlessly elevated, the Giver and Receiver now comically share an obvious tattoo on their wrist (undermining the concept of sameness) and the setting itself is heavily exaggerated to a generic YA society.

to:

* TaintedByThePreview: The fans are ''not'' happy about the movie's trailer. If you didn't know better, you'd swear it was actually a parody of InNameOnly adaptations that only exist to jump on the bandwagon of young adult dystopias. This lightened up a bit on the movie's release, as it's ''far'' less action-heavy and more true to the book than the trailers let on. That said, the film still ended up receiving predominantly mixed-to-negative reviews.
** YMMV with that take. The film is
reviews for not at all being true to the book. The dystopia is made out to be inexplicably futuristic, plot elements are mixed and matched throughout and out of order, characters are aged up significantly but given the same childish dialogue and direction, the Giver and Jonas’ relationship is very different, many characters are a departure from their original iterations, Fiona’s role is needlessly elevated, the Giver and Receiver now comically share an obvious tattoo on their wrist (undermining the concept of sameness) and the setting itself is heavily exaggerated to a generic YA society.book.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*** ''Messenger'' does at least mention that the community [[spoiler:sent Jonas some books, presumably the ones The Giver owned, implying that they were at least around for a few more years]]. Exactly what happened in the meantime and how they reacted to everything are still up for debate, though.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* SlidingScaleOfSocialSatisfaction: Categorized as "Too Happy to Care".

Top