Passengers

[Resha Caner]

For me the movie Passengers raises a long list of fascinating questions. That doesn't mean I intend to defend it as a good film, but the criticism that surrounded the film is part of what intrigues me.

Rather than spew a long list of questions, I'll start with just one, and if that dies out I'll bring up some of the others.

So, my first question regards themes of redemption & forgiveness. The biggest criticism of the movie was the fact that Aurora Lane would agree to marry Jim Preston given the horrible thing he did to her. So what is your position? Is Jim's action unforgiveable? If not, what would need to happen before Aurora can believably forgive him?

 

[timewerx]

The ship suffered very serious malfunctions that is nobody's fault.

Tough to be alone, with no one to talk to for many years would drive many insane.

There were all victims of these unfortunate events.

 

[Jon Osterman]

I don't think it is believable that she would ever forgive him. She may pretend to for the sake of their existence together, but it would always be there inside, festering away, ready to return at any moment.

 

[Resha Caner]

The ship suffered very serious malfunctions that is nobody's fault.

Tough to be alone, with no one to talk to for many years would drive many insane.

There were all victims of these unfortunate events.

I think she had a right to be angry - very angry. I will note that the film put her in a similar circumstance - the possibility that she was going to be alone. It was only then that she forgave him, and I find that plausible - the idea that she had to understand why he did it. But should there be more to it?

I don't think it is believable that she would ever forgive him. She may pretend to for the sake of their existence together, but it would always be there inside, festering away, ready to return at any moment.

So you believe some things are unforgivable. What types of things rise to that level? To that end, I will also ask if you think Gus was unforgivable as well? IMO that is a flaw in the movie. She appealed to him for justice - for help in punishing Jim, and he brushed her off. Yet she didn't seem angry with him for doing that. He became the adored member of the team. Why?

[edit] I'll add that forgiveness doesn't mean forgetting or the elimination of consequences.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

For me the movie Passengers raises a long list of fascinating questions. That doesn't mean I intend to defend it as a good film, but the criticism that surrounded the film is part of what intrigues me.

Rather than spew a long list of questions, I'll start with just one, and if that dies out I'll bring up some of the others.

So, my first question regards themes of redemption & forgiveness. The biggest criticism of the movie was the fact that Aurora Lane would agree to marry Jim Preston given the horrible thing he did to her. So what is your position? Is Jim's action unforgiveable? If not, what would need to happen before Aurora can believably forgive him?

So, after all of that, I guess a guy in Jim's position needs to be incredibly good looking, then, and only then, she'll find a way in her heart to "forgive" him. ... at least, that's what Hollywood seems to make it look like here.

Still, it's one of my favorite movies because of the social issues it handles metaphorically and philosophically.

 

[Jon Osterman]

Gus has no responsibility to deliver "justice" on her behalf. So it would be unreasonable to be (too) angry with him. Jim, on the other hand, willfully "stole" her life on their destination planet from her. Like I said, you may try to forgive, intellectually, but emotionally I don't think it is possible. It certainly wouldn't be for me. Note that I am not saying that is right, or what God would want, it is just human limitation.

 

[Resha Caner]

Jim, on the other hand, willfully "stole" her life on their destination planet from her. Like I said, you may try to forgive, intellectually, but emotionally I don't think it is possible. It certainly wouldn't be for me. Note that I am not saying that is right, or what God would want, it is just human limitation.

I see. I can understand that.

Gus has no responsibility to deliver "justice" on her behalf. So it would be unreasonable to be (too) angry with him.

Actually, Gus does have that responsibility. He's a crew member, and the only one who's awake. He, therefore, represents the captain. He's the commanding officer.

His attitude is very different, though. His life was 'stolen' as well, even if not by Jim. But he expresses two thoughts:
* Aurora knew the risks when she signed aboard
* Aurora needs to understand why Jim did what he did before she decides how to treat him

So, here's another question for you. If you were a passenger along with a loved one, and the loved one was awakened, destined to spend their life alone, would you want that loved one to wake you up or leave you to continue your journey?

My wife and I agreed we would want to be waked up.

 

[timewerx]

I think she had a right to be angry - very angry. I will note that the film put her in a similar circumstance - the possibility that she was going to be alone. It was only then that she forgave him, and I find that plausible

Jim got woken up by the malfunctioning computer

Aurora got woken up by Jim whose mind has gone nuts when the computer got him out of hibernation with no chance of return and the ensuing loneliness.

Jim's thinking has been compromised by the situation / loneliness that wasn't his fault at all. No longer capable of making rational decisions.

Although both of them is expected to be very angry by the events, there's really no one to blame here. Jim's accountability in the situation is simply not enough to be denied forgiveness.