Stowaway [Netflix]

Homelander

Thought it was.....OK. Which isn't the most scathing criticism of a movie these days, but it could've been a lot better. Putting aside the bizarre, implausible opening, it looks good and it's reasonably compelling.....until the end, when it just sort of loses its way.

Not the worst thing you could watch on Netflix, but way down the list of worthwhile sci-fi drama.

expectationlost

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCwXJMVVdck

space science youtuber Scott Manley helped with the script and did a demo of the craft in 2011 Kerbal Space Program space simulation game

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hic0mz3_U4c

namloc1980

mikhail wrote: »

There seemed to be some corner cutting in general. Maybe not as unlikely with commercial launches/missions as you'd think. He seems to have been

unconscious for five hours, which is very serious and maybe speaks to a serious head injury during take-off but was maybe downplayed at little. The movie cliche of the hero giving or receiving a blow to the head and waking up half an hour later with no ill effects worse than a headache is complete nonsense. If you're unconscious for longer than a few seconds, you need medical attention.

Yes it is extremely unlikely.

If the day comes that Spacex leave a member of ground crew screwed inside a panel on a Falcon/Dragon, then I'll agree.

There are incredibly high safety standards with human spaceflight.

De Bhál

I watched it last night, and was a bit apprehensive after the last Netflix space movie I watched which was Midnight Sky with George Clooney. That, I thought was rubbish and this movie is better than that. Not much better but watchable.

the idea is good but trying to figure out how yer man got stuck in that panel would hurt your brain so you'd just have to move on from that. It seemed to finish up kind of suddenly also I thought. I did wonder was there enough oxygen for all three that were left etc... but really I was just glad it was over.

flasher0030

De Bhál wrote: »

I watched it last night, and was a bit apprehensive after the last Netflix space movie I watched which was Midnight Sky with George Clooney. That, I thought was rubbish and this movie is better than that. Not much better but watchable.

the idea is good but trying to figure out how yer man got stuck in that panel would hurt your brain so you'd just have to move on from that. It seemed to finish up kind of suddenly also I thought. I did wonder was there enough oxygen for all three that were left etc... but really I was just glad it was over.

Ya, overall it was a bit of nothing. The sequences of retrieving the oxygen cannisters were exciting. But other than that, it was basically filler. And ending was a bit of nothing. W

hy would a lady in her prime just give up her life for a random stranger who wasn't supposed to be there in the first place.

But at the end of the day, it is only fiction, so I guess they can play it however they want.

Have no idea how the dude got stuck in there when that panel was subsequently bolted from the outside.

Anyway, passed 2 hours, but I wouldn't recommend. Much better files out there to spend 2 hours of your time on.

Kirby

Follow this through with me.

So, we are supposed to believe that the small tank of liquid o2 that Anna Kendrick's character returned with is supposed to be enough air for one person to survive several months.

Okay......

So why wouldn't a ship that size have several of those canisters in reserve just lying around? Think about it. The tank was tiny. Why wouldn't you just pack a dozen of them? Engineers are smart.

I'm all for suspension of disbelief and plot holes don't usually bother me. Like the guy stowing away doesn't bother me. You just accept it so the film can happen. But the oxygen thing is a logical fail on so many levels and bothered me for the last 40 minutes of the film. Most of the science in this was spot on. From the method of creating gravity, to the length of time the mission would take, to using cycler's to get to mars. All great and grounded in reality. Which makes the oxygen thing all the more perplexing.

The film itself was average enough. I saw somebody compare it to The Martian earlier in the thread and I couldn't disagree more. The Martian is leagues better than this.

Fysh

There's an offhand remark from the commander about how the original plan for the ship was for 2 crew members and how the (I assume private co. rather than govt-linked) organisation behind the launch decided to push the limits of the design late in the day and bump the mission to 3 crew. So they were probably already using some of their original contingency to allow for a 3rd crew member, then a 4th is effectively stealth-added.

NASA would never let a mission hit these problems (they are very keen on durability of kit and also providing multiple redundancy for core systems wherever possible), hence my assumption that this is a private Virgin Galactic/SpaceX type outfit where there's more wiggle room for a senior mgmt numpty to throw a spanner in the works and make a stupid demand like "increase the crew by 50% but don't allocate any additional resources towards life support etc".

(Since someone mentioned it - the medic choosing to give herself up rather than yer man was sketched out reasonably well, I thought. She clearly takes her role as a doctor seriously and has strong moral problems with the idea of even indirectly killing someone. So in a situation where there are no good options, she decided that the least bad option was to sacrifice herself rather than harm someone else. Bit of a problem if the mission needs a medic at any later point, but again, No Good Options and all that...)

Sad Professor

Yeah I thought it was clearly implied that the space organisation was private and was cutting corners. I expected a third act with a Moon-esque twist regarding this but instead the film just sorted stopped like they ran out of film or something.

TBh people are thinking about it too much. Most of the plot was fine and more solid than 90% of Hollywood plots. If the story and characters were compelling enough you wouldn't care about why they didn't pack extra canisters etc. In any case, the answer is that if they had there wouldn't have been a movie... which probably would have been for the best mind you.

The biggest issue with the film imo was that first act. It's so weak and annoying that by the time the story starts to pick up that the audience has already decided the film sucks.

pixelburp

The script needed another pass. I thought the movie was fine but its problems all stemmed from its script wanting for another set of eyes to embellish some of the world-building, as well as the structure of its acts. As you guys have said, the Cost Cutting was a deliberate choice and a good potential segue but never got the kind of room it needed - especially as a way to explain the Stowaway for those requiring the mental leap. Plus with the last act, I felt like I could hear the writer just going "Uhhhhh, I dunno; just do the same set piece again I guess? Something something noble sacrifice... Let's do lunch"

Cos to be fair, the premise was, and remains, fantastic and an easy pitch for high drama.

Fysh

I'd agree with that

I thought the strengths of the film were the character performances, and it was a pleasant surprise to not have to have Bombastic Blockbuster Nonsense (The Martian and the "fly around like Iron Man" bit, I'm looking at you) in a film like this. But definitely the plot and setup could have done with at least one more round of polishing.

On a different note - according to Wikipedia the budget was $10M, which is quite impressive I think - while the film is very theatrical in nature and is at its core about a moral dilemma, I would've guessed a higher budget.

pixelburp

Fysh wrote: »

I'd agree with that

I thought the strengths of the film were the character performances, and it was a pleasant surprise to not have to have Bombastic Blockbuster Nonsense (The Martian and the "fly around like Iron Man" bit, I'm looking at you) in a film like this. But definitely the plot and setup could have done with at least one more round of polishing.

On a different note - according to Wikipedia the budget was $10M, which is quite impressive I think - while the film is very theatrical in nature and is at its core about a moral dilemma, I would've guessed a higher budget.

On that, I had been wondering. That budget is absolutely miniscule yet the detail of the ship and equipment was most excellent (convincing too to these layman's eyes). My thoughts were if like those companies who specialise in airplane sets to rent (for the innumerous scenes on jet liners) there are modular "space station" sets you can pay access to. Configure them as needed, add some singular details for your specific feature then off you go.

Presumably those actors worked to scale then, but even then by modern standards, 10 million is buttons.