Are the choices we make really made on our own free will or is it all fate, predestined and set in stone no matter how hard we try to escape it? In "The Adjustment Bureau", a rising politician, David Norris (Matt Damon) bumps into a ballerina, Elise (Emily Blunt) in the strangest of places under the strangest of circumstances and they are immediately attracted to each other. Even though mysterious men (The Adjusters) are dead set on keeping them apart, they keep bumping into each other by chance. Finally, one of the stranger mysterious guys kidnap him and lay it all in front of him. They are the course correctors of the world. Whenever they hand over free will to humans from the heights of human advancements, we inevitably decline into anarchy, the Dark Ages and world wars. He realizes the gravity of the situation where his and Elise's entire starlit future will no longer be a possibility if they fall in love. In the face of overwhelming odds, either he must let her go and accept his fate or risk everything to be with her and push their career into an abyss.
People who haven't watched 'Fringe' are calling this movie imaginative and intriguing, while I'd say its derivative of a far greater work. The Adjustment Bureau in the movie is quite obviously fashioned along the lines of Fringe's "OBSERVERS". The differences being the notable not-balded heads, the use of 'portal doors' and The Adjusters being more or less angels. The Observers though, are obviously much more better written than The Adjusters who seem very non-threatening. Implying God as the Chairman was really funny to me. It made the movie less suspenseful than it should have been. Then there's a plot deviation in the middle when its revealed that David and Elise were meant to be together in all the previous plans, but the plan was changed suddenly. So, now they were meant to be with different people. This brings up the whole - Why the hell did the Chairman change the plan in the first place!! Thus, David and Elise, when you think about it, never had any free will to fall in love with each other since the remnants of the previous plans were subconsciously in their minds.
Most people are comparing this movie to Inception which is highly unfair since its not an all out intelligent action/sci-fi thriller. But, if this is the kind of stories 'Inception' helps bring about in Hollywood, then its a step in the right direction. Let me be clear, I really liked the movie, but the potential it had was never quite achieved. Why did the Adjustors want humans to have a better life? What was their interest in all this? It was never explained. They didn't delve into the philosophical or sci-fi aspects of the story. The first half was far superior to the latter half of the movie. Also it didn't help with the fact that the gorgeous Emily Blunt is just the arm candy for Matt Damon and is completely under utilized, barring a few scenes. Matt Damon is perfect in his portrayal as always. By far, the breakout character being the Adjuster, Harry (Anthony Mackie) who goes against the rules and helps David Norris in his quest. In retrospect, his was the only arc where the philosophical and moral conundrum in following God's plans was even remotely touched upon (same storyline is done better in 'Supernatural'). This movie is just another 'love triumphs over all hardships' with a sci-fi/supernatural twist. Could have been done better, but its enjoyable nonetheless.
7/10
People who haven't watched 'Fringe' are calling this movie imaginative and intriguing, while I'd say its derivative of a far greater work. The Adjustment Bureau in the movie is quite obviously fashioned along the lines of Fringe's "OBSERVERS". The differences being the notable not-balded heads, the use of 'portal doors' and The Adjusters being more or less angels. The Observers though, are obviously much more better written than The Adjusters who seem very non-threatening. Implying God as the Chairman was really funny to me. It made the movie less suspenseful than it should have been. Then there's a plot deviation in the middle when its revealed that David and Elise were meant to be together in all the previous plans, but the plan was changed suddenly. So, now they were meant to be with different people. This brings up the whole - Why the hell did the Chairman change the plan in the first place!! Thus, David and Elise, when you think about it, never had any free will to fall in love with each other since the remnants of the previous plans were subconsciously in their minds.
Most people are comparing this movie to Inception which is highly unfair since its not an all out intelligent action/sci-fi thriller. But, if this is the kind of stories 'Inception' helps bring about in Hollywood, then its a step in the right direction. Let me be clear, I really liked the movie, but the potential it had was never quite achieved. Why did the Adjustors want humans to have a better life? What was their interest in all this? It was never explained. They didn't delve into the philosophical or sci-fi aspects of the story. The first half was far superior to the latter half of the movie. Also it didn't help with the fact that the gorgeous Emily Blunt is just the arm candy for Matt Damon and is completely under utilized, barring a few scenes. Matt Damon is perfect in his portrayal as always. By far, the breakout character being the Adjuster, Harry (Anthony Mackie) who goes against the rules and helps David Norris in his quest. In retrospect, his was the only arc where the philosophical and moral conundrum in following God's plans was even remotely touched upon (same storyline is done better in 'Supernatural'). This movie is just another 'love triumphs over all hardships' with a sci-fi/supernatural twist. Could have been done better, but its enjoyable nonetheless.
7/10