‘Stowaway’ Review: Star-Studded Space Film Does Little to Impress
Despite a great cast and blissful IMAGERY, the impact of ‘Stowaway’ is dulled by an uninspired story.
Whenever I think of space movies, I’m drawn back to Brian De Palma’s incredibly underrated “Mission to Mars”. Its beautiful mise-en-scène of the desolate and incredibly unpredictable world of Mars is unparalleled, and rivals the like of recent space films such as Christopher Nolan’s “Interstellar”. The latest Netflix film, “Stowaway”, tries to emulate De Palma’s aesthetics from “Mission to Mars”, presenting space as a purely empty and danger-filled world in which humanity is almost never prepared to face its hardships. The resulting story, unfortunately, becomes contrived.
Three astronauts (Daniel Dae Kim, Toni Collette, and Anna Kendrick) are headed to Mars, when they discover a stowaway astronaut named Michael (Shamier Anderson) shortly after their ship takes off. Their oxygen supply is quickly diminishing (since the ship was only made for three astronauts), which prompts the astronauts to ask themselves what to do with Michael. A moral debate ensues, which isn’t as interesting as writer/director Joe Penna and co-writer Ryan Morrison think it is.
Within 30 minutes, it’s clear that “Stowaway” has nothing to say about the mission at-hand, about space, or even about the central figure sharing the film’s title. By the time the film actually kicks off, after spending too much time half-explaining what the goals of the mission are, all we’re treated is a will they/won’t they debate on whether or not Michael should be killed to preserve the mission. Kim’s David and Collette’s Marina always make the most selfish decisions, and do not care if Michael survives or not. Because of this, the analysis on the moral aspects of preserving a mission, even if it means taking someone’s life, feels superficial, monotonous, and almost nonexistent.
The only character that seems to care about Michael’s life, and who will do whatever it takes to save him, is Kendrick’s Zoe, who shares terrific chemistry with Anderson. Their scenes are imbued with so much humanity that you can’t help but admire the care the filmmakers establish in building trust between the two characters, which grows in a somewhat compelling relationship. That’s not to say that the other actors don’t do a good job. They do, but the material Kim and Collette are given is so uninspired that they barely have anything to work with. They do make the most of their screen time, in particular when they are faced with tough decisions.
Their selfishness seems to take the better of them, but they are still guilt-ridden with the mere possibility of committing murder. It’s slightly interesting, but not as interesting as the film will make you believe it is. Since there isn’t really anything for the audience to invest themselves in, it doesn’t feel like any event happening in Stowaway will hold any weight to them. This comes to a head in the film’s climax, where Zoe and David try to fill canisters with the remaining oxygen left in a booster-stage vehicle. There’s a palpable tension where the astronauts try to land on a REMO, in the emptiness of space, after abandoning the ship. However, if you’ve seen De Palma’s film, which masterfully combined the luscious, almost hypnotizing canvas of space with incredible suspense, there’s no reason to watch “Stowaway” rip off the scene.
Of course, the movie has some merit: its visual effects are quite good; the opening “launch” scene is expertly directed, with the focus being on the astronauts, rather than the openness of space, to set up its isolated setting; and the acting is solid from four highly talented actors. It’s just a shame that everything fizzles out so quickly, and the material the film seems indebted to is much better than the way “Stowaway” delivers it. “Mission to Mars” is not one of De Palma’s most popular films, but it’s certainly one to watch instead of streaming “Stowaway” this weekend.