It's hard to write a review of capsule explaining why it's bad and yet not giving too much away that might be regarded as a spoiler. To this end, I'm going suggest that there might be a spoiler here and leave others to judge if there isn't (best be safe and all that - I hate spoilers even for films that are several years old.) This is, ostensibly, a low-budget film but budget must never be an excuse. We're quick to judge big-budget films on storytelling but somehow we let low-budget off the hook. A BBC reviewer described my first short film (made for practically nothing) had interesting effects but lacked a story. 40 years on those words stay with me because they are the truth.
Capsule has a terrible case of a great idea that's been stretched beyond its own meagre abilities.
POSSIBLE SPOILERS FOLLOW: From the get-go, we're asked to believe that the Brits. had managed to get a guy into space before the Americans or Russians. This is patently ludicrous because it's never really explained how (even in the 1950s) a a tiny country could build and launch a rocket of sufficient power to get a guy into orbit without a single soul noticing.
It's tough to suspend that sort of disbelief because, while it's central to the wafer-thin plot, it's too close to home. We allow for aliens, spaceships and time warp in science fiction because we have never seen them. We have seen NASA put men on the moon and we've seen the size of rockets used to put even small payloads into orbit.
If we allow the filmmakers that one - and the awful systems design - there is worse.
Kingsley's character hasn't got so much of the Right Stuff: he's got all the wrong stuff. The man is a weed: a bag of nerves who I wouldn't trust to change a fuse or fly a remote controlled plane, let alone go solo into space.
Now if that sounds harsh, it's important to realise that we're being asked to imagine a seasoned pilot who is not only skilled but brave. This character is neither and no attempt to explain it away with the effects of hypoxia is going to convince me otherwise.
The "twist" isn't so much a twist as an explanation of why this entire convoluted plot unfolded as it did. In effect, what you have here is a fairly run-of-the-mill short story that's been stretched out to a full-length film. I think Hollywood Verge, in describing it as "a gripping tour de force" must have been watching a different movie!
The responsibility for this dire affair rests entirely on the shoulders of the writer/director and especially the producers It would be unfair to criticise the actors or crew. For a low-budget film, it's skillfully crafted and shot. That it doesn't look amateurish is probably what saved it from being savaged by other critics. Little wonder this went direct to DVD... and mine is direct to eBay.
Capsule has a terrible case of a great idea that's been stretched beyond its own meagre abilities.
POSSIBLE SPOILERS FOLLOW: From the get-go, we're asked to believe that the Brits. had managed to get a guy into space before the Americans or Russians. This is patently ludicrous because it's never really explained how (even in the 1950s) a a tiny country could build and launch a rocket of sufficient power to get a guy into orbit without a single soul noticing.
It's tough to suspend that sort of disbelief because, while it's central to the wafer-thin plot, it's too close to home. We allow for aliens, spaceships and time warp in science fiction because we have never seen them. We have seen NASA put men on the moon and we've seen the size of rockets used to put even small payloads into orbit.
If we allow the filmmakers that one - and the awful systems design - there is worse.
Kingsley's character hasn't got so much of the Right Stuff: he's got all the wrong stuff. The man is a weed: a bag of nerves who I wouldn't trust to change a fuse or fly a remote controlled plane, let alone go solo into space.
Now if that sounds harsh, it's important to realise that we're being asked to imagine a seasoned pilot who is not only skilled but brave. This character is neither and no attempt to explain it away with the effects of hypoxia is going to convince me otherwise.
The "twist" isn't so much a twist as an explanation of why this entire convoluted plot unfolded as it did. In effect, what you have here is a fairly run-of-the-mill short story that's been stretched out to a full-length film. I think Hollywood Verge, in describing it as "a gripping tour de force" must have been watching a different movie!
The responsibility for this dire affair rests entirely on the shoulders of the writer/director and especially the producers It would be unfair to criticise the actors or crew. For a low-budget film, it's skillfully crafted and shot. That it doesn't look amateurish is probably what saved it from being savaged by other critics. Little wonder this went direct to DVD... and mine is direct to eBay.