Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I really enjoyed this film and enjoyed re-watching it with the commentary by Professor Brian Cox, the scientific consultant for the movie. Those reviewers who are stating that the science is poor (or even "ridiculous") may not have listened to this commentary. There are some errors, which Cox points out, but the overall idea is not impossible, or even so farfetched as to be 'virtually impossible'. Professor Cox is a Royal Society University Research Fellow in Particle Physics at the University of Manchester who also works on the ATLAS experiment at CERN in Geneva. In his commentary he mentions discussing with other scientists at CERN about the Q-ball hypotheses and relevance to sun-dying and restarting in the movie. (Incidentally, he seems to believe the existence these super-symetrical (or super-stable) objects will be proven (by CERN) within the next 10 years or so.) His problems with science in the movie tend to be some of the smaller issues (for example - the craft orbiting Mercury a few times, rather than just a 'sling-shot' use). His statement on what the penultimate scene means to him (even if it only occurs in a 'billionth of a second', or in 'the mind') is wonderful, and really impressed upon me the beauty, wonder, and awe many scientists hold for the universe. I think some reviewers only saw this scene in a literal earth-based perception of time and were put-off by it. Again, it's not necessarily meant to be seen that way. (And as mentioned earlier, Professor Cox's comment on its magnificence is inspiring.) Another criticism reviewers have mentioned was why so many unstable people were picked for these missions. Again, I think these reviewers may have missed something covered briefly in the film itself, and then more in depth in the commentaries. The people picked were stable and generally the very best in their field. Something with gravity, radiation, or another undefined characteristic of the sun caused mental problems . . . this was the reason the second mission included a psychologist, and the reason he was experimenting with the impact of sunlight exposure. I also think the writer was using individuals to highlight various aspects of human nature, but that might just be me. All that being said, this is not a Star Wars type of film. If that is what you are looking for, you may well be disappointed. On the other hand, it is a bit less obscure in meaning and plot than films like Solaris, and maybe even a bit easier to grasp on the first viewing than 2001, and, for me at least, imparted much of the wonder and awe that those films did. To anyone choosing to see this film on DVD, I'd recommend watching it, and then watching it again (or at the very least, the last five minutes of it) with Cox's commentary. In my opinion his comments make a really enjoyable film even better.