the audience applauded

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

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.

The acting and special effects were decent, and it brings up that age old question of sacrificing one life for the lives of many. This type of story is similar to the short stories told on The Outer Limits.7/10

This was a great story when it was written. Unfortunately, this movie is anything but great. A straight-forward chilling science-fiction story has been turned into yet another "all businesses are run by greedy b****rds with no morals" piece of trash that resembles science fiction only superficially. I recommend against watching it, unless you are bored out of your mind and nothing else is on.

I must admit that it took me a while to warm to this film, but as the story unfolded, I found myself drawn more and more into the dilemmas it posed. My only real objection to the piece were those moments when the characters seemed to take a break from events to talk about themselves and where they had come from. At times the characters almost seemed to step out of the story, and talk about themselves as though nothing out of the ordinary were happening around them.The film seems on more sure footing when it's dealing with the primary elements of the story, less so when it attempts to branch out into character development, or "backstory".