I would much rather have "Passengers" be told from Jennifer Lawrence's perspective, as she falls for Chris Pratt, and it comes as a shock to both her and us when we learn that he woke her up.
As the video said, the version you described should have been the plot and the studio 100% chickened out. Almost every critic also said the same thing.
Yeah true but then we'd all have been subjected to endless months of "They stole her agency! Where was the consent?" posts online and all throughout social media. I'm relieved that they didn't take that path despite the fact that it would've made for compelling cinema for the non-smoothbrained among us.
@@BigDaddyJinx No, that would have been the entire hook of a horror premise. The fact that her agency was stolen and her horror that this seeming perfectly nice guy did this to her out of loneliness and desperation. That would have been a dark, very compelling film. That is the point of the criticism and the OP's post.
I thought of a way to make The Passengers work as the kind of movie it wanted to be: Jim considers waking up Aurora because she is hot and therefore studies the manual, but he realises that he can't do it. However, he notices another passenger's pod malfunctioning, but not opening. He opens the pod and saves the person inside. Then this other passenger goes through the same grief of having to spend the rest of their life onboard this ship. This creates understandable tension between them and Jim. I'm thinking they might not have a ton in common at first. But they slowly warm to each other - maybe they fall in love, maybe they don't. When Jim finds out how to use the medical pod as a as a stasis pod, both characters wrestle with the thought of taking the pod and leaving the other person behind to decades of loneliness. Either one of them is willing to do that, so they agree to spend the rest of their lives together. This way, it would actually be a meditation on loneliness, as well as the question of whether Jim should have let the other person die, so they wouldn't have to experience the same isolation he lives with. And an additional option for the ending could be that they had a child, whom they put into the medical pod when the kid turned 20, so a piece of both of them lived on. This obviously only works if the other passenger is a woman.
Jill Bearup actually came up with a good fix on her UA-cam channel which I think would have worked. It's essentially saying what this video suggested but she really fleshes it out well.
@@cesarvasquez9572 I am not familiar with her channel, so I have to check it out. My suggestion was about trying to keep the themes the movie wanted to explore. A horror take on the plot is interesting, but it just also seems too easy a fix.
The thing about the story "The Box" that made it so effective as a short story and a quicky episode of "The Twilight Zone" was the stinger ending. After being told of the conditions of the box (the main character being informed that by pressing the button, someone, somewhere in the world would die, someone she didn't know and who did not know her) she goes back and forth for a day before pressing the button. This, presumably, kills someone, though we don't see it. Then, when she asks the guy who brought the box what happens now, he says to her that the box would be reset, and given to someone else with the same offer...Someone, somewhere in the world, someone she didn't know, and who didn't know her. The implication being that she'd be the next to die, if the next person pressed the button. It's a perfect ending, and doesn't really lend itself to a full-length feature film.
The thing with The Box is that amateurs on UA-cam did it better years before - Watch "Black Button" here on UA-cam... WAY, WAY BETER!!! Don't get me wrong - I am not slating The Box... I actually enjoy it! But I had seen the Black Button Video first and the timing - YIKES! At the time I saw Black Button - It was only about 3 months before The Box hit Cinemas... And it was really gaining traction - So it did feel like someone had RIPPED OFF Amateur film makers to make a Quick buck... Now, I know this is NOT TRUE... Black Button was not even an original idea, It was based on a short story that had indeed also been in a Twilight Zone episode before! Most likely it is pure coincidence... But the Two being so popular at around the same time Yeah, It don't look good! I am not sure what really hurts the movie... If its that dodgy CGI... Or its attempts to be more "Mysterious" than it has any right to be... I feel the "It Aliens Testing us" concept was REALLY LAME! And Making the son blind to get them to do what the "Man" Wanted... Just... NO! That said, I do like it... I just would never watch it again.. Where Black Button - OH HELL YEAH! I WILL WATCH THAT OVER AND OVER!
@@weasle5022 Yes, it is... The idea in principle is good... But terribly handled! Black Button - The UA-cam Video I mentioned is SO MUCH BETTER! SO SO MUCH BETTER - Here is a link, It only about 8 Minutes long and has a much better story than the Movie... Enjoy! ua-cam.com/video/QrKnhOJ-R80/v-deo.html
Dang, Keith, I was just coming here to write EVERYTHING you just wrote! It's a truly wonderful story, provided you don't try to make it go 90 minutes to two hours!
Yeah, the movie felt like they were trying to pad out a thirty minute story out to feature film length. It's kind of a bummer that neither adaptation has kept to the original ending of the story too.
I actually enjoyed "Downsizing", maybe because I had no expectations for it. Yes, it had its length and its weaknesses, but it all boils down to what you think the actual premise is. In my opinion, the environmental, technical and political issues were just the setting. It was not about them. The real message was about the inability of humans to escape their fundamental conditions, the world they have built up for themselves. You can shrink, you can flee, you can hide in a hole in the ground, ultimately your human problems will follow you everywhere and be the same problems nevertheless. You have to take things as they come and try to make the best of it. That's why I loved the Vietnamese girl. She had understood it and was a perfect embodiment of this idea.
"The One"suffered quite a lot for being released too close after "The Matrix". You mentioned that, but for sure was shot quite before "The Matrix" premiere.
I loved "Hancock"; felt like it deserved a sequel to flesh out the lore. Where Hancock succeeded and Man of Steel failed is that we had a blank slate for a hero who was able to act like an a non traditional hero; in MoS, Zack Snyder took a traditional hero with a rich lore and tried to deconstruct it to disastrous effect. Still keeping hope alive for a sequel
You know, considering how good 12 Angry Man was, I see no excuse why a great movie concept should fail to produce a great movie. I'd love to know how that movie was pitched. "Yea, so I want to make a movie with 12 mean locked in a room, talking." No action, no physical fights, just 12 guys talking. It even produced on of the best exchanges in cinema history: "He's just a poor ignorant slob. He don't even speak good English." With a Spanish accent the guy next to him says "Doesn't. He doesn't speak good English." God I love that.
Same here. I think if it had been given a chance for a follow up we would’ve gotten the war and a fully realized John Connor and gone full circle as he sends Reece back in time.
I liked Freaky, the slasher movie where the protagonist and antagonist body swap. It's obvious to me that they wanted to call it Freaky Friday the Thirteenth, but probably ran into legal issues there. It's also obvious that it could of been a much better movie, still good though.
Yeah, Downsizing did fall a bit short, didn't it? When it comes to issues, a tiny thing here or there is not too bad. But in that movie, they were everywhere! The premise was so good, but I could barely see it. With all the pushing of the environmental narrative, the room left for the rest of the story was very little. Edit: I will not apologize.
Yep, the failure was 100% pushing a political thing that had nothing to do with the premise and was completely a different tone from the premise that just brought the entire thing to a screeching halt
I think Transcendence was a great movie! Only problem was the trailer portraying it as a sci-fi thriller than the character study with sci-fi elements it was.
The movie Downsizing felt like a lie. You see small people interacting with large people for like a minute long.. the rest of the movie, they look like normal people. I was hoping for a lot more showcasing the different sizes for the humans.
Passengers is one of those movies like I am legend or Hancock where it starts of great but ends badly, it should have gone the way of dejavu or sunshine changing genre half what through going from castaway in space to a psychological horror. Also, I liked terminator salvation it just had a poor ending. The terminator that thinks he’s human aspect should have been so much more.
A pretty much forgotten Kirstie Alley movie from 1990 called Sibling Rivalry did this. First off, I have no idea what the title was about as I could never get myself to watch the whole thing. There are some siblings involved, but it has nothing to do with competition. It's about a frustrated woman who cheats on her husband, and then the guy she's cheating with dies in the bed. There are some hijinks following this but overall, the film just kind of devolves into arguing and ends up with her becoming a writer or something. It was really weird, like the movie had a good idea but had no idea where to go with it.
Not much, but the film also had Bill Pullman, Carrie Fisher, Jami Gertz, Scott Bakula Ed O'Neill and Sam Elliott in it so it wasn't lacking in the casting department. It was also directed by Carl Reiner. @@SpamEggSausage
No, Hancock's premise was good. The execution was terrible. Having Bateman's wife also be a superhero was just way too contrived and unbelievable (of all the people in the world, she is the superhero? Her husband met her through absolute random fate. It was dumb). and turned the film from a character study of Handcock into a cliche's star crossed lovers story.
"Hancock" definitely could have become what "Deadpool" would be 8 years later. The jarring tonal shift in the second half of the movie, and the bizarre decision to suddenly focus on a romance, really sabotaged a great premise for a late 2000s superhero movie. It was truly bad writing and ultimately a huge missed opportunity.
I enjoyed Hancock but I feel that even though the concept was great it was always going to be one of those niche stories. You can't make him to much of an ahole then people won't like him. You can't really keep him as the drunken jerk because he will need to grow or people will lose interest. Some will want him to stay this brutal hero while others will get annoyed and bored that he is one dimensional. It was just one of those tight rope acts that is almost impossible to walk correctly.
The Box doesn't sound like a very compelling concept to me. Not without a lot more context. If you think about it, the fact that you wouldn't *know* the person who died really shouldn't matter much to a moral person. It really comes down to, "Would you kill someone for $1,000,000?". I'm guessing most people would say no to that, in the abstract. In order to make the scenario more plausible, you would have to go the Breaking Bad route and have the protagonist have some disease that's expensive to treat. Even then, it would probably be a hard sell, because you're trading someone else's life to save your own. To me, Hancock is a tragic case. Will Smith was great, as he usually is. But once you add the Charlise Theron subplot, it becomes too confusing and really derails the movie. I guess they had to give the hero something to actually do, but it should've been something else. I liked Transcendence when I saw it. It's not an amazing movie or anything, but it at least dealt with its premise relatively well. I give it a pass for getting the Internet wrong, because almost all sci-fi movies get some aspect of computers or the internet wrong. In Time was a good ... time ... but there's no getting around the fact that it was a better concept than it was a movie. It could've been much better as a cerebral thriller than as an action movie. I think Terminator: Salvation had the wrong premise from the start. It shouldn't have been about one final push to destroy the machines. It would've been much more effective to make it about the *start* of the machine war, rather than the end. They could've gone full Star Wars with it, and made a whole sub-trilogy just based on the war, leading to an epic conclusion. And as far as Passengers, I think you're right. That would've been better off framed as a horror story.
"The One" was, by most accounts, supposed to be a more talky movie with Dwayne Johnson in the lead role, but he was unable to do the movie so it was rewritten as a full-on actioner with Jet Li. I can only assume because they were afraid that Jet Li's accent would be too off-putting.
Can I toss Guns Akimbo and R.I.P.D. into the mix? Much like Hancock, they had great lead actors and started out with very solid first acts exploring the starting premise, before going downhill over the course of the film and finishing on mediocre crashbangwallop set pieces.
Guns Akimbo still delivers on its cheesy plot and concept. I’ve watched it a few times because I’m a fan of the genre. Plus the practical effect of the guns bolted to his hands is fantastic, I would love the have those as a prop. I’ve seen RIPD.. I couldn’t tell you a single thing about it. Big rubbery loooking ghosts? Slapstick?
@@chrislail3824 After writing that comment I think I was a bit harsh on that film. It's true I found the last act a let down because it failed to maintain the tone of the beginning (the bit where Daniel Radcliffe suddenly goes from loser to killing machine and then back again for the sake of a set piece made my eyes roll). But I did love the first half or so, so I maybe shouldn't call it 'terrible' overall. Stand by my comment for R.I.P.D. though. That sucked.
Of these, I've seen Hancock, Tomorrowland, and some of The One. I liked the first two well enough, though they didn't change my life. Don't remember The One at all, so that went wrong. Sorry, I did not say "What went wrong" with you - I was distracted by the idea of 25th birthday, then a year til death.Thank you for never bringing that up again. Oh and one more thing
Oh boy! Number 10 - The Box... Yeah, much as I enjoyed the movie... A UA-cam Short did it WAY, WAY BETTER years before! And for those who want to see the original UA-cam Video - Its called "Black Button" - Predates The Box by a few years, itself based on a short story... And does it WAY BETTER with only 2 People and a very limited production budget! In Time - Another film I really enjoy, But I cannot pretend that it wastes its premise... The idea is GREAT, its also an idea that has been done before and been done BETTER... In LOGANS RUN! Why am I pickling on the two that both seem to be "Inspired by" older short films or 1970's movies??? Believe it or not - That was not actually intended! They just happen to be two of the movies I have seen (And one I own on DVD - Yes, I really do like In Time!)... In Time had a great concept, but they really messed it up overall! I know what it was aiming for - But it didn't work as the whole "All the Rich are Scum - Eat The Rich" idea has its place and had been done better since.. but is also FLAWED LOGIC which more and more are now realising! Terminator Salvation - Where to start??? Love the movie but they got it so wrong! Best see my reply to @Zombiesnyder13 - Its way easier!
While I grant you that Passengers was a good premise with very disappointing execution, it doesn’t deserve to be at 2 imo. The others are worse than it.
Passengers is a very watchable movie, unlike most everything else on this list. It's just that the premise is creepy, even though I find it entirely believable given that Pratt's character has reached a suicidal point of loneliness. There are TONS of things wrong with the premise, like the idea of a pilgrimage trip that makes all its profits selling cruise ship upgrades to the passengers in the last month before it lands 120 years after it left, eating century-old steaks and paying extra for good coffee, then transmitting those profits back to the company (60 years to notify the home planet at light speed) so that your great great great grandchild makes money from the ship you sent off almost two centuries earlier. 'BEEP: He bought the fancy breadsticks. $3 more in your account!"
The Box is a classic example of the problems of trying to do a full movie from a very short story. I think the short story was only like 20 pages long. It had one dark point and could never support a whole movie. It was also a twilight zone story that got it right in that the whole thing was also like ten minutes long. In Time was ironically a failure because its young cast could not properly act like much older people. The cast all became better actors when older, but were too green and things that should have packed a punch instead whiffed completely. Passengers was 100% the fault of chickening out of a very dark concept because they had two hot stars and wanted a romance instead of a dark sci-fi tale, which in hindsight this story was 100% supposed to be dark. In the end when they have to save the ship is very contrived also to justify and make alright the dark premise. Gee, if they were not woken up, they would have died no matter what, so it is all okay! Everyone saw through this completely and it was just a huge disappointment, which is a shame, since original sci fi badly needs to be done and greenlit. But they just chickened out.
I watched Transcendence and I thought it was an incredibly boring movie. But they come up with a much better description. It was thunderously dull. Just perfect. I liked Tomorrowland. I think it was geared more toward children than adults.
I think that movie with Scarlet Johanson where she gets some drug that increases her brain power could have been done better. The "we use 10% of our brains" myth needs to die and didn't need to be included except as a ticking clock. With Thor Love and Thunder, they could have done more with Gorr and ask questions about the necessity and purpose of gods. But I guess a movie that asks the question, "Is God worth worshiping?" wouldn't fly with Disney's family-friendly image.
In Time is just another remake of Logan's Run and an STNG episode. Terminator Salvation never promised to answer all life's questions, watch it on TV once and you're done. Downsizing is a stupid idea, either we all shrink at once or not at all. Passengers would have been so much better if Jennifer Lawrence wasn't the damsel in distress, she's smarter than that.
Was inception set entirely in the dream world? The top wasn't shown long enough, it looked like it was going to faller over, but the picture cut before that happened. So maybe he was back in the real world.
Whatculture made a list. So what went wrong? Well, obviously in an attempt to lambast some box office flops, they compiled ten movies that went on to become niche cult classics enjoyed by millions around the world which is more than you can say for any of the films of Erroll Flynn. Go ahead! Name one! I'll wait... 😐
Transcendence was one I effectively slept through. The "tech" was not based in reality and made up by someone looking to solve plot points, not explore the "what if"s that SciFi is best for, so I stopped paying attention. And I haven't thought about it since. Tomorrowland blew it because it didn't serve up a villain/conflict until almost the 3rd act. So the first 2/3 was tedious, without direction or compelling motivation. Hancock is "bad" because it doesn't have a plot. "Hancock does stuff" isn't a plot. I felt like it wanted to be a Man on Fire or any of the other movies that had 3 acts in the 1st half, then switched genre, then had a 3 act second half, so you could watch either half of the movie alone, and it would feel like a short movie. Hancock was first half superhero movie with bumbling drunk abrasive hero, and second half superhero movie with a love triangle (that never gets the attention necessary to really be a plot point), and "hero loses powers" cliche/trope. But Hancock didn't have a clean break between the 1st half, and the second half, so it's more like a 4-act play, where you get a solid first act, then no second act, then a weak 3rd act, followed by second 3rd act, maybe. Hancock is the closest to being great. The cast, the acting, so much of it works. It just doesn't all work together. I can't tell if that's direction or script, but it wouldn't have taken much to turn it into a great movie.
Terminator Salvation - My biggest problem with the film is the way that it muddles the continuity with the half-human, half-machine storyline. If they had stuck to simply telling the story of the war up to the point that Reese is sent back in time, it would have been fine.
I sometimes think of Transcendence... if only because it touches on parts of one of my earliest sci-fi short stories. If you take Passengers and combine it with Transcendence and The Wandering Earth, you're in my ball park.
@@DamienHurts Yeah, I know. I still call it It Blows. I'll give it one thing: the scene where the one girl is in the hallway and the creature (?) looms out of the darkness behind her--the big guy in the white t-shirt--is great.
The issue with the box not having enough material for a movie is bogus, a little work and they could of had something I mean Steven Spielberg made a movie based off a Broadway musical based off a movie, based of an episode of The Twilight Zone. SO yeah its more not enough creative juices flowing on that one then material. As far as Terminator Salavation goes the CGI Arnold was not even worth mentioning. By the 20 minute mark they had already destroyed the Franchise, by flat out preventing the first movie from being possible.
What went wrong? Generic british woman criticises filmmakers who have more talent in one of their eyelids than they can ever hope to have. I hope that you receive this without your consent.
Finally Downsizing is mentioned in a list like this. I saw the trailer, which made this movie seem like a comedy, so I went to see it. Luckily I still had a subscription for the cinema at that time, so I didn’t have to buy a ticket. This movie was not funny at all. It was boring and terribly depressing. And everybody in the audience had the same response. Nobody liked it.
_In Time_ could make for a compelling TV series. It has the potential to be a megahit if time and care are invested in exploring the back story of the movie's premise.
For supposed mental health champions the word awful as a descriptor seems a bit much especially when the films are mostly all enjoyable with the odd plot hole.
@@The1RealDarek That almost deterred me from watching the video. I really love Hook, it was THE favourite movie of my youth, and so I thought, if they're going to sh*t on it, I'm not watching this. But then I thought, well, let's give it a chance.
I do not understand the bad reputation of _'The Box'_ (2009), and I don't think that's just because I saw the cast talking about it on a panel at San Diego Comic Con. _'Southland Tales'_ on the other hand, was sort of just garbage, and I was happy the director came back with something that resembled a proper movie.
@liampatrick3110 it would have been better if they'd just show the effects of Dr. Will's Web infiltration on a wider scale; toppling dictators, catching Russian Oligarchs and then the resulting pushback from world governments. And having Depp emote jubilance and joy after learning something new wouldn't have hurt. Have you watched "Her" from Spike Jonze? That movie is what Transcendence should have been but with more explosions and violence.
Who is writing yalls scripts just to find content to find sumthing a 3rd greater. Terminator Salvation .,and The One . Hancock....was dope Wym😂😂😂😂 7:06
#10. I read the story and I saw a short episode of it on The Twilight Zone called, "Button, button." Not a good idea for a movie, the story was dragged out too long. #09. Hancock. When a movie is rewritten to make it more appealing, it will always be worse than it originally was. Now, I want to the first version. (By the way, Why not make two version of something like this? Make the kid friendly or the adult version first and then edit it for the other one. That way you made two movies and you can let the ticket buyers decide which is the better of the two.) #08. Transcendance. For all the reasons given. If you are going to go here get the tech right and if it won't have a lot of action in it then it should have everyone leave in deep thought about the concept. #07. Truth or Dare. The stupid bad idea rip off of Final Destination. #06. In Time. I watched it and I enjoyed. I guess I was too caught up in the main message of considering the base idea of the movie. #05. Tomorrowland. If you are going to use a title like this then you can't have a movie with the lead actor be a gloom and doom pessimist. #04. Terminator Salvation. What is wrong with it. It was the best you could expect from an intro into the future based on the Universe of this Franchise. This was a lead up to a possible final CGI only battle in a trilogy. And Bale's character was supposed to grow into the role over those three movies. #03. The One. He is knit-picking on this movie. It had the only story arc possible for the base concept, and it ended with good defeating evil. The 124 multiple Universe. Of the possible 124 outcomes of a persons life. One for each possible year you are alive considering the Bible stating we should have a life expectancy of 120 years. With Four versions without you. One. You never existed for whatever reason. Two. You were aborted. Three. you died in the womb at some stage. Four. You died during child birth. #02. Passengers. This is a story of bad turning into good. They didn't have chemistry together. What would you expect from how they met each other? They don't know each other enough yet. Then they ended up needing to be there because if there hadn't been two of them then everyone on board would have died. Maybe you need to watch this movie again?#01. Downsizing. Wrong, this wasn't a good idea to start out with. This has been done in the past with better ideas on smaller budgets. The best part of the movie was the first act, but the problem is that the writer didn't plan anything for the movie after that. No, the only way this works is if it is a comedy, the Smurfs. A Drama, the Dark Crystal. Or a horror movie, The Incredible Shrinking Man.
I disagree. Passengers is a great movies. the romantic ending may not fit some woke views these days, but it teaches empathy, something which is lacking these days, were... judgement and lack of forgiveness is so easy. as is a boring horror type ending. every horror ends the same...everyone dies, maybe one survives, oh and maybe the horror is still out there and might return in another film . which would be an easy thing to do for passengers...In passengers the hero could have a life time of picking more people from deep sleep for a sinister yet predictably twisted reason revealed in the death of Aurora . . or if ya going woke,. She defeats Jim as he tries to do horrible things to her, and saves the ship, then puts herself back in her own sleeping pod after fixing it, despite having no idea how to. ...it's a beautiful film...some people just don't get it
I would much rather have "Passengers" be told from Jennifer Lawrence's perspective, as she falls for Chris Pratt, and it comes as a shock to both her and us when we learn that he woke her up.
I agree. I think there’s an excellent “dire twist” movie in there somewhere.
I agree
As the video said, the version you described should have been the plot and the studio 100% chickened out. Almost every critic also said the same thing.
Yeah true but then we'd all have been subjected to endless months of "They stole her agency! Where was the consent?" posts online and all throughout social media. I'm relieved that they didn't take that path despite the fact that it would've made for compelling cinema for the non-smoothbrained among us.
@@BigDaddyJinx No, that would have been the entire hook of a horror premise. The fact that her agency was stolen and her horror that this seeming perfectly nice guy did this to her out of loneliness and desperation. That would have been a dark, very compelling film. That is the point of the criticism and the OP's post.
I thought of a way to make The Passengers work as the kind of movie it wanted to be:
Jim considers waking up Aurora because she is hot and therefore studies the manual, but he realises that he can't do it. However, he notices another passenger's pod malfunctioning, but not opening. He opens the pod and saves the person inside. Then this other passenger goes through the same grief of having to spend the rest of their life onboard this ship. This creates understandable tension between them and Jim. I'm thinking they might not have a ton in common at first. But they slowly warm to each other - maybe they fall in love, maybe they don't. When Jim finds out how to use the medical pod as a as a stasis pod, both characters wrestle with the thought of taking the pod and leaving the other person behind to decades of loneliness. Either one of them is willing to do that, so they agree to spend the rest of their lives together.
This way, it would actually be a meditation on loneliness, as well as the question of whether Jim should have let the other person die, so they wouldn't have to experience the same isolation he lives with.
And an additional option for the ending could be that they had a child, whom they put into the medical pod when the kid turned 20, so a piece of both of them lived on. This obviously only works if the other passenger is a woman.
Jill Bearup actually came up with a good fix on her UA-cam channel which I think would have worked. It's essentially saying what this video suggested but she really fleshes it out well.
@@cesarvasquez9572 I am not familiar with her channel, so I have to check it out. My suggestion was about trying to keep the themes the movie wanted to explore. A horror take on the plot is interesting, but it just also seems too easy a fix.
You guys should get a UA-cam award for the Jason Stratham having hair being “inherently off putting” line! 😂
That ‘80s Twilight Zone adaptation of “Button, Button” (the story turned into “The Box”) is so damn good.
I remember reading “The Box” short story in school and thought the ending was messed up, but much better than the film.
The thing about the story "The Box" that made it so effective as a short story and a quicky episode of "The Twilight Zone" was the stinger ending.
After being told of the conditions of the box (the main character being informed that by pressing the button, someone, somewhere in the world would die, someone she didn't know and who did not know her) she goes back and forth for a day before pressing the button. This, presumably, kills someone, though we don't see it. Then, when she asks the guy who brought the box what happens now, he says to her that the box would be reset, and given to someone else with the same offer...Someone, somewhere in the world, someone she didn't know, and who didn't know her. The implication being that she'd be the next to die, if the next person pressed the button. It's a perfect ending, and doesn't really lend itself to a full-length feature film.
The thing with The Box is that amateurs on UA-cam did it better years before - Watch "Black Button" here on UA-cam... WAY, WAY BETER!!! Don't get me wrong - I am not slating The Box... I actually enjoy it! But I had seen the Black Button Video first and the timing - YIKES!
At the time I saw Black Button - It was only about 3 months before The Box hit Cinemas... And it was really gaining traction - So it did feel like someone had RIPPED OFF Amateur film makers to make a Quick buck... Now, I know this is NOT TRUE... Black Button was not even an original idea, It was based on a short story that had indeed also been in a Twilight Zone episode before! Most likely it is pure coincidence...
But the Two being so popular at around the same time Yeah, It don't look good!
I am not sure what really hurts the movie... If its that dodgy CGI... Or its attempts to be more "Mysterious" than it has any right to be... I feel the "It Aliens Testing us" concept was REALLY LAME! And Making the son blind to get them to do what the "Man" Wanted... Just... NO!
That said, I do like it... I just would never watch it again.. Where Black Button - OH HELL YEAH! I WILL WATCH THAT OVER AND OVER!
I've never seen or heard of The Box, but my guess is whenever you push it it kills the last person that pushed it? Is it really that lame?
@@weasle5022 Yes, it is... The idea in principle is good... But terribly handled! Black Button - The UA-cam Video I mentioned is SO MUCH BETTER!
SO SO MUCH BETTER - Here is a link, It only about 8 Minutes long and has a much better story than the Movie... Enjoy!
ua-cam.com/video/QrKnhOJ-R80/v-deo.html
Dang, Keith, I was just coming here to write EVERYTHING you just wrote! It's a truly wonderful story, provided you don't try to make it go 90 minutes to two hours!
Yeah, the movie felt like they were trying to pad out a thirty minute story out to feature film length. It's kind of a bummer that neither adaptation has kept to the original ending of the story too.
I actually enjoyed "Downsizing", maybe because I had no expectations for it. Yes, it had its length and its weaknesses, but it all boils down to what you think the actual premise is. In my opinion, the environmental, technical and political issues were just the setting. It was not about them. The real message was about the inability of humans to escape their fundamental conditions, the world they have built up for themselves. You can shrink, you can flee, you can hide in a hole in the ground, ultimately your human problems will follow you everywhere and be the same problems nevertheless. You have to take things as they come and try to make the best of it. That's why I loved the Vietnamese girl. She had understood it and was a perfect embodiment of this idea.
And her eight reasons for...ahem
"having sex" were hilariously on point.
She didn't mince words. It may be my favorite part of the movie.
@@richardrobbins387 That was great! Overall the way she talked, directly, honestly, totally undiplomatic, just refreshing to see such a character.
"The One"suffered quite a lot for being released too close after "The Matrix". You mentioned that, but for sure was shot quite before "The Matrix" premiere.
Yeah, I had a lot of scripts that I had to toss on the slushpile after release because they would have been condemned as 'Too Matrixy'! 🔥😡🔥
List idea: ranking every “statham has hair” movies 😂
😂
I loved "Hancock"; felt like it deserved a sequel to flesh out the lore. Where Hancock succeeded and Man of Steel failed is that we had a blank slate for a hero who was able to act like an a non traditional hero; in MoS, Zack Snyder took a traditional hero with a rich lore and tried to deconstruct it to disastrous effect.
Still keeping hope alive for a sequel
Me too.
You know, considering how good 12 Angry Man was, I see no excuse why a great movie concept should fail to produce a great movie.
I'd love to know how that movie was pitched. "Yea, so I want to make a movie with 12 mean locked in a room, talking."
No action, no physical fights, just 12 guys talking.
It even produced on of the best exchanges in cinema history: "He's just a poor ignorant slob. He don't even speak good English."
With a Spanish accent the guy next to him says "Doesn't. He doesn't speak good English."
God I love that.
I have always liked Terminator Salvation. I have never thought it deserved the hate.
Same here. I think if it had been given a chance for a follow up we would’ve gotten the war and a fully realized John Connor and gone full circle as he sends Reece back in time.
"In Time" was better when it was "The Price of Life".
Richard Kelly needs a comeback. Give him a lower budget if need be but I'd love to see his proposed Serling biopic
I liked Freaky, the slasher movie where the protagonist and antagonist body swap. It's obvious to me that they wanted to call it Freaky Friday the Thirteenth, but probably ran into legal issues there. It's also obvious that it could of been a much better movie, still good though.
Yeah, Downsizing did fall a bit short, didn't it? When it comes to issues, a tiny thing here or there is not too bad. But in that movie, they were everywhere! The premise was so good, but I could barely see it. With all the pushing of the environmental narrative, the room left for the rest of the story was very little.
Edit: I will not apologize.
Yep, the failure was 100% pushing a political thing that had nothing to do with the premise and was completely a different tone from the premise that just brought the entire thing to a screeching halt
*applause*
@@bobross1829What political thing...
Jet Li’s The One has so much potential as a whole cinematic universe on its premise imo
I think Transcendence was a great movie! Only problem was the trailer portraying it as a sci-fi thriller than the character study with sci-fi elements it was.
It was. The movie was really good. I don't know what they're watching in the BBC. In Time was also.
I thought Transcendence was underrated. I thought the story was thought provoking.
The movie Downsizing felt like a lie. You see small people interacting with large people for like a minute long.. the rest of the movie, they look like normal people. I was hoping for a lot more showcasing the different sizes for the humans.
Passengers is one of those movies like I am legend or Hancock where it starts of great but ends badly, it should have gone the way of dejavu or sunshine changing genre half what through going from castaway in space to a psychological horror.
Also, I liked terminator salvation it just had a poor ending. The terminator that thinks he’s human aspect should have been so much more.
Isn't your terminator just blade runner?
A pretty much forgotten Kirstie Alley movie from 1990 called Sibling Rivalry did this. First off, I have no idea what the title was about as I could never get myself to watch the whole thing. There are some siblings involved, but it has nothing to do with competition. It's about a frustrated woman who cheats on her husband, and then the guy she's cheating with dies in the bed. There are some hijinks following this but overall, the film just kind of devolves into arguing and ends up with her becoming a writer or something. It was really weird, like the movie had a good idea but had no idea where to go with it.
what do you expect from Kirstie Alley?
Not much, but the film also had Bill Pullman, Carrie Fisher, Jami Gertz, Scott Bakula Ed O'Neill and Sam Elliott in it so it wasn't lacking in the casting department. It was also directed by Carl Reiner.
@@SpamEggSausage
You should do a list called 10 times actors got movies canceled
Hancock and Passengers are definitely not terrible films. Not fantastic in any way but no way terrible.
No, Hancock's premise was good. The execution was terrible. Having Bateman's wife also be a superhero was just way too contrived and unbelievable (of all the people in the world, she is the superhero? Her husband met her through absolute random fate. It was dumb). and turned the film from a character study of Handcock into a cliche's star crossed lovers story.
@@bobross1829 Agree to disagree. No way was it "terrible." Don't really understand you saying Hancock was a character study either.
@@beatrixdobson4795 because it was
Tomorrowland was fine to me.i quite enjoyed the fetch quests and the leads we're good. What do you mean by tedious guys?
"Hancock" definitely could have become what "Deadpool" would be 8 years later.
The jarring tonal shift in the second half of the movie, and the bizarre decision to suddenly focus on a romance, really sabotaged a great premise for a late 2000s superhero movie.
It was truly bad writing and ultimately a huge missed opportunity.
I enjoyed Hancock but I feel that even though the concept was great it was always going to be one of those niche stories. You can't make him to much of an ahole then people won't like him. You can't really keep him as the drunken jerk because he will need to grow or people will lose interest. Some will want him to stay this brutal hero while others will get annoyed and bored that he is one dimensional. It was just one of those tight rope acts that is almost impossible to walk correctly.
The Box was a great movie with solid Actors, Direction, tension and a great twist and plot. !!!!
....and then you woke up. :)
The Box doesn't sound like a very compelling concept to me. Not without a lot more context. If you think about it, the fact that you wouldn't *know* the person who died really shouldn't matter much to a moral person. It really comes down to, "Would you kill someone for $1,000,000?". I'm guessing most people would say no to that, in the abstract. In order to make the scenario more plausible, you would have to go the Breaking Bad route and have the protagonist have some disease that's expensive to treat. Even then, it would probably be a hard sell, because you're trading someone else's life to save your own.
To me, Hancock is a tragic case. Will Smith was great, as he usually is. But once you add the Charlise Theron subplot, it becomes too confusing and really derails the movie. I guess they had to give the hero something to actually do, but it should've been something else.
I liked Transcendence when I saw it. It's not an amazing movie or anything, but it at least dealt with its premise relatively well. I give it a pass for getting the Internet wrong, because almost all sci-fi movies get some aspect of computers or the internet wrong.
In Time was a good ... time ... but there's no getting around the fact that it was a better concept than it was a movie. It could've been much better as a cerebral thriller than as an action movie.
I think Terminator: Salvation had the wrong premise from the start. It shouldn't have been about one final push to destroy the machines. It would've been much more effective to make it about the *start* of the machine war, rather than the end. They could've gone full Star Wars with it, and made a whole sub-trilogy just based on the war, leading to an epic conclusion.
And as far as Passengers, I think you're right. That would've been better off framed as a horror story.
"The One" was, by most accounts, supposed to be a more talky movie with Dwayne Johnson in the lead role, but he was unable to do the movie so it was rewritten as a full-on actioner with Jet Li. I can only assume because they were afraid that Jet Li's accent would be too off-putting.
Can I toss Guns Akimbo and R.I.P.D. into the mix? Much like Hancock, they had great lead actors and started out with very solid first acts exploring the starting premise, before going downhill over the course of the film and finishing on mediocre crashbangwallop set pieces.
Guns Akimbo still delivers on its cheesy plot and concept. I’ve watched it a few times because I’m a fan of the genre. Plus the practical effect of the guns bolted to his hands is fantastic, I would love the have those as a prop.
I’ve seen RIPD.. I couldn’t tell you a single thing about it. Big rubbery loooking ghosts? Slapstick?
@@chrislail3824 After writing that comment I think I was a bit harsh on that film. It's true I found the last act a let down because it failed to maintain the tone of the beginning (the bit where Daniel Radcliffe suddenly goes from loser to killing machine and then back again for the sake of a set piece made my eyes roll). But I did love the first half or so, so I maybe shouldn't call it 'terrible' overall.
Stand by my comment for R.I.P.D. though. That sucked.
Of these, I've seen Hancock, Tomorrowland, and some of The One. I liked the first two well enough, though they didn't change my life. Don't remember The One at all, so that went wrong.
Sorry, I did not say "What went wrong" with you - I was distracted by the idea of 25th birthday, then a year til death.Thank you for never bringing that up again.
Oh and one more thing
Oh boy! Number 10 - The Box... Yeah, much as I enjoyed the movie... A UA-cam Short did it WAY, WAY BETTER years before! And for those who want to see the original UA-cam Video - Its called "Black Button" - Predates The Box by a few years, itself based on a short story... And does it WAY BETTER with only 2 People and a very limited production budget!
In Time - Another film I really enjoy, But I cannot pretend that it wastes its premise... The idea is GREAT, its also an idea that has been done before and been done BETTER... In LOGANS RUN!
Why am I pickling on the two that both seem to be "Inspired by" older short films or 1970's movies??? Believe it or not - That was not actually intended! They just happen to be two of the movies I have seen (And one I own on DVD - Yes, I really do like In Time!)... In Time had a great concept, but they really messed it up overall! I know what it was aiming for - But it didn't work as the whole "All the Rich are Scum - Eat The Rich" idea has its place and had been done better since.. but is also FLAWED LOGIC which more and more are now realising!
Terminator Salvation - Where to start??? Love the movie but they got it so wrong! Best see my reply to @Zombiesnyder13 - Its way easier!
While I grant you that Passengers was a good premise with very disappointing execution, it doesn’t deserve to be at 2 imo. The others are worse than it.
Studio meddling and unnecessary cuts and reshoots are what really went wrong with Tomorrowland.
Loved Hancock.
So basically films that had decent stories but less than average execution
Tomorrowland: What Went Wrong?
One word: Damon Lindelof.
In Time is still a good movie, not perfect but still good.
Passengers is a very watchable movie, unlike most everything else on this list. It's just that the premise is creepy, even though I find it entirely believable given that Pratt's character has reached a suicidal point of loneliness. There are TONS of things wrong with the premise, like the idea of a pilgrimage trip that makes all its profits selling cruise ship upgrades to the passengers in the last month before it lands 120 years after it left, eating century-old steaks and paying extra for good coffee, then transmitting those profits back to the company (60 years to notify the home planet at light speed) so that your great great great grandchild makes money from the ship you sent off almost two centuries earlier. 'BEEP: He bought the fancy breadsticks. $3 more in your account!"
The Box is a classic example of the problems of trying to do a full movie from a very short story. I think the short story was only like 20 pages long. It had one dark point and could never support a whole movie. It was also a twilight zone story that got it right in that the whole thing was also like ten minutes long.
In Time was ironically a failure because its young cast could not properly act like much older people. The cast all became better actors when older, but were too green and things that should have packed a punch instead whiffed completely.
Passengers was 100% the fault of chickening out of a very dark concept because they had two hot stars and wanted a romance instead of a dark sci-fi tale, which in hindsight this story was 100% supposed to be dark. In the end when they have to save the ship is very contrived also to justify and make alright the dark premise. Gee, if they were not woken up, they would have died no matter what, so it is all okay! Everyone saw through this completely and it was just a huge disappointment, which is a shame, since original sci fi badly needs to be done and greenlit. But they just chickened out.
Am I the only person that loved transcendence? I thought that movie was underrated but maybe Im wrong
Your opinion can’t be wrong, bro.
I watched Transcendence and I thought it was an incredibly boring movie. But they come up with a much better description. It was thunderously dull. Just perfect.
I liked Tomorrowland. I think it was geared more toward children than adults.
Downsizing could have been much more interesting, but it went straight depressing.
Transendance is a great film. The problem is that the promotion made it seem like a Johnny Depp film when it's a Paul Bettany film
I think "terrible" is pretty harsh for at least some of those movies, they simply could have been much better.
I think that movie with Scarlet Johanson where she gets some drug that increases her brain power could have been done better. The "we use 10% of our brains" myth needs to die and didn't need to be included except as a ticking clock.
With Thor Love and Thunder, they could have done more with Gorr and ask questions about the necessity and purpose of gods. But I guess a movie that asks the question, "Is God worth worshiping?" wouldn't fly with Disney's family-friendly image.
In Time is just another remake of Logan's Run and an STNG episode. Terminator Salvation never promised to answer all life's questions, watch it on TV once and you're done. Downsizing is a stupid idea, either we all shrink at once or not at all. Passengers would have been so much better if Jennifer Lawrence wasn't the damsel in distress, she's smarter than that.
Was inception set entirely in the dream world? The top wasn't shown long enough, it looked like it was going to faller over, but the picture cut before that happened. So maybe he was back in the real world.
I thought the film Don't Worry Darling had an interesting concept, but rather sloppy execution. It was a convoluted case of style-over-substance.
it was just another stepford wives movie
The issue with passengers is that it wasn’t enough of a lifetime movie? So it had to be sexist in the other direction, lol! Wtf?
"Hook" was suuuch crap! I really wanted that two hours of my life back.
Whatculture made a list.
So what went wrong?
Well, obviously in an attempt to lambast some box office flops, they compiled ten movies that went on to become niche cult classics enjoyed by millions around the world which is more than you can say for any of the films of Erroll Flynn.
Go ahead! Name one! I'll wait... 😐
Transcendence was one I effectively slept through. The "tech" was not based in reality and made up by someone looking to solve plot points, not explore the "what if"s that SciFi is best for, so I stopped paying attention. And I haven't thought about it since.
Tomorrowland blew it because it didn't serve up a villain/conflict until almost the 3rd act. So the first 2/3 was tedious, without direction or compelling motivation.
Hancock is "bad" because it doesn't have a plot. "Hancock does stuff" isn't a plot. I felt like it wanted to be a Man on Fire or any of the other movies that had 3 acts in the 1st half, then switched genre, then had a 3 act second half, so you could watch either half of the movie alone, and it would feel like a short movie. Hancock was first half superhero movie with bumbling drunk abrasive hero, and second half superhero movie with a love triangle (that never gets the attention necessary to really be a plot point), and "hero loses powers" cliche/trope.
But Hancock didn't have a clean break between the 1st half, and the second half, so it's more like a 4-act play, where you get a solid first act, then no second act, then a weak 3rd act, followed by second 3rd act, maybe. Hancock is the closest to being great. The cast, the acting, so much of it works. It just doesn't all work together. I can't tell if that's direction or script, but it wouldn't have taken much to turn it into a great movie.
Terminator Salvation - My biggest problem with the film is the way that it muddles the continuity with the half-human, half-machine storyline. If they had stuck to simply telling the story of the war up to the point that Reese is sent back in time, it would have been fine.
No one has ever said that “The One” was a terrible movie (pun intended)
Thank you for mentioning The Twilight Zone episode. It's one of the best stories from the 80's series.
I sometimes think of Transcendence... if only because it touches on parts of one of my earliest sci-fi short stories. If you take Passengers and combine it with Transcendence and The Wandering Earth, you're in my ball park.
You forgot It Follows. Great premise...too bad about the movie.
You are in the minority with that one. Critically acclaimed and a lot of horror fans loved it. Genuinely scary
Agreed. For all the hype it received I was very disappointed.
I liked it, it's one of my favorite horror movies
@@DamienHurts Yeah, I know. I still call it It Blows. I'll give it one thing: the scene where the one girl is in the hallway and the creature (?) looms out of the darkness behind her--the big guy in the white t-shirt--is great.
I'm confused. The first three movies they named was pretty good.
The issue with the box not having enough material for a movie is bogus, a little work and they could of had something I mean Steven Spielberg made a movie based off a Broadway musical based off a movie, based of an episode of The Twilight Zone. SO yeah its more not enough creative juices flowing on that one then material. As far as Terminator Salavation goes the CGI Arnold was not even worth mentioning. By the 20 minute mark they had already destroyed the Franchise, by flat out preventing the first movie from being possible.
Devil
Coulda been a great thriller, but Shamalyan had to be Shamalyan
How are you blaming the director, when it's the writers fault? Unless these are all director/writer
OK, but how do you REALLY feel about "Truth or Dare"? 🤣
In time was just a worse version of The Price of Life.
Note to the writer: the repeated "So what went wrong"s are extremely annoying!
The One was amazing on it's own. If you're comparing it to The Matrix, that's a bit unfair.
Woah woah woah, let's not give too much credit to a guy ripping off Logan's Run. Brilliant premise my arse.
What went wrong? Generic british woman criticises filmmakers who have more talent in one of their eyelids than they can ever hope to have. I hope that you receive this without your consent.
It's real shame about The Box's final act, because it was pretty decent for about the first hour or so.
This brit-ch couldn't be more wrong about 1 through 5 here.
Finally Downsizing is mentioned in a list like this. I saw the trailer, which made this movie seem like a comedy, so I went to see it. Luckily I still had a subscription for the cinema at that time, so I didn’t have to buy a ticket. This movie was not funny at all. It was boring and terribly depressing. And everybody in the audience had the same response. Nobody liked it.
I liked Passengers. Then again, I'm a sucker for Michael Sheen.
_In Time_ could make for a compelling TV series. It has the potential to be a megahit if time and care are invested in exploring the back story of the movie's premise.
I liked
The box
How many of these choose cast over plot?
For supposed mental health champions the word awful as a descriptor seems a bit much especially when the films are mostly all enjoyable with the odd plot hole.
And you start with the image of "Hook", one of the greatest films ever made?! No. Just no.
That was just for the pun's sake. You know, when you're hooked on the movie by its premise?
@@DoloresLehmann yeah, I know, but it sends the wrong signal. Especially since you can see the first few seconds mute, before you click the video.
@@The1RealDarek That almost deterred me from watching the video. I really love Hook, it was THE favourite movie of my youth, and so I thought, if they're going to sh*t on it, I'm not watching this. But then I thought, well, let's give it a chance.
Nothing was wrong with "The One".
Terminator salvation is not bad, but not great just solid, I do think is a solid produce movie
The whole list, whole list was movies I liked! But def failed in the endings 😊
jim should have died in passangers and the ending shows auroa contemplating doing the same thing.
I think almost everyone who saw this movie thought this exact thing. Seems like the writers should have thought of it.
Hancock and in time and tommorowland are great fun films can't stand dissers
Can't help it but I really liked Tomorrowland. A movie I think of with a great concept and an awful execution is Jumper.
It may be bad, but The One has always been that trash film I love for reasons I cannot articulate
If by "one hit wonder" you mean the terribly overrated Donnie Darko, well...
Most of these movies are good but could have been way better
In Time... original? Please watch Logans Run 1976
I do not understand the bad reputation of _'The Box'_ (2009), and I don't think that's just because I saw the cast talking about it on a panel at San Diego Comic Con. _'Southland Tales'_ on the other hand, was sort of just garbage, and I was happy the director came back with something that resembled a proper movie.
In Time is good they tripping
Hated Transcendence, it is dull, illogical, poorly written and narrow in scope.
What would've made it better (for you)?
@liampatrick3110 it would have been better if they'd just show the effects of Dr. Will's Web infiltration on a wider scale; toppling dictators, catching Russian Oligarchs and then the resulting pushback from world governments. And having Depp emote jubilance and joy after learning something new wouldn't have hurt. Have you watched "Her" from Spike Jonze? That movie is what Transcendence should have been but with more explosions and violence.
Please stop showing the movies on the list before the intro
The One was a lot of fun. I'd rather rewatch it than The Matrix.
Who is writing yalls scripts just to find content to find sumthing a 3rd greater. Terminator Salvation .,and The One . Hancock....was dope Wym😂😂😂😂 7:06
Sorry but the one was freaking awesome wtf
I loved The One
loved Tommorowland
#10. I read the story and I saw a short episode of it on The Twilight Zone called, "Button, button." Not a good idea for a movie, the story was dragged out too long.
#09. Hancock. When a movie is rewritten to make it more appealing, it will always be worse than it originally was. Now, I want to the first version. (By the way, Why not make two version of something like this? Make the kid friendly or the adult version first and then edit it for the other one. That way you made two movies and you can let the ticket buyers decide which is the better of the two.)
#08. Transcendance. For all the reasons given. If you are going to go here get the tech right and if it won't have a lot of action in it then it should have everyone leave in deep thought about the concept.
#07. Truth or Dare. The stupid bad idea rip off of Final Destination.
#06. In Time. I watched it and I enjoyed. I guess I was too caught up in the main message of considering the base idea of the movie.
#05. Tomorrowland. If you are going to use a title like this then you can't have a movie with the lead actor be a gloom and doom pessimist.
#04. Terminator Salvation. What is wrong with it. It was the best you could expect from an intro into the future based on the Universe of this Franchise. This was a lead up to a possible final CGI only battle in a trilogy. And Bale's character was supposed to grow into the role over those three movies.
#03. The One. He is knit-picking on this movie. It had the only story arc possible for the base concept, and it ended with good defeating evil. The 124 multiple Universe. Of the possible 124 outcomes of a persons life. One for each possible year you are alive considering the Bible stating we should have a life expectancy of 120 years. With Four versions without you. One. You never existed for whatever reason. Two. You were aborted. Three. you died in the womb at some stage. Four. You died during child birth.
#02. Passengers. This is a story of bad turning into good. They didn't have chemistry together. What would you expect from how they met each other? They don't know each other enough yet. Then they ended up needing to be there because if there hadn't been two of them then everyone on board would have died. Maybe you need to watch this movie again?#01. Downsizing. Wrong, this wasn't a good idea to start out with. This has been done in the past with better ideas on smaller budgets. The best part of the movie was the first act, but the problem is that the writer didn't plan anything for the movie after that. No, the only way this works is if it is a comedy, the Smurfs. A Drama, the Dark Crystal. Or a horror movie, The Incredible Shrinking Man.
The bible did not say that. 120 years was how long people had until the flood.
My mistake, I will admit when I am wrong. And thank you for clarifying it for me. @@bobross1829
Jumper
NO NO NO. In Time is an ok movie with a terrible concept.
I disagree. Passengers is a great movies. the romantic ending may not fit some woke views these days, but it teaches empathy, something which is lacking these days, were... judgement and lack of forgiveness is so easy. as is a boring horror type ending. every horror ends the same...everyone dies, maybe one survives, oh and maybe the horror is still out there and might return in another film . which would be an easy thing to do for passengers...In passengers the hero could have a life time of picking more people from deep sleep for a sinister yet predictably twisted reason revealed in the death of Aurora . . or if ya going woke,. She defeats Jim as he tries to do horrible things to her, and saves the ship, then puts herself back in her own sleeping pod after fixing it, despite having no idea how to. ...it's a beautiful film...some people just don't get it