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

[trifle]

32 minutes ago, JennaJ said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

See, I think the movie did enough to show me how conflicted Jim was about waking her up and that it wasn't at any point a remorseless decision - however morally reprehensible it is.

Where I think the movie faltered is at showing how Aurora went from trying to kill him in blind rage to feeling like she wanted to spend the rest of her life with him. I could still buy it, because I think life and death situations make us see what's really important in life. Still, a little more insight into her emotional process would go a long way.

 

I could take an ending where she goes back to sleep, but I don't think the movie couldn't or shouldn't have ended with them together. I think there's more to it than telling a moral story where every action is met with its just reward / punishment. The script just needed to be more compelling in its final narrative choice. By that point I wanted them to be together, I just wanted to know how Aurora got to that point without having to fill in the blanks myself.

 

 

 

I agree,

Spoiler

I wanted them together. But I did want them to make it more natural and less sudden.

 

[Bishop54]

1 hour ago, amelin said:

 

Well, I think that would have run counter to the themes of the story, or at least the way I interpret it. One of the things that resonated so strongly with me was how these characters come to realize the value of relationships with other people, and how those even trump the importance of fulfilling your personal goals. I can see how a lot of people may not agree with me on that, but if I were to name the single most important thing in life, it wouldn't be my career goals, as important as they are to me. It would be love. Not necessarily romantic love, just love in general. The review I linked goes into way, way more detail, but that's the gist of it for me.

 

Love that was formed from a egregious selfish act? Is that worth having?

 

Edited February 5, 2017 by Bishop54

[amelin]

On 5 februari 2017 at 2:32 AM, Bishop54 said:

  Reveal hidden contents

Love that was formed from a egregious selfish act? Is that worth having?

 

 

I think so. It may have grown from an egregious, selfish act, but it was still the most intimate relationship Aurora had ever had. As I understand it, she had lived her life keeping people at arm's length, until Jim. She even spelled it out for us: when she was with him, for the first time in her life, she didn't feel alone. I'd say that's absolutely worth having. Giving it up would have been a big sacrifice, I think.

Edited February 8, 2017 by amelin

[JennaJ]

34 minutes ago, Bishop54 said:

  Hide contents

Love that was formed from a egregious selfish act? Is that worth having?

 

 

The question is if a movie's purpose is to preach and serve as a moral cautionary tale, or if its purpose is simply to tell a compelling story.

I don't really get the notion that movies shouldn't depict morally grey acts and characters. How boring would it be to limit storytelling like that. I mean, isn't it equally important to convey that people aren't defined by their mistakes and misdeeds, that forgiveness is a virtue, that love can overcome the most difficult circumstances? I think there's a story worth telling here.

 

my problem isn't with the outcome they chose, it's with the way its resolution was handled.

 

Edited February 5, 2017 by JennaJ

[amelin]

16 minutes ago, JennaJ said:

 

The question is if a movie's purpose is to preach and serve as a moral cautionary tale, or if its purpose is simply to tell a compelling story.

I don't really get the notion that movies shouldn't depict morally grey acts and characters. How boring would it be to limit storytelling like that. I mean, isn't it equally important to convey that people aren't defined by their mistakes and misdeeds, that forgiveness is a virtue, that love can overcome the most difficult circumstances? I think there's a story worth telling here.

 

For sure. And I think the idea that a character's bad deeds should always go punished in a story can be more than a little patronizing to the audience. It's not as if we can't be trusted to make our own judgment.

Edited February 5, 2017 by amelin

[trifle]

53 minutes ago, Bishop54 said:

  Reveal hidden contents

Love that was formed from a egregious selfish act? Is that worth having?

 

 

OK, but what do you do when the situation is imperfect but it is the situation you have?  That is the question the movie poses.  I agree with @amelin about Aurora and relationships. (But under the new 'until release in dvd in North America' spoiler policy, I think it maybe should be spoiler tagged.)

 

I think it is a lot more interesting because it is a murky situation.

 

But I think the end was abrupt and not as persuasive as it could have been.

Edited February 5, 2017 by trifle

[amelin]

Oops, I thought the "four weeks after theatrical release" rule applied in this thread! Sorry! Will fix.

[AndyLL]

5 minutes ago, amelin said:

Oops, I thought the "four weeks after theatrical release" rule applied in this thread! Sorry! Will fix.

 

It does.

 

4 weeks is the spoiler policy in the movies general thread.

 

DVD release is for outside this thread.

 

 

[HesAPooka]

so, no chance is this hitting 100m now that its been leaked.

[amelin]

2 minutes ago, AndyLL said:

 

It does.

 

4 weeks is the spoiler policy in the movies general thread.

 

DVD release is for outside this thread.

 

 

 

That's what I thought. Thanks for clearing it up!

[trifle]

1 hour ago, AndyLL said:

 

It does.

 

4 weeks is the spoiler policy in the movies general thread.

 

DVD release is for outside this thread.

 

 

 

OK, sorry, @amelin  !

Edited February 5, 2017 by trifle

[amelin]

12 minutes ago, trifle said:

 

OK, sorry, @amelin  !

 

No worries!

[trifle]

 

 

[antovolk]

Ruben Ostlund pitched an alternate take:

“There was one film I really wanted to do that has been made now. That was ‘Passengers.’ But I wanted to change the setup of ‘Passengers.’ The main character is a guy who wakes up in one of those pods on a spaceship. I wanted to put his family in the other pods, his wife and kids. Then there’s this dilemma: He’s going to die on the ship because the travel takes 300 years. If he wakes up his kids, they will die on the spaceship and not on the planet they’re heading for; if he wakes up his wife, then the kids will not have a mother when they arrive. So of course, you have to wake up another woman, because you don’t want to be alone,” he explained. “Then you can swipe on pictures to see the women, like Tinder. You have to decide on the pictures and pick someone. To bring things [like] that would be relevant in contemporary times. But when I pitched this to the producers, I think they got scared.”

http://theplaylist.net/force-majeure-director-ruben-ostlund-says-producers-turned-pitch-direct-passengers-20170208/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[baumer]

That's a horrible idea.  So Pratt would leave his wife and kids in the pods but wake up the hot piece of ass?  That's horrible.

[trifle]

2 minutes ago, baumer said:

That's a horrible idea.  So Pratt would leave his wife and kids in the pods but wake up the hot piece of ass?  That's horrible.

agreed.

 

Of course, one critic was suggesting he be a serial killer, that he keeps waking up young women but then 'has to get rid of them'. And then one woman discovers the other empty pods -- all women....but she's stuck with him on the space ship...

 

I'm convince that moral ambiguity is too much work for some people, but to me, it is what gave this movie greater depth.

Edited February 8, 2017 by trifle

[trifle]

 

 

 

Edited February 9, 2017 by trifle

[A District 3 Engineer]

edit

Edited February 9, 2017 by A District 3 Engineer

[trifle]

 

 

 

Edited February 9, 2017 by trifle

[TalismanRing]

http://variety.com/2017/film/global/qa-force-majeure-director-ruben-ostlund-on-the-square-1201978527/

Force Majeure’ Director Ruben Ostlund

 

Quote

 

It’s interesting that you’re getting offers to direct crimes and thrillers in the U.S., considering you’ve never done any in Sweden.

 

There was one film I really wanted to do that has been made now. That was “Passengers.” But I wanted to change the setup of “Passengers.” The main character is a guy who wakes up in one of those pods on a spaceship. I wanted to put his family in the other pods, his wife and kids. Then there’s this dilemma: He’s going to die on the ship because the travel takes 300 years. If he wakes up his kids, they will die on the spaceship and not on the planet they’re heading for; if he wakes up his wife, then the kids will not have a mother when they arrive. So of course, you have to wake up another woman, because you don’t want to be alone. Then you can swipe on pictures to see the women, like Tinder. You have to decide on the pictures and pick someone. To bring things [like] that would be relevant in contemporary times. But when I pitched this to the producers, I think they got scared.