Passengers (sci-fi rom-com with C. Pratt and J.Law)

All the dirt. All the top secret stuff. Anything that has to do with the process of getting us to sit and watch something projected on the big screen.

Passengers (sci-fi rom-com with C. Pratt and J.Law)

Postby so sorry on Tue Sep 20, 2016 12:05 pm

User avatar
so sorry
Deacon Blues
 
Posts: 15658
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 11:29 am

Re: Passengers (sci-fi rom-com with C. Pratt and J.Law)

Postby Ribbons on Tue Sep 20, 2016 12:28 pm

For the time being I'm actually trying to go into this one clean. I'd heard that there are several twists and sort of want that experience to be pure.

...unless it looks like it sucks, in which case someone please tell me
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 13907
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Re: Passengers (sci-fi rom-com with C. Pratt and J.Law)

Postby so sorry on Tue Sep 20, 2016 2:03 pm

Ribbons wrote:For the time being I'm actually trying to go into this one clean. I'd heard that there are several twists and sort of want that experience to be pure.

...unless it looks like it sucks, in which case someone please tell me



Don't watch the trailer...it was long and showed alot. Although the big twists aren't revealed (spoiler Pratt's cyrotube had a facehugger in it and he births an Alien halfway thru the movie).

If they had cast Bradley Cooper in this I'd probably have to take my wife to see it as a date night movie. Fortunately she's not into Pratt (yet), so I'll be spared this sci-fi romantic [comedy?] flick.
User avatar
so sorry
Deacon Blues
 
Posts: 15658
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 11:29 am

Re: Passengers (sci-fi rom-com with C. Pratt and J.Law)

Postby Ribbons on Tue Sep 20, 2016 3:07 pm

so sorry wrote:If they had cast Bradley Cooper in this I'd probably have to take my wife to see it as a date night movie. Fortunately she's not into Pratt (yet), so I'll be spared this sci-fi romantic [comedy?] flick.


Oh well, at least there's always Burnt!
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 13907
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Re: Passengers (sci-fi rom-com with C. Pratt and J.Law)

Postby TheButcher on Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:07 am

THR 6/23/2016:
Tom Rothman on 'Spider-Man' Plans and Loving 'Ghostbusters' Trolls: "Can We Please Get Some More Haters to Say Stupid Things?"

THR Box Office 1/27/2017:
'Passengers' Fights to Break Even Amid Stiff Competition
Pamela McClintock wrote:Like its doomed protagonists, Passengers doesn’t seem like it will get a happy ending at the box office. The decade-in-development project has been watched closely because Sony Pictures chief Tom Rothman made it his first big-budget greenlight in 2015 and he hoped it would save a down year at the studio. Rothman thought he had a good bet in casting Jennifer Lawrence and Chris Pratt — arguably Hollywood’s hottest young stars — in a two-hander romance set aboard a transport ship hurtling through the galaxies. He agreed to a gross budget of $156 million, including a $20 million fee for Lawrence, and hired director Morten Tyldum, fresh off his Oscar nomination for The Imitation Game.
User avatar
TheButcher
ZONE NEWS DIRECTOR
 
Posts: 17418
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:02 am
Location: The Bureau of Sabotage

Re: Passengers (sci-fi rom-com with C. Pratt and J.Law)

Postby Ribbons on Sat Feb 25, 2017 12:07 am

I ended up seeing this movie, actually. It wasn't good, but I wouldn't say it was terrible, either. There were some interesting ideas in the script, but the writer either never followed through with them or the story got "noted" to death by producers into a misshapen thing. Pratt and J.Law are likable enough, which is good since it's basically just the two of them the whole time (with sporadic appearances by Michael Sheen as a robot bartender and a secret cameo near the end). It's just okay enough that I wish it were better. So I get why it was a disappointment, but really, there was no reason this had to be a $150 million tentpole. The story could have gone in a dozen different directions on a much smaller budget but settles for middle-of-the-road, almost instantly forgettable fare.

I also couldn't help but notice that there were, like, ten montages.
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 13907
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Re: The Passengers

Postby TheButcher on Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:34 am


This Video Shows an Easy Way to Make Passengers Better, But It's Still Not Nearly Enough
Beth Elderkin wrote:For the record, I agree with this idea. Putting Aurora at the center of the story would’ve given Jim more flexibility as a complex villain, and improved the film’s ethical questions significantly. Unfortunately, it fails to address one key problem: Aurora is a terribly written character.

Passengers’ Aurora Lane isn’t a person, she’s an ideal. A male-driven fantasy that never has a hair out of place, or a bad case of PMS. She’s smart, but not too smart— she still defers to him for all major decision-making, especially in moments of crisis. In short, Aurora is exactly who Jim thought she would be. She wasn’t written well enough to be the center of the story, since the film didn’t give her a personality outside of Jim’s selfish desires. She was essentially spawned from his rib.

User avatar
TheButcher
ZONE NEWS DIRECTOR
 
Posts: 17418
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:02 am
Location: The Bureau of Sabotage


Return to Movie News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 3 guests