An entertaining but too soft and predictable film. The new epic science fiction film from SONY has every opportunity in the world to become a mature, adult, intriguing or exciting story, all of them. And it loses them all. He lets them go because he does not know how to face those possibilities and decides that it is much better to become a kind of variant of Titanic in space, in which there is no force, tension or magic, simply the charisma of its two main actors and visual effects. It could have been a tribute to 2001, or to The Shining (it is something that is seen in the film, the seed is there) but it is not. He does not take advantage of it. It ends up resembling Wall-e to which it imitates even in the soundtrack …
It is curious how a few days before seeing Passengers, science fiction cinema, with a spaceship, with those elements mentioned above, I saw La Land, a musical film, genre that I do not passionate in the least, and I loved the second one and left untempered from the first. The reason is simple, La Land rises with history and characters, gets deep into their personal history and avoids clichés or dodge them in the best possible way. It’s brave. It takes a risk. Passengers does not, because it seems that the director and the screenwriter are more interested in the romantic story than in the science fiction part, and that is something that ends up being paid. Moments of adventure, terror or action lack the strength to truly thrill the audience.
No, it’s not boring, it’s just another movie. The story of a journey through the galaxy over 100 years to a new colony, and two people who wake up 90 years before the journey comes to an end, unable to fall asleep again. There is good chemistry between the cast, a very brief cast, with some guest surprises, but little else. Although Pratt is worse actor than Lawrence and that shows off. In fact she raises the story on several occasions thanks to her talent. The presence of Michael Sheen is curious, but wasted (if they had chosen to give another twist to his character …) and that of Lawrence Fishburne is almost an anecdote …
I’ll say it again, it’s not boring, it’s just flat. Lacking in flavor. Visually cared for, elegantly told, but with no real soul. Too obsessed to be Titanic and with a plot that, when you see it you will understand, is too close to the Pixar film that we have mentioned before. With the material they had there were many more possibilities. The initial premise is promising. And as one develops imagines possible scenarios away from topics. They have the possibility to do them, but they prefer to stay on safe ground. Something already seen too many times. They might even have opted to make a variant of Stargate Universe, and neither do they. That leaves us with a nice product, but nothing more.
Jesus Usero
COMENTA CON TU CUENTA DE FACEBOOK
