So this is a ripoff of.....
The Cold Equations by Tom Godwin?
shareI watched a video by Scott Manley discussing the movie (he also mentions The Cold Equations) and my expectations improved slightly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCwXJMVVdck
It's pretty bad.
Did you end up watching it and if so, what do you think.
You mean the movie? No, looks too boring and predictable and requiring too much suspension of disbelief for a movie that also strives to be correct about the science behind it.
When you are a bad writer, just put in the script some zombies and aliens, dammit.
When you realize that any trip into space is done by minimizing the weight which means minimizing the food and water on any space ship, it really isn't going to take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you ever get a stowaway on a ship you need to kill them ASAP and chunk them out the nearest airlock. You can't afford to cut ration or anything else for an unaccounted for person. Not sure how you can make a movie about something where there is only one logical answer.
shareThat is not true. In reality they probably have a 3D printer onboard and can build a new carbon dioxide recycler. Food can be rationed.
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/netflix-stowaway-science-of-space-survival
Bullshit. Energy isn't pulled from the ether it is limited and even if the recycler fairy gave them a carbon dioxide recycler it would still need energy which can't be created from nothing. Every pound you launch is costing upwards of 10,000. You don't build in enough excess to provide for and increase in required resources of 33%. The stowaway would need to be terminated quickly.
share
When you realize that any trip into space is done by minimizing the weight which means minimizing the food and water on any space ship, it really isn't going to take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you ever get a stowaway on a ship you need to kill them ASAP and chunk them out the nearest airlock. You can't afford to cut ration or anything else for an unaccounted for person. Not sure how you can make a movie about something where their is only one logical answer.
Yes they would have some extra supplies, but when it came to food it would have likely been 5 or 10 percent extra. But assume it was 50% extra. That would mean they had food for 3.5 people. If you then ration that to 4 people then you are starving to death 4 people over a 2 year period which was the supposed time they were going to spend going out and back. You just created a ship of 4 concentration camp victims.
What was really ridiculous from the very start was that the stowaway was not just someone that was knocked unconscious and collapsed in a place where he wasn't noticed, he was someone that supposedly collapsed and was then sealed into where he fell by someone on the outside that screwed a panel on top of him. Or that he survived the lift off while tangled in the mass of cables. If you assumed he really did accidently get hidden behind a panel, the lift off should have killed or at the very least left him with some serious injuries, probably some brain damage from a loss of blood flow to parts of his brain.
Your math is off. 50% extra would had been food for 4.5, not 3.5.
shareit was a 4 month trip. the mission was 2 years total which included the round trip and time at the Mars settlement
shareThis is what you get when you contract with Ryan Air for your space ship.
shareIt's very plausible on a long trip there'd be some spare supplies. And that they might be able to buy a little more time by stretching their supplies, too. Not a lot, but enough that they wouldn't have to kill the stowaway immediately.
shareI don't think this is a ripoff anything. It is a story about limited life support, a fairly general plot for B movies.
sharesomething like that
shareThey changed characters and many major plot points, but the premise is identical. Kind of shitty of them not to credit the original story.
share