The Martian - Grading & Discussion

[BeatleJWOL]

And the intensity of the windstorms was hugely exaggerated. The Martian atmosphere is a hundredth as dense as Earth's. Even a very fast windstorm wouldn't hit with a lot of force. They kept talking about how thin the atmosphere was, but the visible effects and loud sounds of the wind belied that, creating the impression of an atmosphere of Earthlike density. It was an odd contradiction.

The whole "unrealistic Martian storm" issue has been present since the book was written. Andy Weir has said he was made aware of the problem but felt that it was the only (or the best) way to really kick off the story.

No fault of the movie, it's a "problem" built into the source material that doesn't really have a workaround.

 

[Christopher]

^It's not just the storm at the beginning, it's practically every scene in the movie where there's wind blowing. It looked and sounded like wind in an Earthlike atmosphere, and the contrast between that and the repeated dialogue about the lack of atmosphere pulled me out of the story. That's not on Weir, that's on Scott.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Yeah, that could have been fixed, but I guess it was done for spectacle, which is odd since everything else about it is well done.

And I agree about Jessica Chastain. I'd have picked someone like Gillian Anderson. It just didn't come across that she had much experience and more like she was fresh out of astronaut training.

 

[intrinsical]

^It's not just the storm at the beginning, it's practically every scene in the movie where there's wind blowing. It looked and sounded like wind in an Earthlike atmosphere, and the contrast between that and the repeated dialogue about the lack of atmosphere pulled me out of the story. That's not on Weir, that's on Scott.

If you really want to nitpick, Mark Whatney should be bounding a bit more on the surface of Mars due to its lower gravity, and dust should be flying with every step. Ridley Scott acknowledges this in one of the interviews he did. Basically, it boiled down to a cost vs realism issue. The film would cost a lot more in terms of both time and money if he had to spend time developing mechanisms to emulate Mars realistically.

 

[Commander Richard]

Would have been nice if he had.

 

[Gov Kodos]

Not really. Jacking up the budget ridiculously for some special effects only the nerdiest will notice and fewer still of them will care about really isn't a good directorial decision. I am glad Scott didn't bother.

 

[Trekker4747]

I don't think much was lost by not depicting Mars's lesser gravity. Also, at the end of the day, it'd also look fairly silly even if it was accurate. Some lip-service could have been played like Watney being able to better lift heavier objects and such, but there was little need to show him bounding around in Mars's lesser gravity.

The air-pressure thing is sort of an issue, like the cover on the hatch "sucking" in and out in a storm as he counts the potatoes struck me as odd but, again, sometimes drama has to win over realism. I do think some set of circumstances could have been come up with to trap him on Mars, though, without showing the wind to have been so strong as to dislodge the dish. It being blinding levels of dust and maybe he falls, misjudges where something is, trips, whatever and then gets impaled and they lose his medical sensor and can't find him again.

 

[Christopher]

I just generally despair of Hollywood filmmakers ever understanding how air works. They constantly get it wrong. Like thermodynamics -- assuming that people can be standing right next to a bed of lava or a fiery explosion and be perfectly find as long as the lava/flame doesn't directly touch them, ignoring the fact that the atmosphere would be conducting the heat and would roast them quite thoroughly. Or, same with explosions, ignoring the concussive force of the blast wave propagating through the atmosphere, which is far more damaging than the visible fireball itself. And it gets even worse when they have to deal with the absence of air in a vacuum -- sound in space, roiling explosions in space, explosive decompression myths, Superman's cape waving in space, etc.

That's why the Hermes decompression scene was so refreshing -- they actually got it right there. Usually when you see a scene of a spaceship venting atmosphere, it's a powerful wind that lasts for up to several minutes, but that's wrong. It's more like a balloon bursting or a water heater rupturing -- an abrupt release that's over in moments. That's why it's called explosive decompression. It doesn't mean that people blow up in vacuum like in Outland or Total Recall, it means that the air empties out very quickly in one single blast. They even had the air fog up as the decompression cooled the air and caused the moisture to condense, which is something that's often observed in aircraft that undergo sudden decompression. (That doesn't always happen, though, and I'm not sure it would've happened in conditions like this. It may have been a bit of a fudge to make the effect more visible. But if so, it was still grounded in plausible science.) They really did their homework there and made sure to get it right, which is why it disappoints me they didn't try harder to get across the near-airlessness of Mars. It's really contradictory to have the characters talk about the lack of atmosphere and then cut to a scene where there's a loud and forceful windstorm outside.

 

[Trekker4747]

The science was pretty good overall, but that just called my attention to the bits that weren't as accurate. Watney's line about "imploding" if the habitat depressurized was bizarre.

I took that as more him being glib rather than articulating what would really happen, the guy obviously had a sense of humor on him.

I do agree that it's frustrating the movie was both refreshingly accurate when it came to a lot of the physics and such of space travel and even on how a real-world Mars mission would likely work (by sending stuff there in blocks rather than everything needed all at once.) Then ion-engine Hermes was great, and it would have been nice to have gotten some more info on it. (I saw the movie with my parents this past weekend and had to explain to them the type of engine the ship had is more efficient than rockets and while not "faster" is more practical than conventional rockets as well as it being possible for it to carry all of the fuel it'll ever need in a smaller space compared to conventional rockets.

In the book, it is mentioned how the Hermes did have some operational issues when going back to Mars as some pieces of it would have been replaced (filters and other parts that are used up by the trips) during a layover between missions and this didn't occur with the slingshot maneuver, the capsule only carried rations for the extended mission.

It is frustrating that Mars's thinner atmosphere wasn't well portrayed (though the "bulging" of improvised seal seemed to suggest the different air pressures. Had they meant to imply closer atmospheric pressures the tarp wouldn't have bulged out so tautly.

But, at the same time, there are just some things you have to wave away because some things are too big for most audiences to grasp without explanation and it's hard to have experts in extraplanetary travel explain to one another things like air pressure and why it'd make sound harder to travel. It's a balance and sometimes you have to deal with it.

It's more threatening to a character to have hurricane-force winds endangering his vulnerable habitat or to force the end of a mission than to say that, well these are fast winds but they're no threat whatsoever.

I think it made the balance more-or-less work. I know it's wrong but the drama of it still felt good. When Watney is counting his potatoes and he's hearing the wind blow on his tarp-sealed hatch you feel the tension here because of the notion there's not much protecting him right now, if the tarp doesn't hold it's all over. If it's flapping gently in the wind and he's like, "well the air pressure isn't enough to cause a blow out, but the dirt moving around so fast could cause some more erosion and degradation of the hatch, like putting it in a sandblaster. I hope it holds."

It's a push and shove. For me, it worked. I can forgive a lot when it comes to things if the movie is good enough. It would have been fantastic if it'd been more accurate but I don't think necessary.

I had to explain to a co-worker who saw the movie how it was Watney was able to survive the rocket-launch without the hatches on the capsule and how he can be hanging out of the capsule in orbit and moving at 1000s of miles an hour without it being dangerous.

The depiction of the decompression of the Hermes was really good, it was cool to see all of the air condense into a cloud and fly out in one burst and then seeing the ship slow.

 

[Commander Richard]

What else could Weir/Scott have done to strand Watney on Mars while getting the rest of the crew back to the ship? Any ideas?

 

[BeatleJWOL]

Sinkhole? Mars seems to be a pretty calm place IRL, doesn't seem to be a lot of drama there.

 

[Christopher]

It's more threatening to a character to have hurricane-force winds endangering his vulnerable habitat or to force the end of a mission than to say that, well these are fast winds but they're no threat whatsoever.

Yeah, but it doesn't make sense to make the lack of air an explicit and important plot point and to make strong wind a threat at the same time. It doesn't require a university degree to understand that wind is made of air. I think anyone above the age of three is pretty well aware of that fact. It's kind of like telling a story about someone dying of thirst in the desert and throwing in a rainstorm in between conversations about the near-complete lack of water.

I think it made the balance more-or-less work. I know it's wrong but the drama of it still felt good. When Watney is counting his potatoes and he's hearing the wind blow on his tarp-sealed hatch you feel the tension here because of the notion there's not much protecting him right now, if the tarp doesn't hold it's all over. If it's flapping gently in the wind and he's like, "well the air pressure isn't enough to cause a blow out, but the dirt moving around so fast could cause some more erosion and degradation of the hatch, like putting it in a sandblaster. I hope it holds."

I think the sound effect of sand and pebbles hitting the tarp would've conveyed the danger just as well. I'm sure a lot of viewers would've been wondering if that tarp was strong enough to hold. The explosion that blew the whole airlock module away was, I think, very effective at illustrating the danger of a blowout. After seeing that, I think any reasonably intelligent and observant viewer would recognize that a plastic sheet held on by duct tape is less strong than a big metal airlock module, and thus they'd be aware of what a tenuous fix it was. Indeed, the airlock blowout was preceded by a shot of a tear in the hull, so that would've primed the audience to be aware of the risk of a tear in the tarp. So having it bombarded by sand and the occasional pebble would sufficiently convey the risk that it might tear as well.

And if you ask me, the sound of a sandstorm spattering against the hull/tarp would probably be more alarming than the sound of wind. Think of the last time you were in a sleet or hailstorm. Was it a soothing sound?

 

[IcecreamLtDan]

Tulin wrote:
IcecreamLtDan wrote:
This movie .... may be the last movie I see this year, depending on reviews of the 007 movie

Uuuuuummmmmmmm.......there's this little thing called a "Star Wars" movie coming out later this year?!?!?!

Oh, I'll be going to see it, just can't until after the new year. Life and all that you know.

 

[Trekker4747]

What else could Weir/Scott have done to strand Watney on Mars while getting the rest of the crew back to the ship? Any ideas?

There being a massive sandstorm alone should have been enough, sandstorms on Mars can be damn severe even with the low air pressure as it can damage/degrade equipment (like I said, it can be likened to putting something in a sand-blaster) and sandstorms on Mars can envelop the entire planet and last for weeks or months. So any sandstorm during their mission, especially if it had reached higher categories, realistically wouldn't be a risk from the wind speeds but the presence of it alone could potentially negate anything they could do for the mission and could put their lives at risk if some of their equipment were to fail, or the storm had the potential to last long enough to make their solar cells incapable of maintaining their shelter.

So, not much needs to change. The characters determine that the storm is a mission-ending event given the risks of it and early indications show the storm has the potential of lasting a long time. Given the lag-time in communications to NASA the crew has the latitude to make the call to abort the mission in the name of their safety and Lewis makes the call to abort. (This could even play more into the "mini-arc" of her being nervous on her first mission as commander and unwilling to take risks or endanger the rest of the crew.)

Enroute to the MAV the electrical activity caused by the storm interferes with communications and restricts visibility making it difficult for everyone to see and communicate with one another. Watney, rather than being struck by flying debris -as realistically it wouldn't be moved by even the strongest of storms on Mars- trips, stumbles, falls or is otherwise made prone by trying to move through the storm, as he goes down he strikes the head and some other part of his suit on a rock, this not only knocks him out but damages the sensors on the suits (or he falls on one of the little flags around the camp that impales him, as the dish part does in the original movie) showing him to have a suit-breach and loss of life-signs to the rest of the crew, who cannot reacquire contact. Pretty much the rest plays out the same, they can't relocate him and the "window" for launching is narrowing (In this case, the MAV wouldn't be vulnerable to tipping due to the wind forces (which, why would this be a thing? Does this mean the MAV for the A-IV mission is standing there vulnerable to falling over if the right kind of storm comes along) as either the alignment between it and the Hermes is starting to become unideal for a rendezvous or the stronger part of the storm has yet to reach them yet and the conditions for launch are about as ideal as they're going to get. It's now or never. Lewis makes the tough choice to leave.

For his impalement, it may have to be when he falls he lands on the communications array, as that's why he was unable to contact NASA in the movie (the communications dish was damaged in the storm) and this would still need to be the case here. Or the communications system was dependent on the MAV which, being gone, can no longer allow him to contact NASA.

And if you ask me, the sound of a sandstorm spattering against the hull/tarp would probably be more alarming than the sound of wind. Think of the last time you were in a sleet or hailstorm. Was it a soothing sound?

Well, I like severe weather and I have a car-port so, yeah.

But, in storms when there's howling, strong, winds it can be a bit alarm when you consider trees, power lines, etc. around and how those howling, strong, winds when it comes to weather on Earth is almost always associated with very strong storms and tornadoes in the Mid-West and hurricanes in the south and east-coast during the right times of year. But, I'm not bothered by the sound of wind either.

But, in the movie the action of the tarp going in and out of the port as the winds howled struck me as something that would be alarming in that situation and it was easy to connect with. He's in this place and the thing between him and death is the tarp and it's flapping in and out of the hole in the storm.

The sound of any sandstorm would be loud and probably just as dangerous -or more so- but I don't think it'd convey the message as well. (Incidentally, there were numerous times in the movie where there were apparently sansstorms outside that we saw through the hab's windows along with lightning.)

 

[Owain Taggart]

Yeah, it's definitely a balance thing. As it is, I find it remarkable just how well and accurate the science is in general despite those things. The author went to great lengths to research things, and it shows.

 

[Trekker4747]

Yeah, it's definitely a balance thing. As it is, I find it remarkable just how well and accurate the science is in general despite those things. The author went to great lengths to research things, and it shows.

Indeed, and there's some good stuff in the books along those lines too and he does admit the storm in the beginning he had to flub in order to get the story moving (in the book it occurs in a recounting/flashback) but, as I said, I think it could have been done without having to sacrifice reality.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

If you really want to nitpick, Mark Watney should be bounding a bit more on the surface of Mars due to its lower gravity, and dust should be flying with every step. Ridley Scott acknowledges this in one of the interviews he did. Basically, it boiled down to a cost vs realism issue. The film would cost a lot more in terms of both time and money if he had to spend time developing mechanisms to emulate Mars realistically.

Would have been nice if he had.

Then he would have had to make an animated movie if he did, and I don't see Fox spending the money to do that after the failure of this 2001 movie.

 

[Trekker4747]

Finished reading the book last night, been busy the last few days so some large pauses in reading it. Good book, but I think it is lacking in not having an epilogue to wrap-up what happened after Mark got back to Earth. Granted the story isn't entirely focused on that, it's on his survival on Mars, but it seems odd that it just.... Ends.

I think the movie did a good adaptation of it not only in adding in the epilogue but in some of the other adjustments in the final challenges. I think having Lewis aid in the rescue herself works well for her "arc" in feeling guilty about leaving Mark behind and, I dunno, as ridiculous as it is and unlikely as it is to work, I like the "Iron Man" stunt Mark pulls to get to the Hermes, it'd be slightly anti-climatic that they just go over there, pluck him up, and take him back to the ship. Seems you still need something of an action or tension beat in there and having Mark trying to make he way to the Hermes, miss Lewis and needing to hold on my trying to get a good grasp on the tether works better than "we got him, now we just struggle a little bit to get him out of there and back to the ship before the velocities betray us."

Good book, and yeah, it would have been really nice to get some of the hurdles he went through in trying to get to the MAV in his improvised cross-country trailer. (I did see a screen cap somewhere of Mark using a shovel to apparently dig the vehicle out from a sand pit (when it crashed/tipped entering the crater?) The looming sandstorm (of course for that drama to work the connection with NASA would have to be lost, otherwise he could be warned about it and avoid it), the crash going into the crater, etc.

And, maybe I missed it, but I'm not sure the movie really gave us an impression of how long he was at the second MAV modifying it. In the book it's the better part of a month, in the movie it's an almost-montage that makes it seem like he made all of the "modifications" inside a day. (Though timestamps may have given us a better clue on how long it all took. I don't recall any, but they may have been there and I just missed them.)

I do look forward, and hope for, an extended/"director's cut" when it comes to home-video that hopefully will have much of this stuff added. I really think they could have pushed this movie to a full 3-hours and not hurt it at all.

 

[Christopher]

^By that point, though, the movie has jumped over such huge swaths of time that I don't think it really mattered how long it took to modify the MAV. We'd been in montage mode for most of the film already, seeing plenty of long, involved processes trimmed down to a couple of minutes of shots. So by the time we got to the MAV, I think we could take it as read that it took a fair amount of time.

 

[Tulin]

Not really. Jacking up the budget ridiculously for some special effects only the nerdiest will notice and fewer still of them will care about really isn't a good directorial decision. I am glad Scott didn't bother.

Indeed.

No matter what you do, there's ALWAYS going to be some nerd/complainer/hater ragging on what you did.