To begin with, some positives: the cast did pretty well with what they were given, most of the subplots were interesting and resolved pretty well, and unlike a lot of similar movies, the emotional layers were played realistically.So this is not irredeemable, but as with all science fiction, it lives or dies on the science.There are three ways it can work: 1). I don't care if a movie goes for fantasy science, as long as it is upfront about it and tries to be consistent, or 2). even bad science where the science is fudged for the sake of the story, IF the story is a fun ride. Obviously 3). Good science throughout is best, but how many movies manage that?This piece tries for option 3, with detailed scientific explanations everywhere, but almost every use of science is wrong. As other reviews show, some people can look past that. Personally the rest of the movie is not good enough to cut them that much slack and in any event I just found the constant stream of errors grate more and more as the film went on. It was almost as is the writers thought that they could just say anything and no-one would notice.I really don't want to pick the details apart, but one example to highlight my irritation.The basic premise is that a small piece of highly dense material hits the moon and wackiness ensues. Firstly they call it Brown Dwarf Star material, which is not super dense. The description isn't of that material, but instead of dead cold star material - a black dwarf. That is fine, except that astrophysicists don't think it actually exists yet. Instead of Black Dwarfs there are White Dwarfs, which would be OK for the plot, except you can easily see them. They might have meant Neutron Star material, except that would have been way heavier that they wanted (mass of Sun not Earth) which would wreck the rest of the plot.Secondly, whichever option they actually meant, something that dense, that fast hitting the moon is likely to shatter it and keep on going. Funnier would be that if the fragment hit the moon and stuck as in the film its momentum (remembering that the fragment was 6-10 times heavier than the moon) would knock the moon completely out of orbit.Lastly, the object has to be a fragment of White Dwarf/Neutron Star/whatever as a whole one is way too big for the plot to work. The only problem with that is how on earth you break a piece off of one of the densest objects in the universe.It feels nit-picky to go through things like this, but the same is true of every part of the plot that is science-Dependant. By the time the tanker started floating, while the water nearby was unaffected, and non-metallic objects were flying around, while cars were not, I was not sure whether I should laugh or cry.

This is actually a good movie. I don't care if it cannot be "scientifically justified", Star Trek cannot be either - that's why these things are called science fiction! The plot is good, the cast is good, the execution and production almost flawless for this type of movie. It goes hand in hand with "Official Denial" and similar relatively modest movies. Getting a planet, any planet out of its trajectory is quite plausible scenario. This movie exploits such possibility and it does it quite well. You may enjoy the movie or end up endlessly analyzing it, it is up to you.

As much as I love disaster movies, I have to say this one was a flop. Faulty science (totally ridiculous at times), bad script, horrible acting (notwithstanding a rather 'stellar' cast for this type of movie) all add up to a real disaster. The story is not believable, there is no drama created, the whole thing just seems tacky to put it mildly. Even the HD cinematography is not good, the special f/x (important for such movies) seem to have been done in the 70's when CGI wasn't even a theoretical possibility... I could go on and on, but there is no point. There is absolutely nothing I found really worthwhile in this film.Just skip it.

After reading some other spoilers here, I was skeptical and I caught a couple of blown lines, like at the end when Alex tells Sergei, "We're not leaving anyone behind..." that was the greatest line screwup of the whole film since the mission commander just took an accelerated gravity fall over a cliff never to be seen again so sorry Alex, but yes you are leaving someone behind...nice marine line though...Semper Fi!!! Hoo-Ah!Still the screen writer said in the extras, he actually went to some actual astro-physicists to check the plausibility.Now here we have all these great scientific minds in reviewing her and I ask, have you ever fired a high powered rifle into the sand on a beach or your back yard or through an oak tree or an handgun unto a clay block to examine expansion damage?Same principle as your brown matter and the only brown matter any of you pseudo-scientists have come in close contact with in this life is while wiping your butt each daily dump.I can assure you, that a lead or a depleted uranium round will in fact stop at some point in the sand and not blow a hole to the earth's core, so take that smart guys!It's called suspension of disbelief and the term was coined a couple, few hundred years back and still hold true for movie enjoyment.And since we're all just having fun, Did you notice the rack on Natasha Henstridge. My god is she fine. I would have googled some bikini pictures of her a long time ago had I noticed that rocking body, but I don't watch television regularly...just movies and this isn't so bad and is actually kind of fun in spots.To all the "experts" here, you can tell us all how dense brown matter actually is after you wash it off your hands next time okay? A lot of space science is speculative and it changes constantly unlike some other areas of science. Theories come and go on a daily basis.Let's not pretend they are carved in stone.