This had the potential to be a classic, but they went for the light plot, almost fell on the romantic-drama genre.
I say he had to die, and then she had to wake someone up to keep her company and sort the ship out and stuff, and then she gets to get to the new planet and back to earth to tell their story.
Wouldn't have been as touching. It would have felt cheap in a way. She just easily continues with her life with another man, it wouldn't feel good. Cheapens her character, especially after what they went through.
Plus she is aware how terrible is to be woken up, so why would she do it to someone else?
I just don't see how that would have been better. Maybe if he died and she made the decision not to wake anyone because she loves him too much and doesn't want to essentially ruin someone life by waking them up.
Sometimes a little bit happier happy endings are okay, btw this ending wasn't the happiest, they were still alone on the ship for their whole life. A happy ending would have been there are two pods that can put them under stasis and they wake up 90 years later about to arrive on their new planet.
You're right, slickr12345, happy endings are okay. Maybe not all the time, but at least some of the time. There's a lot of nonsense, mainly from literature professors, that happy endings are necessarily bad, and people buy into it. They can't see quality in anything unless it's dark and miserable.
shareI saw both today and really liked Passengers but was bored with Arrival.
shareOnce the producers had bought into the basic premise, the film was beyond help artistically. No engineer would design a ship without back-up resources, so therefore no protagonist would ever be presented with such an artificial and ridiculous dilemma.
The investors were lucky the project made its money back - it's basically a far-fetched Sandra Bullock romance movie in space. Somehow there's a taste for kind of nonsense plus CGI special effects. Nobody will remember this dog in five years.
Nobody will remember this dog in five years.
The movie was endearing. I think the point of this thread was to compare it to Arrival, in which case it is easily the better of the two.
The studios obviously started 2016 with the following request: make us two sci-fi movies with a male-female pair of protagonists and a black supporting role.
They came up with Arrival and Passengers.
But while Arrival pretentiously tries to invent a language and some aliens that aren't totally shallow and goofy, Passengers settles for the much less ambitious Romance In Space(tm). I'm sure they sold it to the studio with the pitch: "Wall-e meets <insert generic rom-com here>".
Amy Adams was miscast in her role as a genius linguist. Say what you want about female academics -- I don't much care -- but Adams does not pass for one, not in a million years.
The geopolitical cliches it presented were also quite annoying; they've outstayed their welcome by a decade at least.
As for Passengers the story was more engaging, more believable (in an immediate sense) and less frustrating. To be sure, the film is full of plot holes and passes better as science fantasy rather than science fiction. But this film responds well to a symbolic reading rather than a literal one. Looking for symbolism in Arrival, however, I was left wanting.
I can imagine people liking this film more than Arrival because this had lots of explosions, and shiny stuff.
http://www.1971-reviewae.com
Welcome to modern cinema!
shareI didn't like Arrival because it's the first act of three but we won't get the latter acts.
shareArrival was way better. Imo.
shareI liked Passengers. I don't understand so many people apparently did not like it. I liked it much better than Arrival.
shareArrival and Passengers are very different movies, with artistic variations in tone, pace, and viewing experience. Arrival was more cerebral, contemplative, and scientific while Passengers was more about drama, romance, and dazzling visuals.
I appreciated and enjoyed the different experiences of both movies. I'm not sure they can be compared effectively (apples vs. bananas). Why does one have to be better than the other? Why can't they just ... be? Personally, I prefer moves to be different and not copy each other.