I’m quite mixed on this heady sci-fi drama. On the one hand, it’s what I technically want in smart semi-realistic science fiction: big ideas and brains over blasters. But this film makes a bad ethical argument and does it very, very slowly.

The film is set in a near future where an international space station orbits an Earth polluted beyond its means. The astronauts have a special algae that might be able to help the Earth… but a disaster hits and they lose all connection as the population of Earth dies. Will they risk their lives to possibly save a tiny portion of humanity or stay aboard the station where it’s safe?

Hey, it’s a good idea, a nice ethical scenario that a movie can chew on. But, really, is it? The movie has a cast of three who are arguing over staying safe aboard the station or returning and saving 300 people. I get there’s a survival instinct, but I’m not sure these nimrods have thought through the long-term implications of doing nothing. Plus, Spock would be disappointed.

Beyond the limited room for debate, the film is really pretty slow and monotonous. It’s budget clearly shows as it struggles to find something for the three actors to do, especially in the mid-stretch but also at the alleged climax. It doesn’t need fist-fights and rayguns to liven up the party, but maybe some heady debates over what to do, arguments about how to survive, or, you know, what the long-term strategy is. I don’t think there was nearly enough thought put into this thoughtful science fiction.

This could have been a very cool, maybe even great hard science fiction film. I appreciate it didn’t go dumb, but it also didn’t go particularly smart. Not smart enough for me, anyhow. I give it credit for the attempt, at least.

Score: 69