Scarecrow-88 I don't think there isn't anything more infuriating than knowing that simply postponing a launch could have prevented death; that brilliant astronauts would die on the Challenger when it could have been delayed for another time (cold weather and o-rings; it'd seem like a joke if it weren't for the fact that astronauts perished). Physicist Richard Feynman (played in the film by William Hurt in a wig), dying of cancer (possibly related to his days on the Manhattan Project, assisting in mathematic computation, responsible for developing the A-bomb), is brought into the "Rogers Commission" as an independent analyst (while the rest of this group have allegiances and ties to various political/scientific associates/associations, his voice is undeterred by such influences) and he discovers answers that led to the supposed necessity of launching the Challenger that dark day in 1986. With heavy emphasis on Feynman's prospective (it is all from his point of view and through his experiences on the Rogers Commission) during the search for truth (and ability to explain to an audience that can understand and listen to such truth), The Challenger Disaster is an absorbing docudrama that can explain to a cable/television audience the unfortunate mistakes by NASA management to launch a flight that was doomed to be a tragedy. Arranged like a difficult pursuit for the truth, this docudrama, through Hurt's performance, essays Feynman's frustrations and roadblocks that often interrupt and interfere informing others of NASA management's miscalculations when their own scientists had differing analysis/calculations regarding the launch of Challenger and its "resilient" rubber o-ring capability. While Hurt adds pauses when reciting the words of Feynman (when the real Feynman is shown describing the miscalculation in the o-ring, he's more assertive and delivers authoritatively), he provides insight into the anguish behind the scenes when cancer was taking away time he could spend with family while giving him incentive to get to the truth (and out there to the masses) before it runs out. I really found the film informative and the results haunting. I think it was the right idea to follow the one man with no outside influences to hide secrets for. There's even a Deep Throat who provided the information about the o-ring and an Air Force general (Bruce Greenwood) behind a spy-satellite project (Titan) both of whom just might assist Feynman in his pursuit. Directed like an unfolding mystery, The Challenger Disaster is worth checking out if you are familiar with that sad bit of American space program history (I was a kid when it happened and I have never forgotten that moment). Playing currently on "Science" & "Discovery" channels, if it's on give it a watch. Also starring Brian Dennehy as the head of the Rogers Commission and Joanne Whalley as Feynman's wife. Good cast, and the obvious discomfort of many people involved in a possible cover up is a major component in Feynman's agony and ecstasy when the final results come out and expose serious logic errors…logic errors that sent astronauts to their deaths.

iwhoknows After the dramatic opening scenes where realism is achieved by using actual footage of the "Challenger disaster", the movie slowly develops as the audience begins to realize that what they are experiencing is not merely a factual drama/documentary about an unfortunate malfunction, but rather a thriller with "Good Guys" and "Villains" The choice of William Hurt to play Richard Feynman was brilliant. Hurt is acknowledged as a character actor who lives and breathes every role that he accepts and as the movie progresses it is remarkable that the viewer becomes so involved with the character that they actually forget that it is an impersonation. Hurt who in real life is a complex, some say awkward person, brings aspects of his own complexity to the role.Joanne Whalley is supportive as his wife, but the story is very much that of theoretical physicist Richard Feynman.Bruce Greenwood is a vital link in the whole drama. He deserves a lot of credit for his strong portrayal of General Kutyna a disciplined loyal military man who acts as the catalyst for the truth to prevail. Greenwood looks like he was born in a uniform. He assumes the role as naturally as if he'd taken leave from the battlefield to make the movie.Eve Best provides a solid and sensitive performance as Sally Ride (First woman in space). Her role in the Rogers Commission remains a mystery and we only learn of it just before the credits roll.Brian Dennehy as William P. Rogers (Chairman and, former secretary of state) exudes the physical appearance of a persuasive man who has his own agenda and delivers a powerful performance. Dennehy is a master at conveying meaning in a story merely through the raising of an eyebrow, a glint in his eye or a subtle shift of body position.One needs to make special mention of the good performance by many of the South Africans who were used in supporting roles. In particular Robert Hobbs who plays Allan J Macdonald a man torn between doing what is right whilst realizing the personal cost that might result.There is no mention of the members who made up the "Rogers Commission". (Not even in the credits). The commission was comprised of some of the most influential members of the military and should surely be identified.James Hawes directs with firmness and allows the story to flow and develop with fascinating insights into Feynman the scientist, but also Feynman the man and husband who had to fight his own person battles as a subplot.Lukas Strebel camera shots are interesting. I feel the use of camera positioning where half the frame is blocked was at first novel, but maybe repeated too often and in some scenes it would have been better to allow the subject to take up the full frame.The ending comes suddenly almost as if the editor had to condense the material into exactly 90 TV minutes. It is rumored that there might be a movie release where the running time will increase to 120 minutes. The Challenger is scheduled for the Discovery channel in the USA in November. Most probably renamed "73" – (Challenger broke apart 73 seconds into its flight).

PHASEDK I remember where I was at work when the disaster happened, I've read everything there is, and early on knew.. so watching this apparently first airing of this sensitive event on UK TV tonight.Firstly, who was brave enough to do it.. BBC? I guess its time and the facts have been in the public eye for years. Yes, this seems to be a very accurate depiction of what must have happened as it happened. This TV airing has lasted an hour and a half.. not two hours, so what was dropped I wonder. Enough to make me want to buy a DVD if released? Maybe.William Hurt was so good as the knowing he was up against authority physics expert. One feels for him, and know the usual reactions of, oh no, what will he stir up. Everything about this 90 min version worked, I hope the 120 min version works too.

johnmcc150 How times flies when watching a good film! The story is compelling because it is based on real events, though the sets, script and acting also all contributed. The result is not only moving but you get a great insight into the dilemmas and vested interests that can exist at top of government and management. The film is based on the last of Feynman's autobiographical works "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" so it is told from his perspective. The film shows how Feynman was pointed in the right direction. However the story is more complicated. For example there was not time to mention the role of Roger Boisjoly of Morton Thiokol who wrote a damning report about the O-rings six months before the disaster. The report was ignored. He lectured on work-place ethics.William Hurt is physically similar Richard Feynman and did incredibly well with his impersonation. You can see Feynman in action in videos of him lecturing to a lay audience in Auckland and judge for yourself. Feynman died one year and nine months after the publication of the Rogers Commission Report with his appendix, and sadly his wife Gweneth also died the following year.