Dissapointed with Europa report ( 2013 )
This is a film I had planned to watch several times, but for some reason it always slipped out of my sight. Eventually, I finally sat down and watched it. Unfortunately, I ended up somewhat disappointed, for reasons I’ll explain below.
Europa is an incredibly fascinating moon, and I genuinely hope I live long enough to see humanity either set foot there or at least send a robust probe capable of drilling through its ice. To be honest, I’ve never fully understood the obsession with Mars when we have such a far more intriguing destination in Jupiter’s moon Europa. Precisely because of this, I had high expectations for the film. I hoped for an interesting story with moderate, grounded science fiction.
The premise itself is promising: the first crewed mission to Europa, where a subsurface ocean and potential life are suspected.
This review contains story information.
My overall rating: 5.7
Plot and Narrative Logic
The film follows a clear storyline, but several elements feel deeply illogical. If humanity has the technology to send six people to Jupiter aboard such a complex spacecraft, it’s reasonable to expect far more contingency solutions for potential failures.
The first major issue is the malfunction that leads to Corrigan’s death. The entire sequence feels rushed and artificial. It becomes painfully obvious something will happen to him the moment we’re introduced to his family early on, while most of the other crew members barely get their names established. It comes across as a cheap attempt to provoke an emotional response.
I also find it absurd that such an advanced spacecraft lacks easy internal access to critical systems. Sending humans such an unimaginable distance without planning for every possible repair scenario feels unrealistic and poorly thought out.
Another frustrating point is the handling of data transmission. A mission of this magnitude shouldn’t feel half–suicidal by design. Sending people there is one thing, but I strongly doubt their first task would be to descend to the surface. In reality, multiple probes and automated systems would likely be deployed first to drill, analyze, and transmit data to orbit. The crew should be supervising the process — not rushing headfirst into danger.
It’s also unclear why communication with the ship — and Earth — fails so easily. I’m not a fan of artificially created problems, and this felt particularly cheap.
That said, the plot does maintain a consistent direction and never completely derails. There are no outrageous twists, but there is a strong sense of predictability throughout. Out of a possible 2 points for this section, I’d give 0.7.
The Science Fiction Aspect
Here, the film performs noticeably better. The science fiction elements feel grounded and reasonably well thought out. The spacecraft has a believable design, and the technologies presented don’t veer into fantasy. The scientific concepts are restrained and sensible.
What’s missing, however, is any meaningful development of the company funding the mission. Why is a private corporation financing such an endeavor? Are space resources being commercially exploited? Is Earth facing a severe water crisis? None of this is explained.
Despite that, the film does create the impression of a world larger than the story we’re shown — even if it never explores that depth. Importantly, the sci-fi actively drives the plot. For that reason, I give this section 1.5 points.
Characters and Dialogue
This is where the film disappointed me the most. The characters exist primarily to move the story forward, but most of them feel flat and underdeveloped. Their personalities often seem like tools for forced conflict rather than authentic human behavior.
Take Andrei Blok, for example. While his reaction to Corrigan’s death is understandable, these aren’t random people pulled off the street. They should be highly trained professionals selected for an extreme mission. His psychological fragility feels exaggerated.
Several characters are difficult to remember at all — William Xu, Katya Petrovna, and Daniel Luxembourg among them. I honestly couldn’t tell what Daniel contributed to the mission. He feels like filler, included simply to increase the crew count.
Katya often came across as someone who just does whatever she wants. There’s no clear hierarchy, and the command structure feels oddly undefined.
Dialogue is functional at best — characters say what they’re doing and what needs to be done. Nothing more, nothing less. In modern cinema, that might even be considered a strength, but here it leaves the film emotionally hollow. 0.6 points.
Themes and Motivation
There are, however, a few strong points worth highlighting:
- The story is focused and doesn’t rely on hidden messages or secondary narratives.
- Events are conveyed visually without unnecessary exposition.
- The crew’s eventual sacrifice is predictable, but still satisfying.
For this category, I’m comfortable giving a full 2 points.
Cinematography and Presentation
This was another major disappointment for me. I strongly dislike films presented in a pseudo-documentary or “found footage” style, where we’re always watching from the most convenient camera angle. It kills immersion and creates emotional distance — you observe the story instead of experiencing it.
That said, the space visuals and external shots are excellent, especially considering the film was released in 2013.
The pacing is solid, and there were no moments where I felt the story dragged. The music was decent but occasionally absent when it could have helped. Atmosphere was inconsistent, largely due to the documentary-style presentation.
0.9 points.
Conclusion
It’s possible my expectations were simply too high. Had I approached the film with lower expectations, I might not have been as critical. Europa Report doesn’t rank among my favorite sci-fi films, but I do hope we’ll see more stories centered around Europa in the future.
Final score: 5.7 / 10