Passengers

Rating: 3.5 of 5 ★★★½☆ 

Passengers is the sort of movie that, though it’s a big sci-fi spectacle, is ok if you wait to catch on tv. Not because the visual effects aren’t pretty, they totally are. But because, as enjoyable as it is, it’s a small story that isn’t compelling enough to need to see right now or epic enough to need to see in the theater.

After seeing the trailer a few months ago, it was pretty much exactly what I thought it’d be. Well, maybe a bit less mystery and thankfully a bit less veering into horror/sci-fi. But it was interesting in different ways than I expected and fun to watch. Of course I go into more detail in my review.

The reason I think it’d be easy to wait for tv is that neither Jennifer Lawrence of Chris Pratt are especially charismatic and this film sort of exposes that. Talented, obviously. Likable, totally.

Here’s the thing, I never saw Cast Away, because it just sounded boring to me. But I remember it being such a big hit (it made ofer $200M domestically) and Tom Hanks was nominated for an Oscar for it. And there’s this section of Passengers where it’s only Chris Pratt. And as endearing as he is, as amusing as he is, I thought of Cast Away and that no one would show up to watch two hours of Pratt by himself the way they did for Hanks.

The nice thing about Passengers, though, is that it doesn’t expect that from Pratt. It’s edited well to compensate for what he lacks. So it works. And it’s fun enough for what it is. Either in the theater or on tv.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

  

  

  

        

Subscribe