Passengers | Chris Pratt, Jennifer Lawrence | Dec 21, 2016 | Trailer pg 70

[Dementeleus]

1 minute ago, JennaJ said:

 

Of course, however I do find it encouraging that the writer was involved during the production of the movie (far from common practice, I believe) and that he has had less studio interference than in his previous projects (Prometheus in particular is known for having a good script by Spaits torn to shreds by Lindelof). I think the way he talks and reacts to news of this movie on his twitter indicates that he is very much involved and cares about this project. I would think that if his script was mishandled, he'd be trying to distance himself from this.

 

 

A fair number of productions involve the writer during shooting. It usually is the last writer on the project before shooting starts (so it may or may not be the original writer). It sounds like he, the director, and the studio were on the same page creatively, which obviously helps -- though in terms of PROMETHEUS it's not really fair to lay that at Lindelof's feet. And any writer involved with their project up through production and post will care about it!  All this are good things, but they aren't so unique as to unequivocally state what the final product will be.

 

As an example, Michael Pillar's un-published book on the making of STAR TREK: INSURRECTION is fascinating. It's the story of many people -- extremely smart, caring people -- who intimately understand the characters they were writing about, studio execs that, while they were involved, gave solid, sensible notes... a thousand decisions that made sense at the time and yet somehow unravelled and got muddled and the final result was a cruddy mess of a movie.

 

I'm not saying that will happen with PASSENGERS at all. Certainly it's better to have the core creative team executing a shared vision and with the writer involved throughout the process. But it's not really an indicator of what the movie will be either.

[The Futurist]

4 minutes ago, Nutella of Arabia said:

 

A fair number of productions involve the writer during shooting. It usually is the last writer on the project before shooting starts (so it may or may not be the original writer). It sounds like he, the director, and the studio were on the same page creatively, which obviously helps -- though in terms of PROMETHEUS it's not really fair to lay that at Lindelof's feet. And any writer involved with their project up through production and post will care about it!  All this are good things, but they aren't so unique as to unequivocally state what the final product will be.

 

As an example, Michael Pillar's un-published book on the making of STAR TREK: INSURRECTION is fascinating. It's the story of many people -- extremely smart, caring people -- who intimately understand the characters they were writing about, studio execs that, while they were involved, gave solid, sensible notes... a thousand decisions that made sense at the time and yet somehow unravelled and got muddled and the final result was a cruddy mess of a movie.

 

I'm not saying that will happen with PASSENGERS at all. Certainly it's better to have the core creative team executing a shared vision and with the writer involved throughout the process. But it's not really an indicator of what the movie will be either.

 

I think it is fair to say you could make a documentary series on the making of ANY film and we would discover that each movie is its own different story with thousands of variables.

 

 

[trifle]

5 minutes ago, Nutella of Arabia said:

 

A fair number of productions involve the writer during shooting. It usually is the last writer on the project before shooting starts (so it may or may not be the original writer). It sounds like he, the director, and the studio were on the same page creatively, which obviously helps -- though in terms of PROMETHEUS it's not really fair to lay that at Lindelof's feet. And any writer involved with their project up through production and post will care about it!  All this are good things, but they aren't so unique as to unequivocally state what the final product will be.

 

As an example, Michael Pillar's un-published book on the making of STAR TREK: INSURRECTION is fascinating. It's the story of many people -- extremely smart, caring people -- who intimately understand the characters they were writing about, studio execs that, while they were involved, gave solid, sensible notes... a thousand decisions that made sense at the time and yet somehow unravelled and got muddled and the final result was a cruddy mess of a movie.

 

I'm not saying that will happen with PASSENGERS at all. Certainly it's better to have the core creative team executing a shared vision and with the writer involved throughout the process. But it's not really an indicator of what the movie will be either.

 

Yeah, but it is another point on the plus rather than minus side of news, of which we have very little;  but it is so far overwhelmingly good rather than bad.

 

It doesn't guarantee the movie will be excellent, but if we were hearing bad news after bad news trickling out instead of good, I'd feel less optimistic.

 

[Dementeleus]

1 minute ago, trifle said:

....but if we were hearing bad news after bad news trickling out instead of good, I'd feel less optimistic.

 

 

Sure, but bad news is often just noise as well.

[MikeQ]

55 minutes ago, Nutella of Arabia said:

The black list version is not what was shot. A script doesn't go from being un-produced to production without changes, tweaks, adjustments, alterations to satisfy a whole number of people. These changes might be incredibly minor and trivial or not. The way the movie is shot further alters and changes even the shooting draft of the script.

 

There's no way to say the end result will be great, or solid, or decent, or worse until we see the movie. All we can say is that the production got launched off a great script that had people excited -- which is a good thing, of course. But it's not a guarantee of anything.

 

All fair points. I made the assumption that, while there are naturally changes to the writing here and there in the process, there haven't been any major changes to the actual story, given the involvement of the writer and his social media presence, as well as recent comments by Pratt that indicate he is very excited for people to see the film because of the script. But I could see how this is a potentially dangerous assumption to make. 

 

I also understand that a script and a story can be made into an end result so unpleasant because of poor filmmaking, etc, but I suppose that was part of my point - that Tyldum, Lawrence, and Pratt would had to have messed things up creatively. Given their past work, and indications that Pratt & Lawrence had great chemistry on set, I have confidence that this isn't likely to be the case. But you're right, there is no guarantee. 

 

Peace,

Mike

[JennaJ]

10 minutes ago, Nutella of Arabia said:

 

Sure, but bad news is often just noise as well.

 

Yes. For instance I saw in a few comment sections after the trailer came out that some people wrote about how this movie had "extensive" reshoots. Now that's just not true. We have members here who are fairly keenly familiar with the stars' commitments and schedules, and we know they could not have had more than about a week plus of reshoots. When I read these rumors I know they're false, but other people might read them and take them to be: 1. fact, and 2. bad news.

 

Right now none of us know what this movie will end up being. Until we start getting word from test screenings, all we can do is speculate based on what we have and try to put rumors in perspective.

I just know I'm excited for the potential this has and I hope it's the best movie it can be.

[Dementeleus]

I hesitate to even reply about reshoots...  I'll just say not only do I agree with you, when people label them as "wrong" or use them as examples of trouble, it just shows a misunderstanding of the process.

 

Even test screenings are dubious, this far out. We'll get a good sense about the movie's reception when the first press and/or advanced public screenings happen.

[Klingo]

Excited to hear from those who will see the early screen and watch this week after Rogue One.

[The Futurist]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rodrigo Prieto is one talented mofo.

 

Biutiful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 24, 2016 by The Futurist

[That One Girl]

Nearing on 10M YT views and it was released 3 days ago.  Fantastic.

[The Futurist]

Let that Eminem song commence, shall we ?

 

“EVERY GENERATION HAS A BIG LOVE STORY — I FEEL LIKE THIS IS IT.”

Morten Tyldum, director of “Passengers”

 

“I JUST THOUGHT IF THIS MOVIE GETS MADE WITH THE TWO OF US, WITH THIS STORY AND WITH THIS DIRECTOR AND WE CAN EXECUTE THIS WELL, I REALLY THINK IT’S GOING TO BE ONE OF THE GREATEST, MOST ORIGINAL AND COMPELLING EPIC MOVIES I’VE SEEN… MAYBE EVER!”

Chris Pratt on Passengers

[kowhite]

13 hours ago, Joel M said:

 

Gravity, Interstellar and the Martian have already made this a moot point. None of them had traditional "everything goes boom" action scenes and it didn't matter at all. All of them made 400m+ overseas and all of them did huge buisness in China (the poster market for things going BOOM). 

 

The fact is that both US and OS audiences are very open to space/astronaut movies that don't look like disaster/action spectacles. If this movie fails it won't be because it didn't have enough explosions.

 

Ok...you've got a point.

[kowhite]

4 hours ago, TalismanRing said:

 

The script is OK, though a bit skeevy.

 

 

 

Im a bit skeevy so...

 

Still interested.

[The Futurist]

Skeevy ?

 

[dashrendar44]

5 hours ago, The Futurist said:

Skeevy ?

 

 

It depicts how Sleeping Beauty is twisted at the core and that Prince is not "Oh so charming".

Stalking, picking a sleeping woman he knows nothing about just because he wants to bone her, wake her up and force her into a lifelong relationship through a conniving lie for egoistical reason. (Fear of his dick getting sore after 90 years of space travel)

 

That's why some have a hard time qualifying this as a beautiful romance...

[misafeco]

53 minutes ago, dashrendar44 said:

 

It depicts how Sleeping Beauty is twisted at the core and that Prince is not "Oh so charming".

  Hide contents

Stalking, picking a sleeping woman he knows nothing about just because he wants to bone her, wake her up and force her into a lifelong relationship through a conniving lie for egoistical reason. (Fear of his dick getting sore after 90 years of space travel)

 

 

That's why some have a hard time qualifying this as a beautiful romance...

I don't think it's only about that.

Spoiler

You'll lose your mind if you must live your life without anyone around you. I'm sure most of us would do the same in that situation. It's still unacceptable from a moral point of view but it's not that hard to understand his motivations. It's not a beautiful romance of course.

 

9 hours ago, That One Chris Pratt said:

Nearing on 10M YT views and it was released 3 days ago.  Fantastic.

Now over 10M.

Edited September 24, 2016 by misafeco

[dashrendar44]

5 hours ago, misafeco said:

I don't think it's only about that.

  Hide contents

You'll lose your mind if you must live your life without anyone around you. I'm sure most of us would do the same in that situation. It's still unacceptable from a moral point of view but it's not that hard to understand his motivations. It's not a beautiful romance of course.

 

 

 

I'm not saying that it wasn't interesting story-wise because I really hope the movie addressed that very special point because what's the point of setting such a premise? Of course, I understood at first glance that it is about

 

being stranded away for so long as it wears down on your sanity longing for human interactions at the costs of dubious moral means for those involved (What I describedin my previous post)

or else the movie just misses the whole crux of the story. I've just reinstated why people call certain aspects of the script/character "skeevy" and that the "romance"

 

is a one sided borderline pervy dream? I guess looking like Chris Pratt instead of 10 Cloverfield Lane's John Goodman eases the creepy factor up

.

Edited September 24, 2016 by dashrendar44

[trifle]

5 hours ago, misafeco said:

I don't think it's only about that.

  Hide contents

You'll lose your mind if you must live your life without anyone around you. I'm sure most of us would do the same in that situation. It's still unacceptable from a moral point of view but it's not that hard to understand his motivations. It's not a beautiful romance of course.

 

Now over 10M.

 

plus 6.4 M on Jen's facebook page and whatever is on the Passengers official facebook page.

 

4 hours ago, dashrendar44 said:

 

I'm not saying that it wasn't interesting story-wise because I really hope the movie addressed that very special point because what's the point of setting such a premise? Of course, I understood at first glance that it is about

  Hide contents

being stranded away for so long as it wears down on your sanity longing for human interactions at the costs of dubious moral means for those involved (What I describedin my previous post)

or else the movie just misses the whole crux of the story. I've just reinstated why people call certain aspects of the script/character "skeevy" and that the "romance"

  Hide contents

is an one sided borderline pervy dream? I guess looking like Chris Pratt insteadf 10 Cloverfield Lane's John Goodman eases the creepy factor up

.

 

I am absolutely certain they deal with that 'special point' and that it is a central plot point from what the director has said about the movie.

 

Spoiler

Quote

“It’s about what is important to live a happy, fulfilled life,” says the Norwegian filmmaker of the screenplay, written by Jon Spaihts (Prometheus). Plus, he adds, “it’s a romance, it’s a love story, it’s about forgiveness.”

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2016/09/19/sneak-peek-exclusive-passengers-jennifer-lawrence-chris-pratt/90621180/

 

 

 

[trifle]

#Passengers movie could be about Aurora and Jim giving Aziz piggybacks and i'd still watch it 5 hours straight pic.twitter.com/FbTby1qEb6

— Annie HOLYPASSENGERS (@hutcherson_anne) September 24, 2016

I decided to look at the official facebook page. So now the trailer has over 10M views on youtube, over 6.4M views on Jen's facebook page, and over 9M views on the official facebook page. Not too shabby.

[A District 3 Engineer]

1 hour ago, trifle said:

 

plus 6.4 M on Jen's facebook page and whatever is on the Passengers official facebook page.

 

 

International: 4.5M

 

Official: 9.4M