Amy Adler In the future, John (Billy Campbell) is a pilot who accepts a commission to carry a cache of medicine to a distant planet. He's hoping that this decision will translate into a promotion. On earth, he is part of the more elite group, for there is now a lower caste of humans who do drudge work, eat poorly and live in crowded, noisy conditions. John's mission has a tricky element. Amazingly, the plane that he will fly has been designed for this mission only and has only the basic components. It is termed a "disposable vehicle" and will be dismantled at the voyage's end. Just after takeoff, the ground command notifies John that the plane is carrying extra weight, for some unknown reason. As the vehicle only has fuel for the calculated weight, this is a major problem. Looking around, John sees that he has a pretty stowaway, Lee (Poppy Montgomery). She is of the drudge class and snuck onto the plane to visit her brother who lives on the planet of John's voyage. Uh oh. Mission control tells John he has to throw her "overboard" into space, where she will die; otherwise, they will both perish, for the plane will not make it. What to do? Lee puts up a fight for her life, first with words, then with muscle. John, naturally, doesn't want to end her life and they try desperately to find enough other things to throw out the chute, including insulation, the first aid kit and other items. But, alas, they can't find enough. What will John do? This was a pretty flat and cheaply made science fiction film. It has some good ideas but they are never developed enough and the writing is stiff. The actors, too, don't fair very well, although Campbell and Montgomery truly do try to give it a go. All in all, if you love sci fi, as I do, you will be very disappointed in this one. Unless you have a penchant to "see them all", you should skip it.

Donald Gregory I read the short story, "The Cold Equations," decades ago -- but I just saw this movie for the first time today. And I thought it was outstanding.While I understand many of the negative reviews here, I think some are missing a few key points.When a screenwriter begins with a short story, s/he can't just make adjustments for the screen and be done with it--oops, a 30-minute movie, not what the investors had in mind. A bad screenwriter addresses this with padding; a good one adds foundation, details originally omitted for brevity, motivation, characterization, all that good stuff -- and maybe a subplot. If he's *really* good, he may explain or fix some things that really need explanation or repairs.In any case, the result is a new story inspired by the original, and possibly incorporating most or all of the original. Complaining that it is longer is sort of silly; of course it is. It has to be. And complaining that it doesn't have the punch of the original ... is unfair. Short stories *are* for punch; longer formats by their very nature have to be at least somewhat more leisurely. And this is a very intellectual and psychological story to begin with.** SPOILERS FOLLOW ** As one or two mentioned, the primary point of the original story is that sometimes, there is no way out of a dilemma; physics is not forgiving. Hence the title. The movie retained that in spades, and in my opinion provided just the right level of explanation as to why. And it's not simple, either, except to someone who really already understands the underlying physics. They even factored in the effects of time on deceleration; how often do we see that in popular media -- and done right? When I put this on my list to rent, I had misremembered the author as being Heinlein -- and it is worthy of him.But the movie added some justification as to *why* the situation happened in the first place. Engineers of our day would not, I believe, launch a spaceship with so little margin for error as was provided here. But our motivation is exploration and research -- and we really want our people back whole.Pursuit of the almighty dollar (credit/peso/what have you) on the other hand has often motivated stinginess and corner-cutting. Many excellent science fiction novels have advanced the possibility that the way we'll ultimately get outside our solar system is via mostly autonomous mega-corporations pursuing resources and the devil take the hindmost. And recall, if everything had gone according to the company's *original* plan, no-one would have died or even been hurt at all; it was being cheap, but not initially evil.The other significant part of the original story dealt with the psychological aspects of the situation. Here, the director and actors have their chances to shine -- and I think they did. One of the keys to good drama is that your characters change. And here they do, a *lot* -- but just gradually enough to retain believability. The high-pressure situation adds to that believability, of course.Initially, Barton (Campbell) appears a cold fish, and Cross (Montgomery) brash and ignorant -- annoying, in fact, as at least one other reviewer observed. Maybe they overdid those initial impressions a trifle -- but over the course of (their) hours, their interactions and the situation cause major changes (in his case, life changes). Unlike one reviewer who was happy to see her out the airlock, I was in tears -- and I both rarely do that, and also *knew the outcome before I began the movie*. It was well-acted and well-directed.One other thing -- fie on the IMDb summarizer for indicating that the cargo was a "vaccine" -- rather than just "medicine." He's correct, but that's a plot point, and you shouldn't know it until very late in the movie. The difference is used effectively, another correct but subtle incorporation of good science.Yes, the special effects are mediocre -- but it doesn't really matter; they're good enough. The story isn't about that at all.

Chris Durkin The comments of others who have read the story have disapproved of the movie and I understand that. But if you are a fan of science fiction, I think you have to be grateful for this movie. I saw the movie before I read the story and I was blown away. How rare is it for a movie to actually include math and physics--correct physics? This movie could even be used to teach things like acceleration, mass, and energy conservation. I also think the actors did a good job. Montgomery not only sold the terror of impending death in the vacuum of space, but she also sold me on her determination to sacrifice herself. Understanding that it is a low-budget (I believe made for the SciFi Channel) movie, I appreciate it. I hope more good science fiction stories are made into movies, as faithfully as possible.

gatebanger This film is the third, and worst, adaptation of one of the best SF shorts I have ever read.The original story had some very clear messages: People are responsible for their actions and there are consequences; Life isn't fair; Neither is death; Sometimes, one has to make tough choices.Unfortunately, by the time Geiger and Burger got through with it, it had become an overly long, rambling true love in space soap opera.The short story generated a good bit of controversy when it was published in 1954.I can't recommend this film to anyone who has read Tom Godwin's story.