This is one of those adaptations that should never have been made. Some spoilers here-
The original story by Arthur C. Clarke concerned a freighter en route to Venus when a meteor strike left the vessel with only enough oxygen for one crewmember to survive the trip -a variation on the "Lifeboat" theme. Like all good such stories it centered around the psychological strains as they struggle with the up coming decision.
Here is where the movie breaks down. One of the endearing traits of a properly handled SF story such as this is that the authors treat physics seriously. There is no deux ex machina rescues. There are consequences to accidents in space and the better writers do not attempt to evade them. In fact -the basic thrust is that there may not be any solution (See "The Cold Equations" for an example.) The scriptwriters here violated every tenet of good SF writing. This particular spacecraft had a lifeboat- an utterly absurd concept on a spacecraft limited to Hohman Transfer orbits. Trust me on this- All the captain did in leaving on that lifeboat was to guarantee himself a slow agonizing death- I hope he had no children so we could give him a Darwin Award for "Too Dumb To Live." The actions of a crewman in bungling repairs was about as pointless as it gets. -i.e. yeah big deal he repaired the damage but where do we get the oxygen to replace that lost? Oh- he lost even more oxygen. He is a qualified astronaut- how? The interactions of the crew with each other was such that I really wanted them ALL to die.- and the little dog too. Not very good storytelling. And the ending with a hibernation chamber was the very epitome of a deux ex machina by a writer that doesn't want to actually follow a story to the proper ending. This film ranks as a big missed opportunity. Because Television has done some decent shows. The remake of the "Twilight Zone" did a very good job with the Tom Godwin story "The Cold Equations", William Lee's "A Message From Charity" and Arthur Clarke's "The Star." The key to doing these adaptations is to stay true to the story as written even though some things simply have to be changed for the nature of the TV medium. Contrast this one with "Gravity" -one I thoroughly enjoyed and willingly let them use their "artistic license" to violate some orbital physics for the sake of the story. Tell a good yarn and I will let you get away with a lot. Tell a bad one and I won't. This was a bad one.
The original story by Arthur C. Clarke concerned a freighter en route to Venus when a meteor strike left the vessel with only enough oxygen for one crewmember to survive the trip -a variation on the "Lifeboat" theme. Like all good such stories it centered around the psychological strains as they struggle with the up coming decision.
Here is where the movie breaks down. One of the endearing traits of a properly handled SF story such as this is that the authors treat physics seriously. There is no deux ex machina rescues. There are consequences to accidents in space and the better writers do not attempt to evade them. In fact -the basic thrust is that there may not be any solution (See "The Cold Equations" for an example.) The scriptwriters here violated every tenet of good SF writing. This particular spacecraft had a lifeboat- an utterly absurd concept on a spacecraft limited to Hohman Transfer orbits. Trust me on this- All the captain did in leaving on that lifeboat was to guarantee himself a slow agonizing death- I hope he had no children so we could give him a Darwin Award for "Too Dumb To Live." The actions of a crewman in bungling repairs was about as pointless as it gets. -i.e. yeah big deal he repaired the damage but where do we get the oxygen to replace that lost? Oh- he lost even more oxygen. He is a qualified astronaut- how? The interactions of the crew with each other was such that I really wanted them ALL to die.- and the little dog too. Not very good storytelling. And the ending with a hibernation chamber was the very epitome of a deux ex machina by a writer that doesn't want to actually follow a story to the proper ending. This film ranks as a big missed opportunity. Because Television has done some decent shows. The remake of the "Twilight Zone" did a very good job with the Tom Godwin story "The Cold Equations", William Lee's "A Message From Charity" and Arthur Clarke's "The Star." The key to doing these adaptations is to stay true to the story as written even though some things simply have to be changed for the nature of the TV medium. Contrast this one with "Gravity" -one I thoroughly enjoyed and willingly let them use their "artistic license" to violate some orbital physics for the sake of the story. Tell a good yarn and I will let you get away with a lot. Tell a bad one and I won't. This was a bad one.