Probably but then there'd be no story. That's the point of movies. Story.
Passengers(2016)
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
Probably but then there'd be no story. That's the point of movies. Story.
Possible Spoilers...
The movie does provide a technical explanation for why Jim's pod can't be fixed and why neither of them can go back to sleep. This is of course done to drive the story as Trekker stated.
The movie does provide a technical explanation for why Jim's pod can't be fixed and why neither of them can go back to sleep. This is of course done to drive the story as Trekker stated.
If one were as narcissistic as the character that Chris Pratt plays, probably yes. Personally, I wouldn't unless I believed myself to be a great catch and I was so strongly driven by an innate biological urge to propagate my genes that it overrode my self control. That particular story doesn't really need to be set on an interstellar colony ship...
Last edited:
No. You're understandably sympathizing with his dilemma because of the horrific nature of his situation, but then using that as justification for intentionally inflicting those same horrific conditions on someone else. And then beyond that not telling her the truth and letting her have sex and form a romantic bond with him under false pretenses. That's creepy and manipulative and kinda rapey.
You can try and say it's not the same because she wouldn't be alone like he was, but that's because she has no choice. What if she hated his guts and didn't want to be around him? Now she just has to suck it up for ninety years because she has no other options. He took that from her. He functionally murdered the life she was going to have on the planet they were headed to and forced her into a new one.
If I were in Chris Pratt's shoes, I think I would try to find a way to put myself back into hibernation, and then when that failed and I couldn't take the loneliness anymore, I would leave an explanation of what happened for the other passengers and then find a peaceful way to kill myself.
Or if I wanted to be a dick, erase the log of what happened to my pod, toss myself out the airlock, and let them wake up to a mystery that will freak them the hell out.
Just got back from seeing the movie in 3D. The visuals are indeed spectacular.
In terms of the plot, I feel like the first half of the movie tried to address some interesting issues about what a sleeper ship would be like. The idea of being stranded alone on a space ship, drifting in the void of space, knowing that you have to live the rest of your life alone, is a truly terrifying prospect. The scene where James contemplates ending his life was a powerful way of showing us the psychological effect of being alone on a space ship with no hope for over a year. So, James' decision to wake up Aurora was a poignant moral dilemma. He knew full well that it was wrong to wake her up but he also knew that he needed her. The speech he gives her over the PA system was great. He explains to her how she saved him by giving him a measure of hope. It is not like he went through the roster and decided to wake up some chick just for selfish companionship. Even asleep, she had made an impact on him, giving him hope that stopped him from ending his life. It makes sense that he would want to wake her up. Of course, when he did wake her up, he panicked because he knew she would not take it well, so he kept the secret from her. That was pretty realistic. Many times, people panic when they do something wrong and lie to cover it up.
I did feel like the movie missed an opportunity at the very end. It gave us a paint by numbers action sequence, skips over the remainder of their lives together to go straight to the crew waking up in orbit around Homestead II. A montage showing us James and Aurora growing old together, even having children together, would have been better. Or maybe the movie could have ended with James and Aurora as very very old people (the advanced med tech prolonged their lives), greeting the crew when they wake up, and finally being buried side by side on Homestead II.
In terms of the plot, I feel like the first half of the movie tried to address some interesting issues about what a sleeper ship would be like. The idea of being stranded alone on a space ship, drifting in the void of space, knowing that you have to live the rest of your life alone, is a truly terrifying prospect. The scene where James contemplates ending his life was a powerful way of showing us the psychological effect of being alone on a space ship with no hope for over a year. So, James' decision to wake up Aurora was a poignant moral dilemma. He knew full well that it was wrong to wake her up but he also knew that he needed her. The speech he gives her over the PA system was great. He explains to her how she saved him by giving him a measure of hope. It is not like he went through the roster and decided to wake up some chick just for selfish companionship. Even asleep, she had made an impact on him, giving him hope that stopped him from ending his life. It makes sense that he would want to wake her up. Of course, when he did wake her up, he panicked because he knew she would not take it well, so he kept the secret from her. That was pretty realistic. Many times, people panic when they do something wrong and lie to cover it up.
I did feel like the movie missed an opportunity at the very end. It gave us a paint by numbers action sequence, skips over the remainder of their lives together to go straight to the crew waking up in orbit around Homestead II. A montage showing us James and Aurora growing old together, even having children together, would have been better. Or maybe the movie could have ended with James and Aurora as very very old people (the advanced med tech prolonged their lives), greeting the crew when they wake up, and finally being buried side by side on Homestead II.
That presents an even more creepy ethical dilemma. If they had children together, wouldn't they need to wake children or more adults to produce children, or are they expecting their children either to commit incest or to remain celibate because their parents had no self control?
Last edited:
Having children is a natural thing. It would make sense for James and Aurora to start a family. Of course, incest is creepy and out of the question. Some of the kids might choose celibacy, there is nothing wrong with that. But when their kids reach 20 years of age, they would be closer to home, only 60 years away from Homestead II, so maybe they could wake some more people up? They could start a space colony early. Plus, it might make sense to wake a few more people up in case something goes wrong. It was a miracle James and Aurora survived. They would have better chances of survival if they woke up a couple more people with skills they would need like a doctor or another mechanic. Sure, it poses some serious ethical dilemmas but that also makes a more interesting movie. The movie looked at the consequences of James waking Aurora up against her will but stopped there. It missed an opportunity to go one step further and look at the consequences of James and Aurora being awake together for another 88 years.
Presumably, they would choose who to wake as potential mates without those people having any say in the matter. It's perpetuating the creepy behaviour of their father. There's also the possibility of sabotaging some people's sleeper pods so they never wake up, which might be necessary if a growing non-sleeper population is using valuable, limited resources. There are other distasteful scenarios such as harvesting organs from sleepers, impregnating female sleepers, or using the sleepers as a food source. Hey, we've broken a few taboos already in order to survive, let's get creative...
I am not saying it is right, but arranged marriages have existed for most of Earth's history. It is something that could be explored. Of course, the movie could avoid the entire issue I raised if it had thrown in an extra line of narration about James and Aurora choosing not to have children specifically to avoid a repeat of what James did when he woke up Aurora. It would have added to the sacrifice that James and Aurora made, knowing that they gave up having children of their own because of the circumstances that they were in. I do feel like this is a question worth asking since James and Aurora would have undoubtedly thought about it at some point.
These "marriages" aren't arranged though -- it's more like selecting a mating partner from a catalogue. What happens if the woken person isn't happy about the arrangement -- force them to perform as required, space them? Actually, it would be a more interesting movie to me if these sorts of ethical questions were posed. How far are supposedly civilised people in an advanced technological society willing to go to survive or pass on their genes?
If, in the end, the universe doesn't care, no-one is judged, and everything ends in heat death, proton decay, big rip, or similar, and even if we are revived by chance state recurrence, provided we have no memory of past events, is there any problem with anyone just doing as they randomly feel inclined if there are no consequences to them?
ETA: I've probably been reading too much Nietzsche. Thankfully, there aren't many horses being whipped in the streets nowadays to distress me.
If, in the end, the universe doesn't care, no-one is judged, and everything ends in heat death, proton decay, big rip, or similar, and even if we are revived by chance state recurrence, provided we have no memory of past events, is there any problem with anyone just doing as they randomly feel inclined if there are no consequences to them?
ETA: I've probably been reading too much Nietzsche. Thankfully, there aren't many horses being whipped in the streets nowadays to distress me.
Last edited:
Just came back from it. I'd give it a solid B- rating. Nice visuals. Story was kind of meh without getting into spoilers.
I get the lonely aspect of Pratt's character, can even sympathize with being totally alone for over a year, but what he did amounted to a death sentence for Lawrence and was pretty selfish. Tough to overcome that plot point. Sitting in the theater and thought "Well, that was kind of a dick move."
It was more than him just being alone for a year. I think people are underestimating the situation. He was suicidal. His choice was to either wake Aurora up or kill himself. Considering the choice, I can definitely understand why he did what he did. Honestly, I don't get how waking her up to live the rest of her life on a self-sufficient ship where all her needs would be met is a "death sentence" but him being forced to kill himself is not.
^ That's still no excuse.
Saying that it might be understandable why he did what he did, doesn't make it right.
Saying that it might be understandable why he did what he did, doesn't make it right.
No one forced his situation on him, though, it was just bad luck. I can feel sympathy for him, but I can't excuse him for actually inflicting that situation on someone else intentionally, regardless of his feelings. You can't always say for certain how you'll react in a situation until you've experienced it, but I would like to believe that I would have killed myself rather than inflict that situation on someone else.
Oh yes, and that's not creepy or stalker-y at all. No, not in the least bit. Yeah...seems legit.
Gotta love that 20/20 hindsight, eh?
Pretty much.
I get it. He was in a bad way. But to inflict what he did just seems wrong.
I don't think anyone can honestly say what they would do. Because it's a FUBAR situation. I think it's ludicrous to say you would kill yourself before simply waking someone up and "inflict" them with life. Yeah a life with one other person and not the one they signed up for, but life with presumably your every need met.
I think its impossible to say, for certain, what you would or would not do. And we should all at least relate to the idea of him needing someone else with him and how waking them up would be "easier" than killing yourself.
I think its impossible to say, for certain, what you would or would not do. And we should all at least relate to the idea of him needing someone else with him and how waking them up would be "easier" than killing yourself.
Last edited:
There's a difference between what one would do, and what one should do.
I don't think it's ludicrous at all. People risk their lives for others all the time and sometimes even knowingly sacrifice themselves to save others. Is that ludicrous as well? Those people don't have death-wishes or devalue their own lives versus the lives of others, they're just willing to commit a selfless act either out of a sense of duty or respect for the lives of others.
That's all this comes down to, the difference between selfish and selfless actions. Waking up Aurora is the ultimate selfish action, compounded by the rapeyness of not telling her the truth and having a physical and romantic relationship with her under false pretenses. Choosing not to wake her up would have been the ultimate selfless action. Hard, tragic, probably going to make you want to kill yourself from loneliness before too long, but unequivocally the right thing to do.
Here's a question. Did the movie extensively explore these ethical issues like we're discussing here, or did it pay them lip service before quickly moving on to the big disaster third act where they forget about such things and unite to save the ship? Because if the movie actually spent a significant amount of time discussing the ethics and showing the consequences of Chris Pratt's actions then I'd have slightly less of a problem with the film than if it's quickly glossed over in favor of getting them back together.
Last edited: