xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Passengers
- Thread starter Brian in Mesa
- Start date
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Looks interesting.
looking forward to this one
Saw this yesterday. It's weird because,,, ok disclaimer, I never watched a preview of this movie.
I am on a strict NO PREVIEWS policy now, I try to either arrive 15 mins late to every movie (one of the benefits of assigned seats) or I just close my eyes during previews. I'm just sick of trailers that spoil the entire damn movie! ok moving on
So having no idea what to expect, I really enjoyed this movie.
That being said, everyone I was with either said it was just ok or it was "nothing like they expected." I blame the previews. Some who saw the previews thought it was going to be this pulse pumping action film and others thought it was going to be a sweet love story. But it was neither. It was a psychological think film in space. What would you do? Could you do it? Could you live with yourself? Could you live with the lie? The guilt?
This is why I think I enjoyed it. I had no expectations at all. I knew who was in it and it was a space movie and that's it.
What I liked about it:
My friends. I strongly urge all of you to stop watching trailers. Hollywood now believes that we are all so incredibly stupid that we need to see every movie before we see it so they show every major plot point in the movies anymore. Because ALL of my friends and family who said; It was just ok. Had a better opinion after hearing my take, and my questions for them. Then they started thinking and that was IMO the point of the movie. Then they had a better opinion of it.
It's just the freakin trailers that make you think one thing and then disappoint you.
Dont do it! Or watch the first 10 seconds and if you think its something you want to see, quit watching!
I am on a strict NO PREVIEWS policy now, I try to either arrive 15 mins late to every movie (one of the benefits of assigned seats) or I just close my eyes during previews. I'm just sick of trailers that spoil the entire damn movie! ok moving on
So having no idea what to expect, I really enjoyed this movie.
That being said, everyone I was with either said it was just ok or it was "nothing like they expected." I blame the previews. Some who saw the previews thought it was going to be this pulse pumping action film and others thought it was going to be a sweet love story. But it was neither. It was a psychological think film in space. What would you do? Could you do it? Could you live with yourself? Could you live with the lie? The guilt?
This is why I think I enjoyed it. I had no expectations at all. I knew who was in it and it was a space movie and that's it.
What I liked about it:
The whole development of Pratts character. I thought it was so interesting the dilemma he found himself in. What a total mind eff! You're alone on a desert island but you can bring someone there with you, but they'll be stranded too.
Easy enough to say no I would never do that to someone. Talk to me after you've been alone for a year or 2... Knowing you will die alone. Knowing that you could do this one thing and basically end your suffering...
I also loved Jlaws reaction to finding out. I thought it was totally realistic. It was murder, he 100% took her life, just in a non traditional way.
FInally, I loved the development of her character, as she realized more and more (as Pratt was going to do the vent thing and die) how he had felt and how horrible it would be to know you are trapped on that ship for the rest of your life....
Anyways, it wasn't a perfect movie, I thought the end was corny and kindof far fetched but whatever! I enjoyed it.
Easy enough to say no I would never do that to someone. Talk to me after you've been alone for a year or 2... Knowing you will die alone. Knowing that you could do this one thing and basically end your suffering...
I also loved Jlaws reaction to finding out. I thought it was totally realistic. It was murder, he 100% took her life, just in a non traditional way.
FInally, I loved the development of her character, as she realized more and more (as Pratt was going to do the vent thing and die) how he had felt and how horrible it would be to know you are trapped on that ship for the rest of your life....
Anyways, it wasn't a perfect movie, I thought the end was corny and kindof far fetched but whatever! I enjoyed it.
My friends. I strongly urge all of you to stop watching trailers. Hollywood now believes that we are all so incredibly stupid that we need to see every movie before we see it so they show every major plot point in the movies anymore. Because ALL of my friends and family who said; It was just ok. Had a better opinion after hearing my take, and my questions for them. Then they started thinking and that was IMO the point of the movie. Then they had a better opinion of it.
It's just the freakin trailers that make you think one thing and then disappoint you.
Dont do it! Or watch the first 10 seconds and if you think its something you want to see, quit watching!
Last edited:
OP
OP
Passengers
Release date: December 21, 2016
Studio: Sony Pictures
Director: Morten Tyldum
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (for sexuality, nudity and action/peril)
Screenwriter: Jon Spaihts
Genre: Adventure
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Chris Pratt, Michael Sheen, Laurence Fishburne
Plot Summary: On a routine journey through space to a new home, two passengers, sleeping in suspended animation, are awakened 90 years too early when their ship malfunctions. As Jim (Chris Pratt) and Aurora (Jennifer Lawrence) face living the rest of their lives on board, with every luxury they could ever ask for, they begin to fall for each other, unable to deny their intense attraction... until they discover the ship is in grave danger. With the lives of 5000 sleeping passengers at stake, only Jim and Aurora can save them all.
Release date: December 21, 2016
Studio: Sony Pictures
Director: Morten Tyldum
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (for sexuality, nudity and action/peril)
Screenwriter: Jon Spaihts
Genre: Adventure
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Chris Pratt, Michael Sheen, Laurence Fishburne
Plot Summary: On a routine journey through space to a new home, two passengers, sleeping in suspended animation, are awakened 90 years too early when their ship malfunctions. As Jim (Chris Pratt) and Aurora (Jennifer Lawrence) face living the rest of their lives on board, with every luxury they could ever ask for, they begin to fall for each other, unable to deny their intense attraction... until they discover the ship is in grave danger. With the lives of 5000 sleeping passengers at stake, only Jim and Aurora can save them all.
You must be registered for see images attach
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2003
- Posts
- 26,955
- Reaction score
- 3,895
******** they are both good looking people.
I'll probably go and see this although it's getting crappy reviews. It's an interesting plot, to me. I loved Pratt in Parks and Recreation but I haven't seen him in anything else (havent seen the Galaxy movies). I like JLaw from the Hunger Games movies and Silver Linings Playbook.
I'll probably go and see this although it's getting crappy reviews. It's an interesting plot, to me. I loved Pratt in Parks and Recreation but I haven't seen him in anything else (havent seen the Galaxy movies). I like JLaw from the Hunger Games movies and Silver Linings Playbook.
I think you'll like it. Dont pay attention to the reviews. It's so hip to hate everything right now. If you write a positive review of a film you're soft and lame, but if you rip it up you're edgy and hip!
Criticz R dumb
Chaplin
Better off silent
The first thing you need to do is see Guardians of the Galaxy. As soon as humanly possible!
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2003
- Posts
- 26,955
- Reaction score
- 3,895
Added to my library list today!
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Good first 2/3 of the movie, and an absolutely crap fest the final 1/3. What is truly disturbing is the premise of the film seems to be:
It's okay to be a rapist and a stalker...sometimes!
First of all I agree about the 3rds...
I disagree I think it was just an interesting example of perspective. There's no doubt that what he did was wrong, immoral, and like she said; nothing short of murder.
It's not like she just forgave him. She almost murdered him but couldn't bring herself to do it. She only forgave him when she was faced with the same future he faced, which is why she realized it and said; "I cant live out my life on this ship alone without you."
Not arguing that what he did was super creepy and wrong, but they acknowledged that, it's not like they just glazed over it.
Instead of painting a black and white, mickey mouse right and wrong world, they painted a world where loneliness, despair and desire can drive you to do terrible things. And a world where you really have to search your soul to decide if you're going to forgive someone because you grow to understand them.
Not saying it was a great movie, but I think the synopsis; "Rape is ok sometimes." Is pretty over simplistic and it kindof makes me want to launch you out of the exhaust vent of the reactor and roast you to medium well.
It's not like she just forgave him. She almost murdered him but couldn't bring herself to do it. She only forgave him when she was faced with the same future he faced, which is why she realized it and said; "I cant live out my life on this ship alone without you."
Not arguing that what he did was super creepy and wrong, but they acknowledged that, it's not like they just glazed over it.
Instead of painting a black and white, mickey mouse right and wrong world, they painted a world where loneliness, despair and desire can drive you to do terrible things. And a world where you really have to search your soul to decide if you're going to forgive someone because you grow to understand them.
Not saying it was a great movie, but I think the synopsis; "Rape is ok sometimes." Is pretty over simplistic and it kindof makes me want to launch you out of the exhaust vent of the reactor and roast you to medium well.
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
First of all I agree about the 3rds...
I disagree I think it was just an interesting example of perspective. There's no doubt that what he did was wrong, immoral, and like she said; nothing short of murder.
It's not like she just forgave him. She almost murdered him but couldn't bring herself to do it. She only forgave him when she was faced with the same future he faced, which is why she realized it and said; "I cant live out my life on this ship alone without you."
Not arguing that what he did was super creepy and wrong, but they acknowledged that, it's not like they just glazed over it.
Instead of painting a black and white, mickey mouse right and wrong world, they painted a world where loneliness, despair and desire can drive you to do terrible things. And a world where you really have to search your soul to decide if you're going to forgive someone because you grow to understand them.
Not saying it was a great movie, but I think the synopsis; "Rape is ok sometimes." Is pretty over simplistic and it kindof makes me want to launch you out of the exhaust vent of the reactor and roast you to medium well.
Yeah, no, I 100 percent disagree. I'm not arguing for black and white, or to make it lighter; I actually think it should have been darker--MUCH darker. Instead, they did the stupid bland Hollywood whitewashing kind of third act, that just kills movies. I read somewhere that it was much darker and edgy and that, once they locked up the big Hollywood stars, they ripped the script apart and made it 'safer' Hollywood crap. And that's what we got in the third act.
Sorry, but this was 'rapey is okay...sometimes.' It was a straight parallel to modern stalker and rape culture. I love how it was approached and set up--he's toiling with being alone, finds someone cute, reads and watches her stuff, becomes attracted and fixated, wakes her up, uses all his stalker info to get the girl--that was a GREAT dark setup. So far, so good. She finds out and flips out. He goes uber-creepy, non-consent stalker over the intercom, forcing her to listen while watching her on camera. SUPER stalker creepy and wrong on so many levels. So far, so good. Unfortunately, it falls apart from there.
In the third act, everything was utterly predictable because it was all the typical Hollywood stupidity. Oh, he'll have to get fire stormed...but somehow he'll live. She won't be able to reach him, coming up JUST short...but will grab his cable (actually told my friend that one right before it happened). She'll somehow get him to the med bay and SOMEHOW get him into the scanner, and save him. Boring, predictable. Stupid. No stakes, none at all. This is writing at its worst. Unfortunately, it goes from mere Hollywood crap to really, REALLY unforgivable.
What makes this movie absolute rape culture crap is that she falls to pieces, forgives him, can't live without him, loves him again, and gives up her future life to stay with him. Um, STOCKHOLM SYNDROME MUCH? Jim could have absolutely redeemed himself--by dying. I mean, really, he had to die to make this movie palatable. But, okay, Hollywood crap, so he didn't die. She could have forgiven him without falling in love with him after that. It would have been weak, but acceptable. "I forgive you. I understand what you did, and why you did it. I can never, ever love you or be with you, but we can become friends and keep each other company." In that scenario, her choosing to go into the med pod would have made perfect sense. Choosing to give up her life and NOT go into the pod was just the final nail in this rapey coffin.
The direction I'd have gone? The tragic hero dies saving the woman he raped/murdered, and saving the whole ship, thus in some way redeeming himself. This puts her in HIS shoes, and, to take it to a dark place and make a risky choice, we end with her waking someone up and perpetuating the cycle.
My friend had another good dark direction. After all the stuff he put her through, when she settles down, she decides to stalk him through the ship and torture/murder him. I mean, it would have been fun, and a good dark turn, but I wouldn't have gone that far.
As it stands...no, sorry, the final 1/3 of the movie is a regressive rape/murder fantasy. It 100 percent falls to pieces and is in no way redeemable.
In the third act, everything was utterly predictable because it was all the typical Hollywood stupidity. Oh, he'll have to get fire stormed...but somehow he'll live. She won't be able to reach him, coming up JUST short...but will grab his cable (actually told my friend that one right before it happened). She'll somehow get him to the med bay and SOMEHOW get him into the scanner, and save him. Boring, predictable. Stupid. No stakes, none at all. This is writing at its worst. Unfortunately, it goes from mere Hollywood crap to really, REALLY unforgivable.
What makes this movie absolute rape culture crap is that she falls to pieces, forgives him, can't live without him, loves him again, and gives up her future life to stay with him. Um, STOCKHOLM SYNDROME MUCH? Jim could have absolutely redeemed himself--by dying. I mean, really, he had to die to make this movie palatable. But, okay, Hollywood crap, so he didn't die. She could have forgiven him without falling in love with him after that. It would have been weak, but acceptable. "I forgive you. I understand what you did, and why you did it. I can never, ever love you or be with you, but we can become friends and keep each other company." In that scenario, her choosing to go into the med pod would have made perfect sense. Choosing to give up her life and NOT go into the pod was just the final nail in this rapey coffin.
The direction I'd have gone? The tragic hero dies saving the woman he raped/murdered, and saving the whole ship, thus in some way redeeming himself. This puts her in HIS shoes, and, to take it to a dark place and make a risky choice, we end with her waking someone up and perpetuating the cycle.
My friend had another good dark direction. After all the stuff he put her through, when she settles down, she decides to stalk him through the ship and torture/murder him. I mean, it would have been fun, and a good dark turn, but I wouldn't have gone that far.
As it stands...no, sorry, the final 1/3 of the movie is a regressive rape/murder fantasy. It 100 percent falls to pieces and is in no way redeemable.
Whatever is wrong with you, is no small thing. I'm sorry I did not think that through using the deepest, darkest recesses of my soul.
You're right, the point of this movie was that Rape is awesome. #rollseyes
You're still awesome.
You're right, the point of this movie was that Rape is awesome. #rollseyes
You're still awesome.
AsUpRoDiGy
Magnanimous
Well there's more to it than that:
Without him waking her up...they wouldn't have been able to open the reactor hatch, which would've resulted in the entire ship being destroyed. So it was kind of a "everything happens for a reason" type thing...even though it was a really creepy/stalker reason. The last 3rd of the movie could've been a lot better, and I think they should've let Jim die to give Aurora a different perspective, but like you said...they went full hollyweed on it.
Oh, and Jennifer Lawrence is ridiculously gorgeous. That is all.
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Yep. That's why I thought it was going so great, including all the murdery/rapey stuff. They just fumbled the third act, is all.
Ok I agree, the ending was weak I think I said somewhat the same thing.
But I agree with your assessment about the 3rd act, I thought he was going to, ya know, then he didn't and I was like awe weak.
So fine, you're right, but I still insist that you have the farty-est of all the pants.
Last edited:
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
If only you knew me, you'd know how true your last statement is
OP
OP
Wife and I saw it tonight. Decent movie, but that's about it.
It could have been much more, IMHO. I looked into the original script/ending and liked some of the stuff that was in the original script better. I can see why it was on The Black List (hottest scripts not yet made into films).
http://screenrant.com/passengers-original-script-ending-film/
http://screenrant.com/passengers-original-script-ending-film/
Crud wrong thread. Never mind.
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Oh, I don't know. The fact that he spent half a year personally researching every detail about her, forcibly brought her to a place (time) she would never have gone to on her own, pretended he knew nothing about her, and used every detail of his illicit stalking to get her into the sack. Sounds pretty damn rapey to me.
BillsCarnage
ASFN Addict
Saw this. It's was cool/interesting until Fishburne woke up and then it seemed to use every movie cliche' for that type of ending.
"i have to go out to open/fix the thingy..."
"i have to stay to keep the thingy open or everyone dies...."
"i have to go out to open/fix the thingy..."
"i have to stay to keep the thingy open or everyone dies...."
The only thing I wish they did was:
to show more then just the plants and animals when the crew/passengers woke up at the end. Find out if they had kids and how many? It just ended way to fast.
BillsCarnage
ASFN Addict
Well, the only thing I wish they did was:
Show more of Jlaw in tight or skimpy outfits.
OP
OP
The ending of the original script was more like this.
Here is a snippet from the article I previously posted:
As you might expect, the third act was where things changed the most for Passengers. The general idea is still there – the ship’s problems are caused by a stray meteor and things begin to tumble after a third person wakes up – but everything is more coherent in the original screenplay. For starters it’s better set up (the problems with the core computer are more fundamental and seeded throughout), which makes it feel less like a random turn made out of a studio’s fear of boredom. Gus (Fishburne) is also a much stronger character; we learn a lot more about his past (he’s been ferrying colonists for over 600 years) and the post-hibernation illness is highly prevalent, making his death a lot more impactful. Crucially, he doesn’t have time to address the ship’s problems, putting the onus of fixing it explicitly on Jim and Aurora after his death.
It’s thus the real disaster part that’s the most different, with things much more frantic, yet less visually resplendent (the change was likely to give a typically blockbuster finale). There’s none of Jim having to hold the reactor vent open with only a door he removed using the heat of a blow torch as a shield before being saved by Aurora in space (a scene overly reminiscent of Gravity). Instead, after Gus’ death the pair find the hole in the ship that almost pulls them out into space, nearly killing Jim (and not the later mission). The anti-grav malfunction on the ship comes as Jim recovers, much later than in the film, forcing the pair into a mad rush to fix the ship. There’s a greater explanation of what’s gone wrong with the mini-sun reactor too, and the main characters replace the computer more simply without real incident. However, the reset makes the ship’s computer think it’s docked and begins venting cryo pods, gradually dumping the 5000 other passengers into space. Jim and Aurora rush to stop it and save the captain, but fail; eventually they really are the only ones left on the ship. Like the film, the script comes to an end at Homestead II, but this time crowds of people come pouring out of the ship – Jim and Aurora’s descendants.
I was thinking similarly to you while watching the film. I actually thought they were going to get pregnant and then wake the midwife from her cryo pod.
Here is a snippet from the article I previously posted:
As you might expect, the third act was where things changed the most for Passengers. The general idea is still there – the ship’s problems are caused by a stray meteor and things begin to tumble after a third person wakes up – but everything is more coherent in the original screenplay. For starters it’s better set up (the problems with the core computer are more fundamental and seeded throughout), which makes it feel less like a random turn made out of a studio’s fear of boredom. Gus (Fishburne) is also a much stronger character; we learn a lot more about his past (he’s been ferrying colonists for over 600 years) and the post-hibernation illness is highly prevalent, making his death a lot more impactful. Crucially, he doesn’t have time to address the ship’s problems, putting the onus of fixing it explicitly on Jim and Aurora after his death.
It’s thus the real disaster part that’s the most different, with things much more frantic, yet less visually resplendent (the change was likely to give a typically blockbuster finale). There’s none of Jim having to hold the reactor vent open with only a door he removed using the heat of a blow torch as a shield before being saved by Aurora in space (a scene overly reminiscent of Gravity). Instead, after Gus’ death the pair find the hole in the ship that almost pulls them out into space, nearly killing Jim (and not the later mission). The anti-grav malfunction on the ship comes as Jim recovers, much later than in the film, forcing the pair into a mad rush to fix the ship. There’s a greater explanation of what’s gone wrong with the mini-sun reactor too, and the main characters replace the computer more simply without real incident. However, the reset makes the ship’s computer think it’s docked and begins venting cryo pods, gradually dumping the 5000 other passengers into space. Jim and Aurora rush to stop it and save the captain, but fail; eventually they really are the only ones left on the ship. Like the film, the script comes to an end at Homestead II, but this time crowds of people come pouring out of the ship – Jim and Aurora’s descendants.
I was thinking similarly to you while watching the film. I actually thought they were going to get pregnant and then wake the midwife from her cryo pod.
