Although I was also curious about how the sentient arm knew that the gyroscope was inside Volkov

It was impossible for me to watch Mundy without seeing him as Roy from The IT Crowd.[

I was also a bit suspicious of how they managed to deorbit that escape pod by performing a radial burn using RCS thrusters only, but maybe I'm just being pedantic.

There were other things that stuck out for me... remember those worms? How the hell did they get there! And the creeping arm with a mind of its own... that was a reincarnation of "Thing", the disembodied hand stolen from the Addams Family. I thought the stowaway was contrived, and why would the crew trust an alien stranger?

Anyway, it was OK for the syfy genre and the sets looked pretty good, but I thought the plot was thin and the premise was sketchy. Still, it was moderately entertaining with spots in unintentional comedy and some suspenseful bits, even though it ended with a lackluster fizzle.

I mean, sure it is, but if the film makes a basic nod toward the "science" part of it, then glaring errors need to be accounted for, at least in broad terms.

Explosions don't make a sound in space, of course, but we accept those flashy booms as a conceit of the genre. The current film's bit about "free energy" is a mulligan that we accept just as we accept the otherwise dubious jump to a neighboring dimension. The quasi-sentient magnetic putty grabbing and violating Mundy was a little weird, but ok. I guess.

I was also happy to see that when Kiel detached the maintenance ring, it drifted away from the ship in a straight line, rather than continuing to orbit it like the debris from the earlier explosion was shown to do.

But there's no precedent in film, nor any explanation offered, for the insta-freeze, nor do they explain how a ~6000 gallon chamber could flood in ~45 seconds, given the output of the pipes as shown onscreen! However, they could easily have explained the freeze as an "anomalous energy drain" or something equivalent due to the action of the collider. But because they didn't say it, and since it happened exactly when the outer hatch blew, we can conclude that it was supposed to be due to the sudden vacuum.

I like them all, from Hard Science to Soft Science Fiction, Space Operas and Steampunk, alternate histories, most are good reads for an little escape. Science fiction stories frequently jump around several subgenres, so it didn't really bother me if the storyline switched from hardcore science to grab a startling visual for effect. The unexplained plot discrepancies were more distracting for me. Compared to many syfy films -- and to be honest, there's a disproportionate number of howlers out there -- like I said, this one wasn't that bad, especially for a film that went straight to the internet.

Without downplaying the plot discrepancies (which are many and profound), the flooded airlock scene in particular demands that we question what else might be "wrong" in the setting.

What other well-established scientific principles should we ignore? We can kind of throw gravity out the window, because the crew are shown walking on a flat surface with apparently Earth-normal gravity throughout the ship (rather than occupying the rotating rings, which would simulate gravity). Hell, they actually jump down to the the damaged (and soon to be jettisoned) maintenance ring, directly perpendicular to whatever gravity they might be creating!

How can we know how to gauge any situation in the film, once the writers have shown that they don't give a shit about the underlying physics?

I've been a sci-fi fan for decades, so I "get" the need to make certain concessions when watching/reading the genre. But suspension of disbelief isn't some panacea for curing all bad writing; it's meant to allow the viewer to accept certain "facts" necessary to enjoy the story.

An overview: http://www.hpac.com/galleries/hvac-popular-movies-did-hollywood-get-it-right

From Jurassic Park:

Two big ones for me are the way films handle lava and (at the other extreme) cold water.

Lava can apparently melt metal and rock, but regular folks can stand by as an entire river of the stuff flows by at arm's reach. Ambient temperature would probably be bout 700° or so, yet people are hanging out like it's no big deal.

Other movies will go to lengths to explain that the cold water will kill someone in minutes, yet when it becomes convenient for the plot, people can swim or wade chest-deep through that exact same water without harm. James Cameron did this in both The Abyss and Titanic.

I'm not a scientist nor an engineer, but these things really jump out at me. I would imagine that it's much worse for audience members with actual technical expertise!

Or the impossibly huge exhaust fan that is running at 10 RPM.

The engineers of that room in MI could have also invested in a few cameras to see if anyone was, y'know, dangling from the ceiling.

WERE THEY SCARY?

I also had the misfortune of watching The Cloverfield Paradox. Remember the name Oren Uziel, and, if you see anything written by him, run the other way as quickly as possible. Great sets, relatively good actors, and quite possibly the worst science fiction script since Plan 9.