Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Passengers is a pretty cool sci-fi movie. I like the first half in particular, the way it shows how "dumb" A.I. will be the bane of our existence feels very accurate as far as futuristic predictions go. I'm also a sucker for "lost on an island" stories, which this ultimately is. I will never understand how so much was made about the decision the main male character makes at a certain point, because the movie very clearly shows that a) he really struggles with the decision for a long time, knowing it's wrong and b) finally does it after almost killing himself and being heavily intoxicated, immediately regretting it. The only real gripe I have with the movie is that Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence have zero chemistry, which kind of kills the whole romantic element of the film.
That actually helped make the movie more plausible. Pratt's character knew almost nothing about her, but formed an opinion and love based upon what he wanted her to be. She wakes up, and is (surprise!) an actual human being with thoughts and feelings of her own and very little about what Pratt's character projected onto her. At the same time she's dealing with the struggles that the only other awake human is essentially her murderer, and for her to find some other human to connect with, she'd have to perform the same egregious act on someone else against their will.
It felt like a struggle from before our modern age where a woman might have to marry someone she doesn't even like to make sure she has food, shelter, power, etc. She came to terms with her situation and made of it what she could like millions of women before her in a world dominated by someone else.
That's a great take of the movie! Although she could have gone back to hypersleep in the end but decided against it, presumably because she had a glimpse of how he must have felt when she thought he was dead. So she definitely feels genuinely something for him in the end. I think the movie could have benefited from a short montage of their decades together on the ship in the end, sort of like how UP started.
I know thats the Hollywood desired take, but if we're looking at the more realistic gritty vision we see a darker answer to Jennifer Lawrence's character.
Since there was only one capsule that could put someone back to sleep, she could choose to save herself. However, she knows that she would have left the psychopathic murderer of Chris Pratt's character to run wild for a few more years before he would wake up someone else when he gets lonely again. There is no second pod that could put someone back to sleep. She could have murdered him, then used the medical pod to go back to sleep, but then she too would take on and share Pratt's "murderer" title.
So she sacrifices herself in the only way that no one else but her will die. She resigns herself to the hell of a life with Pratt's character.
That's definitely an interesting take on it, but I don't think the movie as it is represented supports it. I agree that making Chris Pratt's character into a psychopath would also made for a good movie, even a superior one. But that's obviously not the movie that was being made.
I think you'll appreciate this analysis of how the movie could have been way better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gksxu-yeWcU
I love that video. I know that hindsight is 20/20 but that is such a good take on how it could have been such a better film. It's frustrating when such a good premise cheaps out at some point to be truly poignant.