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

[The Futurist]

Some test screenings are around the corner ...

 

[trifle]

10 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

Some test screenings are around the corner ...

 

 

Some MORE test screenings are around the corner but this should be the first with finalized effects and the benefit of the reshoots.  (Which were short.)  The one I know about is in Irvine.  I don't know what people will be allowed to say, though.  It is still 3 months before it comes out.

[Klingo]

Just now, trifle said:

 

Some MORE test screenings are around the corner but this should be the first with finalized effects and the benefit of the reshoots.  (Which were short.)  The one I know about is in Irvine.  I don't know what people will be allowed to say, though.  It is still 3 months before it comes out.

All they need to answer was the movie awesome or not. 

Edited September 23, 2016 by Klingo

[trifle]

 

On 9/21/2016 at 1:56 PM, trifle said:

I wonder if this will include Passengers, and boost the marketing in China:

 

 

more: http://deadline.com/2016/09/dalian-wanda-sony-pictures-slate-deal-1201823837/

 

Edit--

 

Also Jon Spaihts (the screenwriter) read the Guardian article as well:

No pressure.https://t.co/skfk3KjRR3

— Jon Spaihts (@jonspaihts) September 21, 2016

 

 

 

So Passengers is specifically being eyed for that Sony Wanda alliance.  http://deadline.com/2016/09/sony-wanda-alliance-jumanji-passengers-smurfs-1201825089/

[MikeQ]

Passengers could make bucketloads overseas. It definitely looks like that kind of film with big international appeal.

 

Peace,

Mike

[kowhite]

1 minute ago, MikeQ said:

Passengers could make bucketloads overseas. It definitely looks like that kind of film with big international appeal.

 

Peace,

Mike

 

I dunno...it's scifi but...does a lot of shit blow up?

 

Ill give you this...it'll make way more international than most romance movies.

Edited September 23, 2016 by kowhite

[MikeQ]

5 minutes ago, kowhite said:

 

I dunno...it's scifi but...does a lot of shit blow up?

 

Ill give you this...it'll make way more international than most romance movies.

 

That's a fair point. It is hard to tell, based off the trailer, exactly what direction, primarily, the film will take. So I could be wrong in its appeal.

 

Peace,

Mike

Edited September 23, 2016 by MikeQ

[kowhite]

Just now, MikeQ said:

 

That's a fair point. It is hard to tell, based off the trailer, exactly what direction, primarily, the film will take. So I could be wrong in it's appeal.

 

Peace,

Mike

 

Hinestly if it delivers on the promise of the script concept...which is why I'm interested...

 

Im gonna be real...it's international success depends on how much foreign audiences want to have sex with Pratt and JLaw.

 

Oh and explosions.

[trifle]

3 minutes ago, kowhite said:

 

Hinestly if it delivers on the promise of the script concept...which is why I'm interested...

 

Im gonna be real...it's international success depends on how much foreign audiences want to have sex with Pratt and JLaw.

 

Oh and explosions.

 

They both have followings overseas.

 

For, um, whatever reason.

[Joel M]

10 hours ago, kowhite said:

 

I dunno...it's scifi but...does a lot of shit blow up?

 

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.

[La Binoche]

This looks terrible. 

The ship (which is essentially the third character in the movie) looks so glossy and CG and just fake. Why do the VFX look so cheap? Looks like it's something out of spoof movie. 

 

And who can sit through 2 hours of JLaw and Chris Pratt being "relatably charming"? Yuck. 

 

"You die, I die!"

Edited September 23, 2016 by La Binoche

[trifle]

1 minute ago, La Binoche said:

This looks terrible. 

The ship (which is essentially the third character in the movie) looks so glossy and CG and just fake. Why do the VFX look so cheap? Looks like it's something out of spoof movie. 

 

And who can sit through 2 hours of JLaw and Chris Pratt being "relatably charming"? Yuck. 

 

"You die, I die!"

 

I'll guess we'll see who can sit through that when the numbers come out.  The trailer views are certainly encouraging.  I agree that that line should never have been added though.  I hope their test screening audience tells them so.

[trifle]

I've heard a lot of great things about this script.  Both Jen and Pratt (separately) have volunteered that it was one of the best scripts they've ever read.  And looks like the screenwriter appreciates it:

Aw, shucks. #Passengershttps://t.co/hoIg9nezfp

— Jon Spaihts (@jonspaihts) September 23, 2016

 

 

Edited September 23, 2016 by trifle

[bcf26]

After watching the trailer and checking the release date, my prediction would be:

24M OW

96 DOM

[misafeco]

44 minutes ago, bcf26 said:

After watching the trailer and checking the release date, my prediction would be:

24M OW

96 DOM

 

[La Binoche]

Yes, the script is good. 

[MikeQ]

The script seems to be universally loved or appreciated by those who have read it. (I haven't read it myself, as I don't want to be spoiled.) How likely is it then that critics will dislike the film? I've always felt the script is the core to a good movie. It seems as if Lawrence and Pratt would have to be pretty bad together, and Tyldum would have had to really mess it up, no? I'm definitely interested in seeing how it all pans out, critically and financially. We get so few of these big budget original movies today, most are pre-existing properties (comic book movies, etc), that it's rather fun and refreshing to consider how this movie might do.

 

Peace,

Mike

 

 

[Dementeleus]

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.

[JennaJ]

31 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.

 

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 Spaihts torn to shreds by Lindelof).

I think the way he talks about 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.

 

 

Edited September 23, 2016 by JennaJ

[TalismanRing]

1 hour ago, La Binoche said:

Yes, the script is good. 

 

The script is OK, though a bit skeevy.