Welcome to another installment of the TRASH BIN, where we watch the worst movies Hollywood has to offer, according to the critics, and give you our thoughts, good or bad. This week's pick is the 2016 sci-fi film...PASSENGERS.
I realize there was already a Passengers review done earlier, but with it just coming to DVD and Blu-ray this week, me being a newbie, and it being the trash bin: here’s what I have to say.
I’m sure if you stay even somewhat updated on films then you’ve heard this before, but it’s honestly so very true—Passengers has an interesting first and second act and then bombs the third act. It was very frustrating to watch it because the first two acts give you good feelings about the movie and then the rug is pulled out from beneath you. The major ethical dilemma is probably the source of all of this. Watching this movie, you’re faced with the dilemma of Jim Preston’s (Pratt) decision to wake Aurora Lane (Lawrence). As a film lover and a studier of philosophy that dilemma really intrigued me. I was hoping to see where the writer and director would go with it. Instead, I felt like it was used as a spring board to get the movie going and then left in the dust. It was a much more interesting plot than saving the ship, and it wasn't addressed very well.
A saccharine sweet love story ending left a foul taste in my mouth as well. I know the point of the movie wasn’t to be scientifically accurate, but watching the ending where Jim gets saved made me audibly laugh aloud. When thinking and talking through the movie I think the wiser decision would have been to kill off Jim and allow Aurora to process through the pain of being alone, thus wrestling with the crisis that caused Jim to wake her in the first place. The ending was just sappy, honestly.
While the acting was decent, I certainly don’t think it deserved any awards. Pratt is solid, and so is Lawrence, but I’m afraid they’re a tad overrated. JLaw’s misunderstood girl who gets angry at her love interest but then ends up with him anyway is getting a bit boring to me (SEE: Hunger Games, Silver Linings Playbook) and Pratt’s boyish charm was a little weird to me in such a serious role. Their chemistry was decent, and it was cool to see them carry the movie with very little supporting roles around them. I think the true acting hero of this movie, though, has to be Michael Sheen as the bartender robot Arthur. His character was funny, loving, endearing, and enraging in different parts of the movie. I felt like the robot has more of an emotional range than the main characters, for the most part.
Similarly with the acting, the cinematography was good but not great. Very standard, and a few beautiful CGI pieces, but it was nothing to write home about (and yet here I am). I was hoping to see more interesting work with the camera, particularly in the zero gravity sequences, but I was left feeling disappointed.
Overall, this movie was pretty, “Meh.” It might be worth seeing on a rainy day, and some average film consumers will like it, but it’s not something we will be talking about for much longer.
CRITICS' SCORES:
Rotten Tomatoes: 31%
Metacritic: 41%
Roger Ebert: 1.5/4
WESLEY'S SCORE: 4/10
Make sure to check us out and like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter and Instagram for all of our reviews, news, trailers, and much, much more!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment