Plot without Spoilers: Jim (Chris Pratt) and Aurora (Jennifer Lawrence) are mistakenly awoken from hibernation on a interstellar spaceship, and no one else is awake. They can't go back to sleep so they try to make the best of it, until spaceship malfunctions threaten to kill them. [imdb] [photos]
Most interesting are the moral quandaries Jim and Aurora puzzle through. In their impossible situation we see what the characters do, and I wondered what I would have done.
Because the moral situations are the driver, the plot twists are contrived to make the choices more stark and absolute -- whereas on a Star Trek episode focused on adventure Scotty or Jordy would find an Sci-Fi engineering solution to avoid a moral catastrophe -- this give a happy ending and avoids immoral or questionable choices that would make a network executive cringe. Here writer Tyldum wanted the characters to figure it out. (See the Even More section below.) This change in tone is a little unfamiliar, but it is the core of the movie.
Passengers is staying with me. I keep thinking about what would I have done. The moral dimension is why it is getting three stars.
-----------------------------------------------
Plot with Spoilers: After a spaceship accident, Jim (Chris Pratt) is awoken from hibernation by a malfunction decades early with no way to return to hibernation and therefore fated to die before rest of the passengers awaken. He is lonely so he awakens cute female passenger to keep him company through the remaining decades, Aurora (Jennifer Lawrence). It's great for a while, but then she finds out that he woke her on purpose, and she is pissed. The spaceship continues to malfunction threatening their lives until Jim & Aurora work together to save themselves and the sleeping passengers.
The soul of the movie is the moral lapse where Jim awakes Aurora just because he is lonely and in doing so sentencing her to death. This permeates every scene both before and after Aurora knows, and it deeps the ending where she agrees to stay with him. Jim seems likeable, but we know he may be a predator, and Chris Pratt's acting conveys that.
Because the moral situations are the driver, the plot twists are contrived to make the choices more stark and absolute -- whereas on a Star Trek episode Scotty or Jordy would find an Sci-Fi engineering solution to avoid a moral catastrophe -- this gives a TV happy ending and avoids immoral/questionable choices that would make a network executive cringe. Here writer Tyldum wanted the characters to figure it out. (See the Even More section below.) This change in purpose is a little unfamiliar in Sci-Fi movies, but it is the core.
I liked the movie. Passengers is staying with me as I roll over the moral issues in my mind.
Directed by:
Written by:
The Music:
The Visuals:
Rating:
Even More: This interview with writer Jon Spaihts talks about the moral quandaries at the core of the film, and some interesting insights into his process. He likes to minimize exposition at the beginning of the movie, and then dole it out as the audience needs it. In a Sci-Fi this can seem phoney in that it seems like -- Oh look the write set up this new twist in the "universe" just to enable this plot twist. On the other hand, the lack of exposition at the beginning made the film more lonely and beautiful.
.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment