• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Film Passengers

Shale

Bluelighter
Joined
Aug 24, 2016
Messages
85
Passengers
Movie Blurb By Shale
December 21, 2016

THE BEST SCI-FI SPACE MOVIE OF 2016


OK, I never professed to being a movie reviewer, just write these blurbs from my own perspective, often disagreeing with the aggregate critics' opinions. Today was such a day.

While watching this movie, I was quite overwhelmed with how good it was. I had seen the trailers and of course this was a must-see movie about two passengers on a 120-year interstellar flight waking from hibernation some 90 years short of their destination and unable to get back to sleep. But, besides being the futuristic action flick with a major dilemma to overcome, there was a real character driven story unfolding that amazed me.

So, after the movie, the first thing I did when I got home was to check Rotten Tomatoes to see what was the aggregate consensus, expecting it to be in the 90%. It only got a 29% and only 65% or audiences liked it. WTF? How could I be so mistaken about a movie. Their consensus was that it had "a fatally flawed story." The story was the main thing that made me love this movie.

Anyhow, I looked thru all the bad reviews and found a "Fresh" one by Chris Knight of the National Post who wrote in his first line: "How much (or how little) you enjoy Passengers may depend on what genre you’re expecting. As a science-fiction story, it’s a clever, high-concept idea ..." OK, so Chris and I saw the same movie - good to know I did not hallucinate the whole thing.

Since I am of the two-thirds of ppl who liked this movie, I don't want to spoil it for anyone not yet seeing it.

So, here is the TRAILER VERSION.

The Starship Avalon is transporting 5K hibernating passengers to planet Homestead in another star system. Since the journey is 120 years, the crew of a few hundred are also hibernating and the ship is on autopilot. It hits an asteroid belt and the shields are working fine but we see one big one that hits and a momentary disturbance to the computers. In a diagnostic check it is noted that one hibernation pod went offline.

Ship
xtsmimhynt4qyh6zvqom.jpg

That was mechanical engineer Jim Preston (Chris Pratt).

Jim the Engineer
passengers_1-large_trans++qVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.jpg



Later he is joined by Aurora Lane (Jennifer Lawrence) and they are the only two ppl awake aboard a ship with 5K sleeping passengers. They resign to their fate and start getting into each other. Their only other companion to pass the time on an empty cruise ship of vid & holografic games, movies, sports and an occasional walk in spacesuits on the outer decks is an android bartender named Arthur (Michael Sheen).

Spacesuit
mmeuiuihstnofiottppb.jpg



Aurora & Jim Frisky on Table
800x400-jennifer-lawrence-chris-pratt-trailer.jpg



BTW, just have to mention that Jennifer Lawrence and Chris Pratt are great together here, a really attractive couple and Chris has a cute butt (sorry, couldn't find any pix - yet)

Aurora & Jim In Bed
Passengers-661073120-large.jpg

However, Jim keeps noticing little things going wrong and then they are joined by one crew member, Chief Gus Mancuso (Laurence Fishburne) who also comes out of hibernation because of the cascading ships systems. I will leave you with that version of the story, which will have action problems caused by the faltering automatic ship with only 3 conscious ppl aboard.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

S
P
A
C
E

WARNING DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE

Now for the character driven part of the story that I liked. While Jim was the first to awaken from hibernation, he was the only one for over a year. The little details I liked were that his beard was just a shadow from 30 years in hibernation but started growing after he woke up.

He is trying to adjust in his solitude but realizes he will just exist around that ship until he eventually dies a few decades before the crowd wakes up. He is changing, getting primal with his loneliness and admires Aurora and faced with the ethical dilemma of should he wake another person for companionship.

His only sounding board is the android Arthur who only knows bartender platitudes. It is science fiction but I could feel the conflict of doing the right thing and suffer alone or doing the horrendous violation of another person by waking them to share your fate of dying before the ship reaches its destination. I suppose my absorption into this story line is why I liked the movie. How much easier had the writers made Jim and Aurora awaken from the same system malfunction.

Also, I got into the deception of Jim not telling Aurora that he woke her, letting her believe it was a malfunction. This got pushed aside in his mind as they developed an intimate relationship but for me I would have always felt guilty about it. Her rage on discovering the truth was palpable. (I have trust issues - I have always been honest with significant others and need honesty from them). I could so understand her reaction - and his shame to the point of not resisting when she was about to bash his head with a crowbar. Good, honest drama.

The fact that after some near-death moments together she realizes that she was stuck with this guy whom she learned to love before she learned of his violation of her life. Gus seemed to understand that a desperate person, to the point of suicide would do desperate things.

I also thot her resigning herself to the new fate - that changed from her anticipated life on a new planet 4 generations after everyone she knew on earth had died was realistic. But, I have a tattoo on my arm that says "Life is a Journey, Not a Destination."
 
Thanks for the heads up. Looks good.

I stopped basing my viewing decisions on the views of others long ago. I sometimes feel like I'm living in a parallel universe with either the praise or criticism heaped on a number of films that utterly contradicts my experience.
 
A MOVIE-LOVING FRIEND REPLIES (STILL SPOILERS)

From: Publix Girl
To: Shale@
Date: December 22, 2016 at 8:46 AM
RE: Passengers - Movie Blurb

You have that tatoo, cool

It was Excellent. Sexy, the love seemed real as did Lawrence's anger. Fisburn was a bit boring. The captain was Andy Garcia, small nothingvrole. He built her that beautiful house/ life. Can't believe those Rotten Tomatoes. Only thing I wondered was what would Neil DeGrasse Tyson say about his spacecsuit and that extreme fire? I thought he'd b toast. Her saving him was Academy Award. Excellent ending.

From: Shale@
To: Publix Girl
Date: December 22, 2016 at 10:59 AM
RE: Passengers - Movie Blurb

You, me and that one movie critic seem to understand why this was an exceptional movie. Still waiting for someone to challenge my statement about this being the best sci-fi space movie of 2016, which includes a Star Trek and Star Wars movie. But, those are generic now with familiar characters doing what you expect of them or familiar settings and conflicts.

It was the insertion of the dramatic, real-life conflict into a sci-fi fantasy, otherworldly movie that grounded this one. Plus the characters Aurora and Jim were a really cute couple.

So, what did you think of that scene with Chris Pratt's butt?
1f642.png
Just waiting for it to show up on the Web so I can add it to my collection. (Old man Bruce Willis has a fine bubble butt - which he has shown in a couple of movies)
 
Passengers was pretty dull. And to say this was the best sci-fi movie of 2016...did you not see Arrival? It blew Passengers away in every way possible.
 
doesn't sound like the direction it goes, but what would have been an awesome setup for a quiet romance film.
 
Passengers was pretty dull. And to say this was the best sci-fi movie of 2016...did you not see Arrival? It blew Passengers away in every way possible.

Yeah, I did see Arrival - twice. It was one of the best Sci-Fi First Contact movies I have ever seen (referenced the Jodi Foster movie Contact as well).
http://www.bluelight.org/vb/threads/808470-Arrival

Somehow I don't consider Arrival as a Sci-Fi Space movie. A technicality I know.

I expected to get slammed by Star Wars AND Star Trek nerds when I made that statement, since those were both represented this past year. :\

BTW, I saw Passengers 3 times so far. May see it again, then wait for the DVD.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I did see Arrival - twice. It was one of the best Sci-Fi First Contact movies I have ever seen (referenced the Jodi Foster movie Contact as well).
http://www.bluelight.org/vb/threads/808470-Arrival

Somehow I don't consider Arrival as a Sci-Fi Space movie. A technicality I know.

I expected to get slammed by Star Wars AND Star Trek nerds when I made that statement, since those were both represented this past year. :\

BTW, I saw Passengers 3 times so far. May see it again, then wait for the DVD.
Noted. I do enjoy reading your reviews.
 
I really enjoyed the first 7/8ths of the movie. The last 15 minutes were disappointing making what could have been a great movie into one that was only decent.
 
interesting. what's your definition of science-fiction?

alasdair

Arrival would be my definition of science-fiction.
Cowboys and Aliens would be my definition of science-fiction.
Ex-Machina would be my definition of science-fiction.

Guardians of the Galaxy, Star Wars, Star Trek, Alien, Gravity, would be my definition of SCIENCE-FICTION SPACE movies.
 
^ thanks. is 'sci-fi space' a commonly referred-to genre of film? i mean, 'sci-fi' is obviously well understood, as is 'space' and, while they often - for obvious reasons - overlap, i've never seen the terms used in unison as a specific genre, or sub-genre of the more common genre(s).

arrival is set on earth - why would it be considered a 'space' movie at all? indeed, who's describing it as a 'sci-fi space' movie?

thanks for the blurb.

alasdair
 
I decided at first not to see this - based on reviews (numbers, Rotten Tomatoes, and social media where stories are posted in response). I was engaged in it though. It was good. Can't offer review-language, but it demonstrated something very deep about human relationships, I think. I couldn't give it a rating, as I am not comfortable with giving movies ratings, but this passed as a good one, and didn't regret watching it.

It doesn't "compare" to Arrival. They are each good movies.
 
Finally saw it. Good movie. A simple idea that was fleshed out well, enjoyable to watch and worthy of decent reviews. Star Wars 7 has 92% on Rotten Tomatoes, and the film is a plot-muddled empty-headed crud of a film. I think that says more about the herd/hype behaviour of critics than of the films themselves.
 
Top