Everything Just Too Convenient In This Soulless Effort

Rating: 2/10 (26 February 2017)

As soon as I saw the promotional material for "Passengers", I was concerned. It looked for all the world like the stereotypical, glossy flick that uses slick special effects to cover up for the fact that it is hollow both in terms of plot and character. On the other hand, this is the exact genre of film that I love, and Jennifer Lawrence's presence will never dissuade me from a film. As it turned out, I was indeed the sucker for seeing this film, which personifies the concept of "Hollywood slick".
For a basic plot summary, "Passengers" is the story of the spacecraft Avalon, which is transporting a crew of 5,000 to a new planet that will be colonized much like Earth. A malfunction occurs, and Jim (Chris Pratt) wakes up too early...about 90 years too early, to be exact. After some time of crippling loneliness, he makes the momentous decision to wake up fellow passenger Aurora (Lawrence). The duo quickly discover the reason behind the malfunctions and must work together to get the journey back on track.
"Passengers" is a film completely devoid of any interesting plot devices or character development. The whole thing is just too "convenient". All the main beats can be predicted a mile away, there is no chemistry between Pratt & Lawrence, and what passes for "character development" in the movie is laughable. A high school film student could have created more interesting, in-depth characters.
As such, "Passengers" is clearly a paint-by-numbers, "vehicle" film in which everyone involved knew it would make X amount of dollars of profit. In that sense, it hits all the right beats: set in space, slick visuals, Pratt for the ladies, Lawrence for the gentleman, yadda yadda yadda. Creatively, however, those elements add up to absolutely nothing.
Perhaps I'm being a bit too harsh in giving "Passengers" the rock-bottom 1-star treatment (taken strictly as a film it is maybe 2-stars at best), but partially I'm just angry that Hollywood can continue to put out such lackluster efforts. This is especially true when they tantalize me with some of my "favorite cinema things" (sci-fi, Lawrence, etc.) and then produce such a soulless flop. I'm not completely anti-Hollywood or anything like that, but it still galls me that "Passengers" can: 1. Even be made; and 2. Be made so poorly with all the money behind it.
Simply put: "Passengers" was one of the most boring, predictable, asinine movies I've seen in quite some time. I can see children liking it (for the visuals and extremely simple plot), date couples flocking to it (for the mass appeal of Pratt & Lawrence), but that is about it. Creatively, the tank gauge rests fully on "Empty".