Except that the theme devolves to one thing - a dilemma of loneliness, which we've already seen. The cycle has some satisfaction in it, but the realization of it doesn't suggest anything new to think about from the first time.
Just imagine the last shot is Jennifer Lawrence, crying and looking directly up at the viewer with that same creepy soundtrack in the background as Pratt's.
acarteiro1999 I thought the same. Why does Hollywood also have to be so safe? Her basically smashing all the buttons at once and having every procedure done to him to miraculously save him was just plain corny. I love Chris as an actor and person, but I remember wishing they wouldn't save him in that scene. I guess that's part of what makes GOT such a great show. Aside from great story telling, you never really know who's going to be killed off next.
acarteiro1999 I never thought that. When I saw the original version in theaters I left disappointed that Aurora didn't take Jim's offer to go back into hibernation in the autodoc. She should've taken it, having her go back into a relationship with her captor (and not to mention having that really unnecessary epilogue) seemed like such a cop out.
The thought occurred tro me when she was threatening him with that metal thingy and he lowered his guard on purpose. I figured if she did kill hi, she would go through the same thing he did and it would be interesting. Although it didn't come to be, i appreciated the movie. But yeah, it could have been awesome.
The first time I watched this movie was on tv. But I started watching right when she wakes up. So it was like watching the movie through her perspective and I didn't know Chris was the one who woke her up until it was revealed later.
Omg. The suggestion of the twilight zone ending where Chris dies and then we’re left to watch her slowly creep up to the agonizing decision to awaken another person is brilliant. That change would make this one of my favorite movies ever.
It's really cool how many ways you could change this simple story around to make it more intense. I do enjoy how they chose to tell the story. They tried to make you feel happy and satisficed at the end of the move. Good story telling. Nice job. Not too shabby🙂
Wow the ending where he dies and she must then contemplate waking another (as he did) or be alone till she dies really blows my mind. After making him the villain and her the victim she must then decided the same making us look at her as both a victim.. or another potential villain. That would have been quite the twist and not so predictable!
I like the original movie, actually I kinda love it LOL - I was really shocked to see that people generally don't like this movie. But this editing in the plot structure really made things more interesting! I would love to watch this full plot edit version.
A couple of points; 1. Not sure why you mention that they needed some action or tension at all? Movies don't neccesarrily require "action" or "tension" to be good, 2. I don't agree that such a switch of POVs would make the movie way better. What we lacked was a deeper dive to Jim's physcy and Aurora's "thoughts". We don't really see her processing things and forgiving Jim. It just happens over time. The minor change you mention, if its going to lead to the same result, its implications could still be achieved by showing Aurora process things. If its going to lead to a different result, then the genre of the movie is going to change and that is not a minor change. It would be a whole different movie.
great idea. my initial reaction was also a bit of disappointment because the tension resolved way too early. i like the idea of rearranging and having chris die which results in an ending with jennifer pushing a button waking up another passenger.
While you’re not the first to make this observation, you are absolutely the best at interpreting the difference. Totally satisfied in this variance. Thank you!
I haven't seen the original. If it shows up as a free movie in one of the heap of streamers I'll give it a try, but the idea that JLaw ends up in the same situation as Crisp Rat at the end of the movie is way better than the description of the original plot.
Oh god thinking about how Jennifer characters lonely in space just and contemplating should she wakes up other people seems like an interesting ending. There's a moral dillema that she realized how chris characters feeling when he wakes her up And the last scene makes it similar to the last scene of chris before he wakes Jennifer
I really liked Passengers. Turns out it would have liked it even more if the film was edited in a more viewer engaging method. Great episode of the Nerdwriter !
LOL the main bad part about Passengers was the complete difference between trailer and the actual movie. Edit: also, this may be an unpopular opinion, but even if Passengers is a completely original movie, it's boring in it's plot. Think about it: guy wakes up. he's lonely so he wakes girl up. they fall in love. oh no, girl finds out he woke her up. they break up. ship meets danger. guy does a heroic act. happy ending.
I agree, the trailer gives the impression that they both woke up since the start of the film which would have worked perfectly with the rearranged idea but the actual film doesn't start that way and it made the trailer look misleading.
This but jen going apeshit chasing that man but she actually succes and year later the plot where she going the same path as chriss with stalking one hot passenger or her original boyfriend and then the movie end with a loop possibility
True. But they left out showing her possible mental breakdown in the months (not weeks) she's not speaking to him, and only talking to Arthur. Or, instead of waking someone else up, she puts him in the med-pod to save his life, but imagine it takes more than 30 seconds to repair his injuries so she puts him in hibernation. But then in a few months wakes him up because she's lonely.
I feel like leaving it open ended with the last shot being Lawrence crying next to someone's pod would have made the audience feel a thousand more things than the cliche love story did
Oh hey Jack, fancy seeing you here! I'm also intrigued by that option, though I wonder what tropes you could still fall into going that route, it might become the predictable ending given some non-thought out foreshadowing. I'd also be curious if the rest of the film would fall flat when rewatching it with that ending, knowing the irony of Jennifer's devestated reaction to finding out. I am just playing devils advocate here, I think it would be awesome to see. What traps do you see that ending falling into?
When I was watching this movie I was convinced that this will be the ending. There is even a scene when Aurora sees some woman and says something like "I feel like we could be best friends". From that moment I was 100% sure that this woman will be next! Oh well... i was sooo wrong.
Damn, you’re right. I actually liked Passengers but the reveal of him having woken her up coming later on in the film would make for a much more intriguing story. Passengers could have been a sci-fi classic instead of the slightly above average popcorn version we got.
What annoyed me about the movie is that it didn't strive to be anything other than a popcorn romance, given how absurd many of the details were from a scientific perspective. I remember being excited by the ship design when I saw the trailer, because a helical design allows for artificial gravity without the need for made-up, Star Trek-esque physics. (If the ship spins on its central axis, then it creates the feeling of weight.) That's why I was seriously disappointed when, during one of the ship's malfunctions, things started floating into the air because the gravity generator got turned off. There were at least a couple of other major unscientific or nonsense details that, in total, made it clear to me that the movie was, first and foremost, a romantic movie, and would never be a sci-fi classic in the same way that Interstellar will probably be.
@@morganross6399 -- Aesthetically, I agree. As cool as the sets looked, though, they were also immensely impractical. Given that everyone on the ship would only be awake for a very, very small portion of the trip, the luxuriousness and sheer spaciousness of everything was an utter waste. I understand that, because it takes place in the future, it's supposed to be considerably cheaper to build things in space, but that doesn't mean that size isn't a factor at all. They should have taken more inspiration from cruiselines, since they operate under similar constraints. I hope this isn't interpreted as me hating the movie. There were things about it that I liked. I was just disappointed that a movie which looked like it was going to blend two genres ended up abandoning one of them.
@@mvmlego1212 Thanks tor the lenghty response. However, I thought that when the ship arrived at the planet, the ship would be an integral part fo the new colony's facilities.,
@@morganross6399 -- Maybe. I was under the impression that the ship was going to return to Earth, but I could be wrong about that. I should watch the movie again at some point.
I know right? It's a great example of how withholding vital information can pique the viewer's interest and increase the sense of anticipation. Rather than just watching a scene unfold, the audience is trying to find clues, add up information and peice together a chain of events, which ultimately reveals whether or not the characters deserve our sympathy or our disgust
Or laying everything out from the beginning, but without enough contexts. It will hit different, because you already saw everything, but didn't pay enough attention until the writer reveal everything
I think (and I know it's TV) that kids shows do this wonderfully. Take any kids show and watch the first episode. For many, there is no explanation of a character, there is no back story, there is just the moment they are in, and that is a great thing to think about. They are not laying out a preamble to get where they want, they are just hitting the ground running and expecting the audience to just jump on board. Films could do this more and not patronise an audience with set up but have that revealed through antagonisms and tensions in the film.
Only true if the point you want to drive home and highlight is the STORY. If your desire is to highlight and celebrate a character (good or bad) it actually makes more sense to tell the story chronologically and lay it out as you go through the story line with the character.
Yup! The funnest and most interesting movies is to not hand hold the audience. Instead of just watching, they are solving, engaging, theorizing etc. Makes for a fun movie experience!
The creep factor of Pratt’s character once you rearrange it is honestly stunning. The look in his eyes makes it obvious he’s done something, and normally we know what and we’re feeling his inner turmoil, but when you theoretically don’t it could be ANYTHING.
True, and it is a far more compelling way to tell the story. So many more ways it could go. The thing I find interesting is how caught up people get in how it is creepy, as if a ton of other movies we know and love don't have creepy heroes and stories that are just as messed up (or even more so). Stalker liar men who scheme to get the object of their affection are a staple for longer than any of us have been around. Really, the difference here is that the guy actually feels awful about it.
One of the creepiest looks he gave was when he approached her in the cafeteria and she jumped up and ran away. She's furious for a week or weeks and finally goes to his room and hits and kicks him, until he lowers his guard to let her kill him with the metal tool if she wants to, but she doesn't. After that we lose track of time as weeks become months, and we don't see her problems with only talking to Arthur. Just before Gus wakes up, she's locked in her room for 2 days and didn't accuse Jim. But then told Gus that what he did was murder, making it seem like she's been riding on fury all this time. Her turnaround towards Jim then seems a complete surprise in the next 2 days or so with Gus dying and the need to save the ship.
@@sandal_thong8631 When Jim was about to die she come to the realisation that she wouldn't last 2 years by herself like Jim did, let alone 90. Then her other emotions became dominate, the love she felt for him.
@@DavidKnowles0 That's possible that all those weeks not talking to him made her empathize with what he had felt for a year. But we don't see that in the movie, so it comes off as an abrupt reversal.
Or what if you also found out that someone had originally woken up Chris Pratt's character, and that person had died, which led him to waking up another passenger(Lawrence) due to loneliness. It would be like this creepy cycle lmao
Even better, after he dies there's a montage of her doing stuff and going insane like Chris (but edited shorter), then she also considers waking somebody up and the movie ends before we know whether she pressed the button. Point being, it doesn't matter if she does it or not, it's the fact that in the same situation she'd get to the same point, even if she had already been a victim of the same action she was about to make.
@@neon9999 It would have also hinted at the issue that most offenders have been a victim at some early age; somehow seeding (in some cases, not all cases, obviously) a developement into a disgusting person, or an interesting artist, or both. But then again, this scenario is so artificial (not in the sense of unrealistic storytelling, but in the sense of humans typically not being alone and surrounded tech instead of palnts, animals 'n stuff) that it is difficult to predict behaviour other than madness or depression with suicidal tendencies due to isolation.
lmao wow. P.S why would he be awake on his own? 1 pod malfunction shouldn't wake him up all ready to serve. he whould be stored in a closet without power until a crew member wakes up and installs him. when told we're not supposed to be here, he even said "i won't tell if you won't". hmmm
Just the fact that it'd be Chris Pratt as the villain would make it very intriguing, because we're USED to seeing him as the goofy, charming good guy. Seeing him be a... Mentally unstable, selfish but sympathetic-ish villain would be interesting because it'd subvert the general expectations we have of Chris Pratt as an actor.
@@TerenceAwolola-lk8kd I mean, the OP is just trying to say that having an actor associated with a positive, trustworthy character might -- in a movie where there is ambiguity about the character he is playing -- lead an audience to trust him, ultimately creating dissonance when we find out he is in fact the villain, moreover a villain we can indeed sympathize with. Instead of a saccharine love story we get a more nuanced narrative about human behavior.
I've heard this "it should have been done from her POV" before, but this is the best video discussing it. So make this change PLUS have Chris Pratt DIE in the end and the depiction of her living alone and does she wake someone else up... THAT would have been a bitching movie
Like in the end we see her broken and crying and then she presses the button and blurs as camera focuses on new awoken passenger taking long breath and then the movie ends. This way you could end it there or make continuation. btw i am sorry for my english if i made any mistakes
Chris's acting reveals its subtlety much more through this edit... Literally how creepy, troubling and confusing can he look from Jennifer's perspective... Great acting
Jennifer bragged about getting paid millions more; but then she got less screen time. Making it from her perspective and her exploration of the ship (with Jim tagging along her every step) would give her more and make her earn her pay!
I would have loved if it had ended with Pratt being a scary villain. And then a year later she's faced with the same decision because she's so lonely. Would have been quite a Twist and so good!
If it just left it hanging with her hand over the button to wake the next person up and you don't know which she chose... that would have been an unbelievable finish to a movie. It throws the nature of his villainy into question... was he really the villain she saw him as? Or has she come to realize that she either has to classify herself as a villain or desperately, about to go insane, lonely. Oh the possibilities for some really deep dives into human psyche stuff.
Doug, if you do this, you are hereby legally bound to upload it somewhere. I've never seen this movie, nor have I seen a fan edit before. I desperately want this.
Can I trust you, John? This being a new PC and all, I'd rather not be the dope who downloaded five trojan horses and a bitcoin miner because a kind stranger gave him an awesome gift. You know what, I checked your profile, and you seem legit. If this is what I think it is, I wouldn't even mind if you got cyber-rich off my folly.
"....it broke my heart to put that tumor in her head." Exact same type of reveal involving Chris Pratt and its 3000x better with the movie not giving it away 20 movies ago.
@@Vu1turEMaN sorry i didn't;t understand your last part? whoops like do you mean its good because we didn't't expect it or bad because it was revealed before. I don't remember knowing it before the twist but maybe i missed something
This is actually a very good example of the importance of EDITING, something which is mostly perceived as just “cut here and there, remove this scenes, merge this, etc.“
I liked the video-essay, "How _Star Wars_ was saved in the edit." One critic of it said all movies are saved in the edit, but that's not so. This movie could have been saved by taking her side and making it a thriller as this video said. Today I saw the deleted scene where Aurora finds the pod manual in Jim's sock drawer, before he admits to waking her: tense. Add a scene where Arthur sounds creepy by saying he can't tell Jim's secrets would ramp up the tension, before the big reveal. Then add a scene with her starting to suffer from living on rage and only talking to Arthur for the 8-10 months before Gus showed up. And during this time we wouldn't know if he's sabotaging the ship to get her attention. Also the ending needed fixing where Jim has to sacrifice himself immediately or the ship will blow up in a matter of seconds, and it being a two-person job, justifying her awakening in retrospect. They needed something similar but with them making choices. Like if he does something dangerous, can he trust her to save him? Then will she actually save him? I like the idea that she gets tempted by loneliness to wake someone up, and maybe that could have been Jim in the medic-bot.
Now you are rewriting the movie too much. It is one thing to rearrange some things, cut out some parts, invert scenes chronologically, and it is another thing to rewrite the story and screenplay. To be honest, even in the case of this concept in this video, just different editing would not make a different movie, they would have to rewrite the ending, or add something closer to the end to make a transition to them being friendly and trusting (well, that already happens in the movie... but I am basing myself on the darker concept suggested by this video).
@@CzechRiot Well, I'm addressing concerns and criticisms I've seen in other comments to various Passengers video, and in reviews. I was disgusted when I showed up to the movie advertised as an accident leading to romance, followed by an adventure to save the ship, and found Jim was going to wake up Aurora, thus taking her life away, to keep him from being lonely. The romance then felt "rapey." Most people said she needs to feel what it's like being alone, and they didn't put in any of those scenes where she doesn't speak to him for months after fighting him and deciding not to kill him. But the movie presents it as days or weeks later that Gus shows up, leading to the finale and a quick turn around on her feelings, making people think she has Stockholm Syndrome. There's two popular endings: he dies, or he lives and they live together as the movie had. Putting her in stasis via the AutoDoc is an option. Leaving him in the AutoDoc until she gets lonely, is my preference.
Nathan Dickson I just finished watching your re-edit and I have to say, well done. It was superb and it made the story so much more enjoyable and so much more interesting. It gave it so much dimension. One critique I would say is that I personally would've changed the ending of your re-edit so it cuts straight to the credits after seeing Jim smiling at banged up Arthur at the bar. That way our villain gets technically redeemed but he has to spend the rest of his life with the consequences of his actions (which should've happened in the original theatrical version anyway imo) and our badass (for lack of a better term) victim gets "saved" and a second chance at the life she should've had in the first place that was robbed from her. See then, with this ending, it gives Aurora the conclusion to her character that she deserves, and it eliminates the necessity of that scene at the end where the crew wakes up, because having her take the pod implies that the ship is forever fixed until they get there. And, this way, we can come up with our own epilogue in our minds of what happened after Jim's life ended. Idk, just my thoughts.
I am glad you liked it. That would work if Jim were the villain, but I did not see him that way nor did I want to paint a picture of him that way. It also would not have logically followed from Aurora’s emotional investment in him when she saved his life. She saw that Jim was a decent man, even a great man, when he sacrificed his life to save 5000 people, something even she was unwilling to do initially. I think she realized that he is a better person than she was and that she might never find another person like him and it suddenly all made sense to her when she was given the choice. Plus, my wife would have killed me.
After watching this, I am REALLY keen on doing a re-edit myself. I am a sound engineer, so I would redo some dialogue and change the music to generate the new atmosphere. One question though: Do you think this would count as fair usage if I uploaded it to RU-vid? Great work Nathan!
There are tons of Star Wars re-edits/fan-edits on youtube and they have been up for years. I suppose this would be the same thing? I would love to see this re-edited.
When Chris is laying in bed right after she attacks him is when you should cut to the first act of the movie and show his experience of the year alone.
i saw I AM MOTHER on Netflix before I saw this movie and I have to say I AM MOTHER is a must watch! for any fans of this movie, everything ppl suggest and more happens or doesn't i don't want to spoil but take my word for it watch the trailer
I love the idea of the crying ending here. She cries, not because she is about to wake somebody up, she can't imagine doing that to someone else. She is crying because deep down she knows that the strength of that moral choice will deteriorate over time, and that one day she will do it.
And in her scenario it's worse than it was for Chris, because she's gone through it and knows EXACTLY what it feels like. Damn, that would have been some story.
When Chris is laying in bed right after she attacks him is when you should cut to the first act of the movie and show his experience of the year alone.
Just a small thing but I really appreciate you pointing out that it's easier to suggest improvements for an existing film, than to create a wholly independent idea in a film. Really comes across as less smug and more positive than a lot of other critical takes 😅
I so want genres I like to succeed, whether sci-fi or superhero (which is kind of fantasy/sci-fi) that I feel I should support them. I just saw the movie, _65_ about human-like aliens crash-landing on Earth just before the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs. But it really didn't have anything more to say than that premise, and that he has to save a girl about the age of his late daughter. Makes me think of Adam Driver as the leading man in B-movies.
Sad? Watch this: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-t8xL7w1POZ0.html seriously this whole women get abducted and controlled by a man just to fall in love with them is so discriminating and annoying.
Keep in mind that critics were looking for a cliche, stalker-type thriller, while a majority of the audience enjoyed the original version. The audience score was over 60% early on. There have been far too many movies where the protagonist encounters a seemingly nice person who turns out to be a stalker and eventually a psychopath (Single White Female, Misery, Cape Fear, Unlawful Entry, Poison Ivy, Fear, One Hour Photo, etc. etc. etc.) . They were followed by remakes and copycats. I actually developed an interactive engine that allows the viewer to switch between multiple perspectives at will and basically create their own cut of the movie in realtime. Their impression of protagonist, antagonist, or bystander depends on how much of which perspectives they have experienced. It will be interesting to see how much of the audience leans one way or the other.
@@ducklingscap897 Yeah. I think the only good way to end this film still interestingly and differently enough to be critically viewed as uniquely good is to do this rearrangement of J Law's perspective comes first, and then the Twilight zone ending as he pointed where Chris dies and J Law go to the verge of insanity about being alone and wanting to unfreeze someone else. Although a problem with that is many people will agree people don't generally just automatically comes to the same conclusion as what Chris had in the film, because it was a morally wrong decision to take, so forcing J Law into that decision again is really pushing it. i mean the easiest way to go would be to just make this a thriller with Chris being the bad guy from the get go, because then the bad guy and good guy will be crystal clear. And this idea has been done a million times before. I don't think people actually want another film like that; many feel that they do only because Chris Pratt is playing the character and we just want to see him go bad once. But in the end, it will be very unoriginal, and critics will just give it a slightly above average score in the end. I feel that by nature, we like it when everything is more black and white. Good guy looks like good guy, and bad guy looks like bad guy. We are afraid of thinking about Stockholm relationships, because it's very creepy by nature and we are very confused as to how we should view it and think of it. On one hand.... poor guy I would hate to be him; on the other hand, this is literal abduction and rape. So by default, it will disgust a lot of viewers from the get-go and it will make it difficult for people to judge this film more objectively. Honestly I still liked this film, not because of the predicable plots or how it went, but because the film was courageous enough to try something different and try to make you feel bad for the captor in a Stockholm relationship and make the guy look good since the beginning with no physical violence, berating of the woman, or direct threatening involved, which it made me think a lot about human nature, temptations, morals, etc. And I think in the end, if a film can do more than just tell a story, and can provoke thoughts to its audience, it was a good movie. Not a lot of movies can do that nowadays, especially not the ones that spend all their energy on CGI and explosions.
Switching the main POV would have made it sooo much better and it’s such a simple change. And the twilight zone ending where Chris Pratt’s character dies and Jens character waking someone up like he did, then ending it there before they actually wake up. It would’ve been such a bomb ass movie. Such a shame they didn’t do that..
I know I'm going to get a lot of "boo, hiss" from this comment but while I would looooove to see that, I don't think Pratt is talented enough to pull it off. He's great at goofy, loveable, quippy, and charming but I honestly don't think he has any depth beyond that. It'd be awesome to be proven wrong though!
I literally cannot unsee this edit. I’m actually really irritated that they didn’t make the movie this way. It’s utterly brilliant. I would suggest we start a petition to have THIS movie made but everyone already knows what would happen, thus maintaining the predictability we were trying to avoid.
From what i know, it was originally intended to be that way (creepy and told from Aurora's pov) but the corporates(? decided to change it into a more "romantic" story. If i'm not wrong, you can read the original script online
@@edthe2nd - Sometimes the director decides to re-arrange the story & plot, then reshoot parts of it. In fact, re-shoots are pretty common in film It's the editor's job to make this restructure appear seamless. And THAT is why editing gets its own category, bc it's a damn hard job to work with what you've got and translate that into the director's vision.
Yeah sadly it's not really given to good editing. It's more the oscar to give away for a movie that doesn't get the big ones. For example the editing in "Bohemian Rhapsody" was really not oscarworthy
edthe2nd Plots have often been changed in the editing room. Lots of movies have several versions and essential it comes down to production company which version they will release. Eyes Wide Shut is one of those stories. The direction wasn’t allowed to release the version he wanted and it became a war with the studio. He conveniently died and the studio was able to get rid of the original version.
Seriously. But the sad thing is, it would be very hard to get that movie made in Hollywood. The only reason Passengers got made as an original screenplay is because it was so fucking trite and predictable, the execs could sign off on it.
+Baeck John A Twilight Zone ending refers to the old TV Show The Twilight Zone, not the movie Twilight. Twilight Zone episodes usually had an ending that gave an ironic twist to the story you just watched. One of the most famous episodes of the Twilight Zone had aliens arrive on Earth and help humanity end famine and wars and bring about global peace, to the point where humans began to willing leave Earth and travel to the alien's homeworld. At the end of the episode you discover the reason the aliens did all this for humans was so the aliens could *eat* the humans. The book one of the aliens had left behind, the title of which had been translated as "To Serve Man" (which was also the title of the episode) was actually a cookbook. A Twilight Zone type ending for Passengers, in this case, is exactly what the video above talked about: Pratt's character dying, and Lawrence's character growing just as lonely as Pratt's character had, to the point of looking like she's about to do to someone the same thing Pratt did to her as the movie ends (though you don't know if she does or not).
5 years passed, but this video assay is ingrained in my brain. This is so epic and well done, probably my favorite rewrite if a script of all time. I wish we got to see it on screen
Never ending scenario where every passenger wakes up the next person infinity out of desperation and loneliness. That sounds better than black mirror..
3:54-4:17 This is a great beginning for a horror movie. If we start with her waking up, we see her wandering alone in a seemingly empty ship. Then our first intro to the man is of his back, watching her unknowing, setting an ominous tone. The distance between them shows the lack of trust/safety that exists. When she asks who he is and how nobody else in her row woke up, he gives a 1 second pause before answering each time, suggesting he's lying. It all really sets a great tone for a horror movie, hinting that he's suspicious without confirming it. The uncertainty of not knowing who he is for certain (could he be a stowaway, an alien, something else?) or what his true goals are keeps the tension up for the movie.
I agree with the video and you for the most part, but one problem I still would have with this edit is that it would be easy to inadvertently make the truth too obvious before the actual reveal, thereby deflating the tension and defeating the point of the edit in the first place. Maybe there would need to be some well-handled misdirection in the screenplay, and of course, as is said in the video, a lot does hinge on the rest of the movie after the reveal.
making the bad guy creepy isn't killing suspense. Think about the many whodunnit crime procedurals where you don't care about the bad guy because it's just the most random douchbag of the episode. If your bad guy is obvious but his motives aren't, it can work very well. What is wrong with that guy? What danger does he pose? What does he want? You know it's a bad guy, but that knowledge is actually what gets yourt mind racing.
there was a scene where he was following her around on the cameras, and that's where my revelation of how good passengers would be as a horror story came from
It doesn't necessarily needs to be a horror movie, I think it'd actually be quite easy and boring, because what's the interest here is to take some horror elements, but keeping the original genre of the movie, some Sci-fi romance based on a terrible dilemma of a man scared to die alone. So Pratt's actions with this new edit'd have another dimension, we would have empathy for him as well as for Lawrence, but what he's done would have a hugest impact. That'd be much more interesting than just making him beeing a bad guy, because then there'd be no interrogation about his choice.
I recently rewatched this, and the only way his characters despicable crime (regardless of it being the act of a “drowning man”) is redeemable is after he sacrifices his life to save the whole ship, he also discovers there’s a space in the medical pod to put one of them back in suspended animation and he not only tells her, he then offers it to her. These two things are VITAL for the audience to forgive him, not just Jennifer’s character. If he couldn’t reverse what he’d done to her, even if he’d saved the life of everyone on board, I personally still would’ve had trouble forgiving him for ruining HER life. Even if SHE forgave him, and then I wouldn’t have enjoyed their romance. But she is given this choice and DECIDES HERSELF to remain with him, thus negating the entire original crime. It was the only way I or most others could’ve seen it as a “happy ending.” So that needed to stay in.
Even not having seen the movie, just from the handful of scenes you showed from right after she wakes up I can tell you're right. Without knowing what happened those scenes are creepy, and gripping as you try to piece together the situation. With, they're just stepping stones to get to the scene where the lie is revealed.
Didn't see ten movie. But by the alternative you offer here, it seems it could have easily been risen to a more engaging experience. Basically, I agree with you.
Would be better if they did, but more people are likely to see a remake at the cinema if they liked the original than if they hated it. The better films are more likely to make more money on home release, though of course this has a lower yield to the studio than in cinema.
@Dagyhub creanbhntsr m yeah, i know art is subjective and this whole video is just opinion. That's just something indicating it once again that i thought worth pointing out
I like the idea of the story starting with her waking up and ending with him dying and her picking someone else to wake up because she realizes that she can't be alone.
The most cruel irony of all this is: this WAS the orignal plan. The original script for the film starts with Lawrence waking up and only discovering what happened to her in the third act of the film in an extended flashback sequence. But for whatever reason director Morten Tyldum decided to re-arrange the film's structure. Which is especially odd seeing as he;s the director of one of this decade's best thrillers: the cult hit Headhunters. So he should know a thing or two about suspense and how an element of mystery can keep the audience engaged.
I did hear a rumor somewhere that the film had substantial reshoots to retool the movie. I wouldn't put it beyond Sony to interfere, perhaps to capitalize on Pratt's popularity as well as the decline of Lawrence's popularity. The fact the Lawrence got paid much more than Pratt implied initially that she would be front and center, not him. Also Andy Garcia's part seemed kinda random, like there was more to his role but it got cut down to a brief cameo at the end, even though he got high billing in the credits.
Yeah its interesting enough I'd be down to help do it. Start with her point of view getting led around the ship first act. Second act they fall in love, though cut some of the scenes out for later. Third act she realizes his crime, Splice in a few of him near the end going crazy as he realizes what was lost now. long hair and eating in bed. 4rth they malfunction and part of his struggles before she was there. he dies. end with shots of her in the ship but without him as if she continues afterwards. and then a few of her by the pods like he was to show that she might commit the same crime.
I have an idea how you could do it. Start with Jen and then leave as it was until Pratt dies. As she tries to CPR him cut to a flashback when he wakes up a year earlier. And when we get to his decision to wake up Jen, we go back to the CPR scene. He wakes up and the movie goes normally until the end.
I got chills watching and thinking about the re-edit and the shock in finding out a malfunction didn't wake her up. Like for a first watch this movie would have been amazing
I would have enjoyed their romance more, since it would have matched what was advertised and not seemed as rapey as it did. It's amazing he was able to be a good date after being alone for so long. That reminds me of that _Star Trek: The Next Generation_ episode where a version of Ryker gets stranded for years on an outpost and has to readjust to human contact, including romancing the woman he loves, Deanna Troi, that his alternate self broke up with for a career. They should have ended it with both Ryker's on the ship, and made the actor shave his beard and wear a fake one for Commander and clean-shaven for Lieutenant. But for some reason the series didn't want personal conflicts between the main cast.
An ending with Lawrence staring at a sleeping passenger, then looking up at the camera, then movie ends. The viewer doesn't know if she chooses to wake up the person or not. Thats a good ending! Gah!
@@TheStOne1 I enjoyed the movie was it is...the focus on relationships and the message that relationship is more important than many things we think important. It's one of my favorite movies. But surely a darker version would have interested more people. It would have been less character sketch and more suspenseful, which would have worked well.
I like how you give constructive criticism instead of just bashing it at every chance you get. I agree with you that it should be celebrated that this was a completely original script. You put a great twist on the movie that would've made it way better but you appreciate it for what it is.
A lot of movies start you out in the middle of the action left to figure out what happened. But as an overall idea, yes this is an original story even neither if the theoretical execution nor the actual execution were original.
Oh, that would be perfect. Have Pratt go full here's johnny but Lawrence survives. There's a high point but then the aftermath sets in. We don't need to have a 20 minute segment of her milling around the ship for a year - we already saw that with Pratt and we can fill in the blanks. Maybe just a shot or two of her doing similar things. Then cut to some new guy waking up from the stasis chamber, walks around a bit and bumps into Lawrence. "Do you know what's going on? No one else from my group woke up." "Same for me." Roll credits.
If you want to read more, this is called the Kuleshov Effect. Many film theory channels do videos on the effect because it's inherently interesting in the way that the editor has heavy sway with how characters are presented.
A friend once told me to always pay for the best editor you can get... a crap one can make an amazing movie shit, an amazing one can make an ok movie great-
Jorgen Pakieto I can't watch Passengers now without thinking about this video lol. It could've been so much better with just a few minor changes. Scrap the additional malfunctions, scrap Lawrence Fishburne (sorry Lawrence). They could've gone full thriller and stuck with just two people, one a bit unhinged. Then flashback to show Jim losing it in solidarity. Ugh the possibilities!
It's amazing, honestly. It makes you think how great this movie couldv'e been if only they had changed the point of view. One small choice changes everything.
@@luckyDancer100 They could have kept Gus, but instead Aurora finds a way to get him out of hibernation, perhaps by one of the robots on remote control, but botches it. That would put her in the same moral position as Jim.
not that this particular film should be shown in class, but the process of rearranging and editing an existing film to better the story, deepen the plot, etc
oddly enough this entire concept can be summed up in one of Kurt Vonnegut's 8 writing rules: start the story as close to the end as possible....but then another one of the rules is: Give your readers as much information as possible as soon as possible. To heck with suspense..
In film class they talk about the difference of whether the audience knows there's a bomb about to go off under a table. If they don't then when it happens it's a shock. But if they do, and the main characters don't then it's suspenseful.
"I was genuinely surprised by how creepy Pratt's character is, when you take away his point of view." I found Pratt's character creepy even knowing his point of view.
Juju Bean Personally I didn't find Pratt's character creepy. I wasn't confused by his motives, but I was bored by the predictability of the plot. It would've been much more entertaining to start with Aurora. Having her wake up with Jim already there, lurking around the ship, etc. We could piece together the information ourselves and depending on the third act, end with Aurora contemplating the same fate. It would've been like The Shining in space, which sounds pretty epic
Lucky i wonder if one of the writers thought of this but some big wig calling the shots assumed that the audience would be too stupid to take a twist like that, with a big budget in space, they probably didn't want to take the risk.
I saw the film with my Dad. The ending he predicted was way better. He thought everyone on the ship had been conned and their really was no destination. The company had sent them into space with no crew just to get their money. So when the ship starts to break down it's because they've been out there for even longer than the actual trip to the planet, far far into the future and they're all doomed regardless of whether the ship can hold together or not.
MarylandLovely i don't get why Chris Pratt and Jennifer didn't just wake up another passenger, take his I'd and throw the passenger off the ship, I know it's f up ,wouldn't that be a smarter decision. lol
Nice idea, although it wouldn't really make sense. Why would the 'Homestead Company' let their billion dollar spaceship get destroyed, just to get money from the 5000(?) passengers? Lets say that 1 trip by Avalon costs $50.000 per individual, and there are 5000 passengers. $50.000 x 5000 = $250.000.000. The company would lose money for this, so it'd have to be an act of pure terrorism planned by the company itself. Like the idea of 5000 helpless passengers on a sinking (metaphorically speaking) ship though. The original script by Jon Spaihts actually ended with all the pods being released into space, and Jim and Aurora trying to save them. They failed, and literally were the only passengers left.
More than anything else, this video is a testament to the importance of editing in film. One change can alter the entire story, shift the tone and add more complex layers to characters.
I'm a screenwriter. Believe me when I say that editing can alter story structure dramatically, irrespective of what is on the screenplay. One small shift can change the atmos of a screenwriter's story. So while this is about story structure - and I appreciate that - I think, personally, it showcases the power of editing above all else.
the fact you can edit this so cleanly with backstory, just shows how well Chris actually played his part. Down to a TEA with the thriller genre, but yet such a comedic character
This. Blew. My. Mind. I haven't seen Passengers because the story wasn't interesting to me. But this rearranged cut? I would watch the living hell out of this movie.
Same here; I scrolled down once he started with his alternate pitch to see if he put a link to his fan-edit so we could watch it, incomplete as it may be. But alas, no he did not leave the link.
I had a similar idea. It would have been a more interesting ending. You could end it with her looking at his plans as to how he sabotaged her stasis tube and wondering if she should do it.
I would have her choose to make the same choice he did, or I would have them decide to share the extra sleep pod. So one of them will sleep for 5 years, the other will then wake them up and sleep the next 5 years. Jennifer will go first, and Chris will choose not to wake her up to make up for his sin. The movie would end with Jennifer waking up with the rest of the ship and realising what he'd done for her.
@@ge2719 If you make a choice for someone without asking them what they want, you have taken away their agency. That is what it means. It doesn't matter if it was a nice thing or a bad thing.
I would have had them figure out that maybe they, instead of making tree forts, could have spent a decade or so learning how to make TWO sleep pods, and then plugging them in for the next 90 years. I was OK with the movie up until the end. I didn't want to see a creepy horror movie. I wanted to see a romantic movie, and maybe they could have nailed the happy ever after a little better.
If it was billed as more of a thriller, then the ending where Pratt dies and the final scene is her about to wake someone else up, would have been extremely predictable.
No... you would HAVE loved it much more... how come so many people get that wrong?? I'm danish and I'm correcting an english speaking person? So sad.. 😭
@@thedesigner388 .. and why do they do that? Don't tell me it's not basic spelling from the EARLIEST of grades. It's literally some of the first words people learn in school.
I never watched this movie and I was genuinely surprised it showed Chris Pratt waking up first, from the commercials I thought it was Jennifer Lawrence waking up alone
From the trailers, the movie seemed so much better! I tought they had waken up together/she first, and they had to figure out what was wrong with the ship, and then three would have some huge twist like, "we are doomed, the place we were going to does not exist anymore!" Or something
@Krish Nair You should check out the editing process of Star Wars: A New Hope. There's a video by RocketJump that talks about it and how the movie was saved by the edit, a statement echoed by George Lucas himself.
@@notimeforyoutubelol Editing LITERALLY decides the pacing and structure of a story. And it's not just film editing. It's also story editing, music editing etc. It is the art of piecing things together. That's literally how art is created.
Ahh the alternate ending of Chris dying, Jennifer being left alone and contemplating whether to wake up another passenger would have been pure genius ending.
actually it's not, if you take what we know from that ending - there is a pod for 1 passenger to go back into hibernation and that 1 passenger would just be Aurora.. the end
This concept and realization gave me cold chills. As much as I liked this film, to have it from Jennifer’s perspective would’ve made it ten times more interesting and memorable.
When Chris is laying in bed right after she attacks him is when you should cut to the first act of the movie and show his experience of the year alone.
This movie is actually so creepy: the guy basically stole her entire life, locking her up with him forever while they don't even know each others, taking away her autonomy and freedom. This is the plot of an horror movie. And the fact that she forgives him and they fall in love at the end is very unsettling according to me
@@DerezzedMan Well, I have never been in Pratt's position of course, but if I did what he did it would still not be ok. I'm not saying I would be better then him, I'm saying it's pretty f*cked up to make it look like a romance.
Oh my God. When he suggested JLaw's character being left alone and pondering making the same choice, I actually had chills run down my spine. That would have been REALLY good.
Joleine28 I watched Nostalgia critic's and Film critic's video and Film critic says that the script of the film orders the acts the same way as Nerdwriter edited it to be.
They needed a movie with a sympathetic male lead because everyone knows that sci-fi movies with female leads never make any money, especially the ones that star Jennifer Lawrence. Creepy psycho Chris Pratt, even with the flashbacks in the middle, would have been an amazing twist that would have made the movie truly interesting. You can't get a total do-over without a time machine but I think reediting the movie and rereleasing it would be a badass move and make it what it should have been-really good.
Star Wars. Is one of the most impactful movies today but most people involved at the time saw this movie fail even George Lucas had no hope in it for a long time during production. Then came Spielberg and along with several other changes he suggested editing alt of ot in another order beforehand the film didn't start with the space battle, one of the most iconic shots of the entire trilogy and the thing people first saw and made their impression upon the original idea was of Luke and Bighs talking with friends and seeing the battle in the sky. So yeah editing can impact the entire reception, quality, etc. of the movie. I the pacing does not work the movie usually has a problem with its script in so.e way. A lesson many modern directors ignore even if it so important
Nicolas Schultz thats not editing dude 😂 its screenplay. the point of view we follow a plot is script and not editing. editing is all about working on footage post filming. script is pre filming. thats just movies 101 terminology. not meaning to be a dick, but 500 people and you can learn to use the right terms to not sound clueless from here on out. all win for you
