---

"I couldn't do it, they didn't want me"

---

:(

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/passengers-trailer-jennifer-lawrence-chris-pratt-video-1201865288/

I haven't read the script as many of you have; is it accurate to say they changed the thrust of the story? Because I'm picking up a lot of sex with a little sci-fi here and there to break it up.

Still not happy about the casting, but it is what it is. As for Pratt... aside for bankability,social media presence, etc there's another important aspect which probably led to choosing him: age. And not just because Sony wanted to sell the idea of two young people having sex all over the starship. Jim has a certain personality; a certain attitude. He leaves Earth to get a second chance, a new beginning in a world where his job still counts... At 38, it's credible. Just like 'going shopping' through the pods and choosing which woman to wake up has one connotation at 38 and another at 50...
Pratt still has a certain freshness about him. A charming rogue, as allhailkingjack said. Mr.Reeves... he's a bit too world weary for that...compared to 2008 when he started developing this story.
Sure, Keanu could still play Jim today (or rather in 2015 when it was filmed). But it would be a different story, with a different tone... something I'd love to watch, but it wouldn't be this story. It wouldn't be 'mid-thirties guy condemned to spend the rest of his life alone wakes up young beautiful woman to - maybe- fulfill his male fantasies'. It would be 'sick pervert old man sacrificing the life of a young woman so he won't feel lonely'. And sure, this is my bias typing. But the same bias would be watching the movie, too. And it would influence the way I perceive it. And perception is everything...

So for once, I kinda agree with a movie executive's decision :D (there's a first for everything, I guess).
I really wish Keanu could have played Jim. Especially since Spaihts once wrote

Jon Spaihts
‏@jonspaihts
@digifruitella Keanu is the one and only Jim.
3:17 AM - 4 Dec 2011
https://twitter.com/jonspaihts/status/143136932761841665

But that was then. This is now. As they say, timing's a b*tch :|

(one story I'd really like to know is the why, the rhyme and the reason for which Weinstein sabotaged Passengers. Doubt I ever will, though. )

---

It would be 'sick pervert old man sacrificing the life of a young woman so he won't feel lonely'. And sure, this is my bias typing. But the same bias would be watching the movie, too. And it would influence the way I perceive it. And perception is everything...

---

I agree with this. I would not have wanted to see Keanu opposite JL, but I also would not have wanted him to be opposite Reese Witherspoon, Rachel McAdams, or whatever other hot young-ish thing was considered for the role. I just generally don't like seeing him paired with younger actresses for the exact reasons you mention. I wish it could've been KR with someone age-appropriate (by my lights, at least in her early 40s), because he could have brought a lot of soulfulness and longing to this role. But that ain't Hollywood.

---

But that ain't Hollywood.

---

no, it ain't :(

http://cinemascope.co.il/mp3/passengers-jon-spaihts.pdf

I kind of hate that KR is so honest about Hollywood's waning interest in him. I respect that he acknowledges what other actors would never say aloud about their own careers, and I appreciate that he's not high on himself. But I hate to hear him say it nonetheless.

Edit: Thanks, LucaM.

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/53w4ba/keanu_reeves_was_originally_planned_to_be_the/?st=itej5ge8&sh=2a081ca1

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/53w4ba/keanu_reeves_was_originally_planned_to_be_the/d7x9gq4?st=itejl767&sh=bd99be71

[–]frozendancicle 6 points 6 hours ago
Pratt'll do fine, but I think Keanu/Blunt would have killed it.
The difference between Pratt and Reeves for me is, picture a hollywood party, Pratt is there and wearing a smile even though he feels out of place. Reeves is also there and flashing the occasional smile but feels more alone than if the mansion was empty.
Reeves really just has that old/worn soul kinda feel that would be perfect for this movie.

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/53w4ba/keanu_reeves_was_originally_planned_to_be_the/d7xeebj?st=itejxs40&sh=d0c31767

[–]StoicKerfuffle 7 points 3 hours ago
Thanks for adding the context. On the one hand, it sucks for Reeves that he was kicked out of the lead; on the other hand, he now has a lot more credibility in Hollywood. There's nothing better than being the person to watch, the person known to have the taste and persistence to find good projects and get them going. This isn't like some unknown writer/producer/actor getting screwed out of what should have been their breakthrough project. Reeves' role might not be widely reported, but Hollywood knows, and his cred has gone up significantly.
Another point worth considering: everyone who bitches about there being too many shitty sequels to shitty movies should be happy about what happened with Passengers. Sure, as movie connoisseurs, we feel like we've been cheated out of the "real" version of the film, but, as moviegoers in general, this is exactly what we want to happen. We want big studios to be interested in original projects instead of just pumping out more sequels to established properties.
Personally, I'm hoping Reeves connects with Charlie Kaufman, who is struggling to get projects greenlighted despite being brilliant and a magnet for awards. Those two could make some seriously cool shit together.

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/53w4ba/keanu_reeves_was_originally_planned_to_be_the/d7wtm2m?st=itejyhjk&sh=abf828d0
[–]callseveryoneacoward 1554 points 16 hours ago
After having read the script, I envision him playing the lead role with more nuance than Pratt. It's a tough character to do well, and Reeves has reservoirs of sorrow and loneliness that Pratt probably can't access just yet.

---

Just like 'going shopping' through the pods and choosing which woman to wake up has one connotation at 38 and another at 50...

---

Yeah, that's a good point.

I like that Reddit thread. :D

Plekuz: "I, like probably most people who will go to see the film, know nothing about the plot. So I might be completely wrong about this, but Pratt could be an excellent choice. Most see him as a lovely harmless doofus which would make the impact stronger if it turns out that in Passengers he is actually a disturbed creep and manages to convey that through his acting. Like I said, I know nothing about the script and hope the "romance in space" trailer turns out to be fooling us into thinking it will be that type of movie. With Reeves it would have been more expected."

This makes sense. Hopefully that's what they intended, and they're just misdirecting people.

However, there's only one showing per day in 2D, compared to five or six in 3D.I totally dislike 3D,it causes headache and tires my eyes. Why don't they keep movies movies?

Have you read the original Passengers script?

I've put it back up: http://www.whoaisnotme.net/scripts/Passengers.pdf

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/keanu-reeves-wanted-to-do-passengers-for-years-and-years-and-years-before-chris-pratt-was-cast-202227541.html