Passengers (2016)
dpgSingularity
When a spaceship transporting colonists on a 90 year journey to a distant planet malfunctions causing a passenger to awaken from hibernation early, he must find a way to resume hibernation or die of old age.
Share
Have an account? Sign In Now
CraigDGriffiths:
I’ve? flipped on my earlier position and now agree with you.? Because the story hook is embedded in the “B” story — not the “A” story.? ? And in my book, the hook is the ace high trump card.? Sometimes playing that card requires transgressing a conventional logline rule.? I think this is one such instance.? So here’s my revised take:
Either:
When a spacecraft taking colonists to a distant planet malfunctions waking up a man 90 years early, he awakens a woman to relieve his loneliness.
(25 words)
Or:
When a spacecraft taking colonists to a distant planet malfunctions waking up a man 90 years early, he awakens a woman to relieve his loneliness, blames it on the malfunction, and begins to court her affection.
(32 words)
This story line renders the guy as an unsympathetic character.? Which I guess explains why it took 10 years for the script to launch as a film.? And why it failed to launch at the box office.
But, hey, at leasat the check for the screenwriter cleared the bank.
CraigDGriffiths:
The fact that we see different “A” stories in the plot is what makes this an interesting movie to discuss in terms of writing a logline. ?Because for most films, I venture ?we would concur as to what is the “A” story and what is the “B” story. ?The “A” story line is obvious, indisputable. We would differ only as to how to word the description in a logline.
If the relationship is the “A” story, then the film would be an exception to the conventional rule that loglines should be about a singular protagonist struggling for an objective goal — not about a relationship between 2 characters. I think there ?can be valid exceptions to that rule, particularly for stories belonging to the romantic genre.
I’m not sure this film is an exception. ?I’m sticking to my interpretation because about 3/4 of the way through the 2nd Act, the technical problem comes roaring back (literally) to the forefront of the story and ?it — not the relationship — creates the ultimate crisis, the worst case scenario, ?that drives the story to its conclusion. ?The guy (and gal) MUST fix the technical problem NOW or perish along with 5,300 ?stakeholders (the crew and passengers still in hibernation).
Whatever, ?I don’t think the relationship story succeeds. A movie can get away with cheating on the facts and the plot (and this movie certainly does cheat on that score) but it can’t get away with cheating on the emotional truth. ?And I felt that the resolution of the relationship story was a cheat.
I think Karel’s ?30 word version does the job.
What intrigued me about the movie was that the transgressive act the protagonist commits at the end of Act 1….
(Spoiler alert)
… the guy is so lonely he deliberately brings ?a female passenger out of hibernation to have some company . ?Consequently, ?for the next 45 minutes the “B” story is at the forefront, the “A” story slips into the background.
I found the “B” story a rather standard issue love story with a predictable relationship arc. ?The only dramatic suspense in the “B” story in the 2nd Act is ?when and how she will find out that she did not accidentally wake up, as the guy allows her to believe. ?That he has selfishly, deliberately doomed her to death while in transit in outer space.
The movie that my mind cross-references with this one is “Witness” (1985) , where the “B” story also comes to the forefront for the entire 2nd Act while the “A” story slips into the background. ?But there’s continual dramatic tension in the “B” story of “Witness” because of the clash of cultures, a ?worldly, gun-wielding, city-slicker cop forced to hide out in a rural Amish community that adheres to a credo of non-violence.
(And kudos to Australian director Peter Weir for his sensitivity and respect for the values and traditions of the Amish culture.)
This is a good concept to stretch ones loglineing muscles on because the premise needs as much an explanation as the plot – good choice.
I haven’t seen the film and so can only speculate on the story’s particulars. It sounds, from the logline, as if the most immediate danger the MC faces is old age.? Thinking about the concept alone would likely put most people to sleep, so what else was added to the story to increase the stakes? Did the authorities find out? Did the ship’s computer activate a system to try and kill him in fear that he may endanger the mission?
Haven’t seen it yet. Sounds overly small.
How about:
When a passenger?on a 90-year space journey wakes up from hibernation because of a malfunction, he must repair the ship?to resume hibernation, or die of old age. (30 words)
It’s shorter, and I find the structure is clearer with the protag upfront.
I can instantly see a major story flaw:
The passenger only shortens his life by the time it takes to repair. Even if the repair takes a year, he’ll only shave off one year of his life. So the ‘die of old age’ is not really high stakes, in the sense that there’s no strong ticking clock.
Did the movie work for you?
An interplanetary colonist wakes up 90 years early he awakens a woman rather than die alone which begins a rocky relationship built on a lie.
A bit wordy. Could be condensed with a rewrite.