Thanks for the memories!

Excellent but underrated film

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

The plot was not good.The special effects weren't.The acting was... not very good at all.Like others, I felt there were numerous holes in the plot that you could fly, well, a space shuttle through.I thought the ending was rather unbelievable.By the way guys, about the "blow torch in space".Blow torches have their own supply of oxygen (Hence the name "Oxy-Acetylene torch"). Two hoses run from the torch: One to an acetylene bottle and one to an oxygen bottle.So a "blow torch" would work just fine in space.

Look, there are those who tell you "Don't watch this" or "It's the worst movie ever!" who in my opinion don't have a life! The bottom line is the movie is just plan good entertainment. Yes, the premise can be questioned at some points, but I have seen a lot worse than this one. As for TV movies, this is one of the better films I have enjoyed in a long time. I enjoyed the visuals, the acting was believable, and I was entertained. Some parts of the movie are far-fetched but that was most of fiction is. This is not based on a true story, and if Jerry B. had more time than 2 months to make it than it probably would have been better. Comparing it to Apollo 13 is not fair. This is fiction, Apollo 13 was based on actual events. I enjoyed this one more than Armageddon, which in my opinion was total crap!! If all you you do is pick it apart then you won't like it. This is worth seeing. I taped it off TV so I get to enjoy when I Like.

This film laboured along with some of the most predictable story lines and shallow characters ever seen. The writer obviously bought the playbook "How to write a space disaster movie" and followed it play by play. In particular, the stereo-typical use of astronauts talking to their loved ones from outer space - putting on a brave show in the face of disaster - has been done time and time again.Max Q appears to have been written in the hope that the producers would throw $50 million at the project. But, judging by the latter half of the film which contained numerous lame attempts at special effects, the producers could only muster $50 thousand. To learn that the film was nominated for a "Special Visual Effects" Emmy has me absolutely gob-smacked.I think a handful of high school students with a pass in Media Studies could have created more believable effects!And the plot holes are too numerous to mention. But I will pick one out as an example. Now, I'm no NASA expert, but surely it's highly implausible that a worker attached to the shuttle simulator would suddenly hold a position of power in the control room when things start to go pear-shaped with the program. Surely there is someone more experienced at Mission Control who the Program Director would call on rather than a twenty-nine year old who has not been in the control room before.The only saving grace for this film is the work of Bill Campbell. He manages to make a good attempt at salvaging something out of the train wreck that is this script.I give this film 2 out of 10, with the above-average work of Bill Campbell in the lead role saving it from a lower mark.

Obviously the writers of this mulch had this brief - "Imagine Apollo 13 but on the shuttle with a sexy imperiled crew trying to get back to earth". If this sounds stupid, that is because it is.Throw in some dreadful special effects, a low budget, a total disregard for reality & physics and a plot which consists of one over the top crisis after the next and a happy ending. The actors however do make the best of a bad situation, but this one is a total dud.