I'm four episodes in and agree it's pretty weak. I think the acting is pretty good, but it doesn't hide the predicable plot, contrived drama, and stale dialogue.

The production values are barely good enough, not nearly as good as the Expanse for example. At some point, someone mentions "turning on" gravity even though the ship never spins. Are we inventing gravity fields in the next 10 years? It's also pretty obvious when they switch from CGI space floating to "let's all pretend and move around slowly like there's no gravity in this room." The outer space smartphone FaceTime is also pretty eye-rolling.

That said, I'm probably going to finish it!

Part of the ship does spin. But the other half of the ship would spin the other direction. They screwed that up.

Why would you pack 3 years of makeup in limited space when you can't bring very many things at all?

aTmAg said:

---

Part of the ship does spin. But the other half of the ship would spin the other direction. They screwed that up.

---

I finally saw that spinning in episode 5...

aTmAg said:

---

Part of the ship does spin. But the other half of the ship would spin the other direction. They screwed that up.

---

What's that? The pods that extend out from the ship all spin in one direction. Those are their dorms, and they have artificial gravity due to centrifugal force. The center of the ship doesn't spin and is still a weightless environment. I'm no scientist, but I think it all checks out.

double aught said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Part of the ship does spin. But the other half of the ship would spin the other direction. They screwed that up.

---

What's that? The pods that extend out from the ship all spin in one direction. Those are their dorms, and they have artificial gravity due to centrifugal force. The center of the ship doesn't spin and is still a weightless environment. I'm no scientist, but I think it all checks out.

---

So if there was no tail rotor on a helicopter, then the blades would spin one direction and the rest of the helicopter would spin in the other direction. The tail rotor, in effect, holds the helicopter "still" so the blades can turn at full speed.

A rotorless helicopter is pretty much what we have with the ship in this show. Each part of the ship should rotate in opposite direction in proportional to their moment of inertia. That's why in 2001, the whole ship rotates in the same direction. Arthur C. Clarke knew what he was doing when he wrote that.

Apparently others do care, as they asked about it.

Also hydrolics are ridiculously strong. That wouldn't be a problem. Keeping balance would be a bigger problem.

And the scene of collecting snowflakes with static electricity was preposterous. Why not just stick the bag over the nozzle?

I'm guesssing that was so they could properly tether without going to far from the door of the ship. Idk.

The melodrama was a little thick at times, but overall I thought it was really well done. Great ending. I'm in for season 2.

nai06 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

double aught said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Part of the ship does spin. But the other half of the ship would spin the other direction. They screwed that up.

---

What's that? The pods that extend out from the ship all spin in one direction. Those are their dorms, and they have artificial gravity due to centrifugal force. The center of the ship doesn't spin and is still a weightless environment. I'm no scientist, but I think it all checks out.

---

So if there was no tail rotor on a helicopter, then the blades would spin one direction and the rest of the helicopter would spin in the other direction. The tail rotor, in effect, holds the helicopter "still" so the blades can turn at full speed.

A rotorless helicopter is pretty much what we have with the ship in this show. Each part of the ship should rotate in opposite direction in proportional to their moment of inertia. That's why in 2001, the whole ship rotates in the same direction. Arthur C. Clarke knew what he was doing when he wrote that.

---

who TF cares? Its a movie about a trip to mars and people are all pressed about the physics of everything. I feel like if you are going to nit pick a space/sci fi movie for accuracy maybe its not the genre for you.



Next you're going Ripley's exoskeleton couldn't have actually lifted all those loads due to the limitations of the hydraulics used

---

Have you not seen the books trekkies write on picking apart the science in it? That is exactly what real scifi nerds do. That is the point. It doesn't mean they dont like it.

Shai-Hulud said:

---

nai06 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

double aught said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Part of the ship does spin. But the other half of the ship would spin the other direction. They screwed that up.

---

What's that? The pods that extend out from the ship all spin in one direction. Those are their dorms, and they have artificial gravity due to centrifugal force. The center of the ship doesn't spin and is still a weightless environment. I'm no scientist, but I think it all checks out.

---

So if there was no tail rotor on a helicopter, then the blades would spin one direction and the rest of the helicopter would spin in the other direction. The tail rotor, in effect, holds the helicopter "still" so the blades can turn at full speed.

A rotorless helicopter is pretty much what we have with the ship in this show. Each part of the ship should rotate in opposite direction in proportional to their moment of inertia. That's why in 2001, the whole ship rotates in the same direction. Arthur C. Clarke knew what he was doing when he wrote that.

---

who TF cares? Its a movie about a trip to mars and people are all pressed about the physics of everything. I feel like if you are going to nit pick a space/sci fi movie for accuracy maybe its not the genre for you.



Next you're going Ripley's exoskeleton couldn't have actually lifted all those loads due to the limitations of the hydraulics used

---

Have you not seen the books trekkies write on picking apart the science in it? That is exactly what real scifi nerds do. That is the point. It doesn't mean they dont like it.

---

That doesn't make someone a "real" sci-fi nerd. It just makes for a miserable experience.

Finished it tonight. Good, but it could have been great. Got better as it went along. There were definitely some eye-rolling moments that could have been left out. ("If we don't take care of the Earth, it will look like Mars soon.") The acting saved a lot of it, esp the Russian guy.

The actress who played Mel (the nanny character) was also really good, if under appreciated. She saved a lot of the earth scenes.

I felt that the mission control scenes were way too loose and the least accurately portrayed. Of course, the model *had* to burst into flames. Is that cliche now?

rynning said:

---

Finished it tonight. Good, but it could have been great. Got better as it went along. There were definitely some eye-rolling moments that could have been left out. ("If we don't take care of the Earth, it will look like Mars soon.") The acting saved a lot of it, esp the Russian guy.

The actress who played Mel (the nanny character) was also really good, if under appreciated. She saved a lot of the earth scenes.

I felt that the mission control scenes were way too loose and the least accurately portrayed. Of course, the model *had* to burst into flames. Is that cliche now?

---

And they did it in mission control room? Not in a lab somewhere?

Away is officially a goner: https://deadline.com/2020/10/away-canceled-netflix-one-season-hilary-swank-space-drama-1234600145/

Not shocking, It wasn't awful but could have been so much better.

dcAg said:

---

Thats really disappointing. I enjoyed that show.

---

Well at least they got to Mars!

What's her name' husband in Away is the teenage love interest in "Don't tell mom the babysitter is dead"

West Point Aggie said:

---

dcAg said:

---

Thats really disappointing. I enjoyed that show.

---

Well at least they got to Mars!

What's her name' husband in Away is the teenage love interest in "Don't tell mom the babysitter is dead"

---

He will always be Dan Rydell

Or Knox Overstreet.

Dude has had a long run of success.

Tanya 93 said:

---

West Point Aggie said:

---

dcAg said:

---

Thats really disappointing. I enjoyed that show.

---

Well at least they got to Mars!

What's her name' husband in Away is the teenage love interest in "Don't tell mom the babysitter is dead"

---

He will always be Dan Rydell

---

That show needs to come back. Mix of old cast and new cast. Get cameos from actually ESPN people.

I figured they would pull a Mark Whatley for the second seaon

I wonder if they get home...

Nah, of course they get home! And there are many (one per episode?) drama-filled, life-threatening situations in which various characters get special attention to shine and save the flight, each in their own special way.

Wife and I watched. Our prediction for next season is lots of almost adultery drama.

Tanya 93 said:

---

West Point Aggie said:

---

dcAg said:

---

Thats really disappointing. I enjoyed that show.

---

Well at least they got to Mars!

What's her name' husband in Away is the teenage love interest in "Don't tell mom the babysitter is dead"

---

He will always be Dan Rydell

---

But he was such a baby face in the babysitter flick!