The Martian - Grading & Discussion

[publiusr]

So, apparently some people think "The Martian" is inspired by real events. Because at some point in the last 20-years or so we not only sent multiple manned missions to Mars, but one of them was plagued with numerous problems; including a stranded astronaut, and this all happened without making national news enough to be notrworthily memorable.

If only--though Sally Ride did make a go of it--so to speak
http://spaceflighthistory.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-martian-adventure-sally-rides.html

I left the film feeling a bit more positive about spaceflight and its reception.

Until I saw this:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/entertainthis/2015/09/30/bill-nye-mars-nightly-show/73078282/

 

[Starkers]

An excellent film adapted from an excellent book. See Ridley, this is what you can do with a script that makes sense!

It’s not quite perfect, which is why I gave it an A, it still felt a smidgen too long and during the whole resupply mission/Chinese space agency/Rich Purnell’s plan/ Hermes bits it did seem like Damon was conspicuous by his absence but I’m being picky. Wonderful direction, great effects and a really top draw cast, including another great performance from Michael Pena (who was the best thing about Ant Man in many ways).

I know NASA astronauts often fly on multiple missions, but it still seemed odd that Martinez got to go back to Mars via another Hermes flight!

Sadly, he still believes Prometheus was brilliant.

Sadly, he still believes Prometheus was brilliant.

Which doesn't bode well for the next instalment(s).

[Sir Ridley] "Is it pudding time yet? [/Sir Ridley]

As I showed in the link that I posted before, Prometheus does make sense when you analyse it logically, and not when you use previous horror/science fiction movies and TV shows to judge it. The people on board the ship weren't Starfleet officers that had been on a million billion gazilon planets doing exploratory surveys before, they were the first human beings to explore sentient life on another planet. Therefore, they were bound to make mistakes on first contact with an alien life form.

Its not so much the stupidity as the inconsistency. One minute Rafe Spall's character is terrified and wants nothing to do with encountering alien life, the next something that doesn't look that friendly pops its head up and he sticks his face right next to it?!

To be faire I've only seen it the once, and I do mean to get around to giving it another go, but Christ it annoyed the hell out of me in the cinema.

 

[Rowan Sjet]

Solid film, often brilliant, but except for a few moments (like Whatney counting potatoes while listening to the wind *shudders*)

Weird.

Why was that not a good moment?

I personally thought that was one of the scariest moments of the film - it gave that sense of COMPLETE isolation, of being on an ALIEN world where even the wind could turn against you and kill you. It was creepy as all hell and VERY alien.

What a strange criticism.

You're reading it wrong, I said that it was a good moment for connecting with his character.

 

[Mach5]

To be faire I've only seen it the once, and I do mean to get around to giving it another go, but Christ it annoyed the hell out of me in the cinema.

Ditto.

I felt so frustrated, walking out of that theater, that I honestly don't see myself sitting through that crap again.

 

[Trekker4747]

No, Prometheus is a mess. I agree with the thing about guy who's utterly terrified of where they're at and stuff then the phallus-y, vagina-faced snake monster pops up and he awws and coos at it like it's a kitten.

And, of course....

 

[RAMA]

Well damn, I just loved it. Not sure I could gush so much about other good SF movies this decade..

I don't need a SF movie to be perfectly accurate scientifically for me to like it, a high believability factor is always good, but that's just gravy in this movie. That's not all though, the movie is a triumph of the process of science! There's no backhanded praise for what we've accomplished, no hipster, emo, dark or evil commentary from the crew..it's all about positivity and what we can accomplish through knowledge. We don't stop going to Mars because there was a failure, we keep on because it's important! I really love that in the movie.

While it wasn't my central focus. others I talked to were telling me how much they liked Damon's character. Yes, he was written with a nice mix of intelligence, humor and diligence. Likable and sympathetic.

I came away from the movie looking at a news story on my phone about how NASA is closer than ever to going to Mars. This movie can't hurt the effort.

RAMA

 

[BigJake]

I left the film feeling a bit more positive about spaceflight and its reception.

Until I saw this:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/entertainthis/2015/09/30/bill-nye-mars-nightly-show/73078282/

Well, that's just a bit on a comedy show. And not really any different from "they can put a man on the moon but they can't [do such-and-such] on Earth" sentiment that goes back to the moon landings. I wouldn't take it as an indicator of much.

Finally saw this movie last night... well, most of it, I was late to the theater and missed the first twenty minutes or so. Take-aways:

1) It was darned impressive, obviously. The Wadi Rum landscape that stands in for Mars is absolutely stunning, the space sequences and the design of the Hermes just about equally so.

2) Matt Damon does a good job of the "lone protagonist trapped in a shitty situation" performance. Mark Watney is a likeable, believable problem-solving hero. (And okay, he should probably have died in the "Iron Man" sequence during his rescue but what fun would that be.) Really the movie has solid performances from stem to stern.

3) The reassuringly upbeat disco soundtrack, relaxed pacing and general up-with-people air of warm humour about the movie had upsides and downsides. On the one hand it made the proceedings feel human and relatable... but on the other, it shaved all the sharp edges off the drama of the situation. I was never in any serious doubt about the happy ending (as was the case with, say, Gravity).

4) It's a bit melancholy how movies about NASA having a manned spaceflight program feel increasingly like fantasy (kind of like movies about the States having a functional political system). It would be great to see NASA get a shot at lavishly-funded Mars missions like those portrayed here, with all the world watching with its heart in its throat like in the days of the Apollo Program... but it all feels very quaint.

In the end I'll give it an A-.

 

[Dales]

have not seen it here but is it better than interstellar

 

[BigJake]

Different kind of movie from Interstellar, as it doesn't have any of the 2001-esque quasi-"supernatural" elements that figured in that movie. I personally liked both more or less equally; I gave Interstellar an A- rating, too, anyway.

 

[Mach5]

have not seen it here but is it better than interstellar

Better, IMO.

 

[Harvey]

^I'm surprised they didn't go the Captain America Skinny-Steve route and use digital effects to alter Damon's proportions or put his head on the double's body.

A body double meant the shots could be completed in camera. Since the movie only cost $108 million, It makes sense that they'd want to limit themselves when it came to visual effects (the dust storm at the beginning was also largely done in camera, apparently).

 

[Daddy Todd]

I gave it a B+. I enjoyed it a great deal, and was astounded by how faithful it was to the novel, which I read about a month ago. Even great swaths of dialog were lifted basically verbatim from the text.

But it never lifted off for me; I never started living an experience; I was watching a movie the whole time. A finely crafted movie, but "just" a movie nonetheless.

 

[DWF]

I thought it was a good move. I loved the LOTR reference with Sean Bean in the scene and it was the second movie I've seen this year where he survived. But I really like how the world seemed to come together to save Mark. And I do think it'd be MacGyver's favorite movie.

 

[IcecreamLtDan]

So, my wife and I went to see this movie this past Friday and I have to say, I was impressed. If you're still on the fence about seeing this movie, do it! Even if you haven't read the book, or listened to the audiobook, and I highly recommend both, you'll enjoy it. The changes made to the story for the movie make sense and do not adversly affect the storyline at all and you're not required to know the story before seeing the movie. You'll laugh, you'll cry, shoot, you might even jump up and down in joy for some scenes.

Matt Damon plays his role perfectly, I'll never be able to read the book or listen to the audiobook again without picturing Matt as Mark Whatney. The supporting cast is solid and they participate in the journey just enough so that you actually pay attention to them and their story. I do wish some of the characters were fleshed out a bit more, but I think it's simply because they had bigger roles in the book and I understand about cutting those roles down for time, otherwise this movie would become a 3 hour slugfest. Mark Whatney's situation is the primary reason for the movie, so I have no problem with the sole concentration of the movie being on him.

Visually, the movie is breathtaking. The views of Mars are wonderfully created, even small things like dust devils, craters, stunning vistas and mountainous views, are done with such realism to make you feel as if you're right there with him the whole time. The Hermes is beautiful as it travels through space and gives the impression of a realistic and highly probable design straight from the NASA design bureau. I certainly would love to be able to see such a ship built in my lifetime.

Now the bad, not that it's really bad, but it must be mentioned. As Mr. Weir himself stated, the dust storms on Mars are not at all realistic. The reality is, the atmosphere on Mars is so thin that such dust storms could not happen. I certainly had no problem with suspension of belief on this subject as our hero had to be stranded there for some reason. Additionally, Mars' gravity is only just over a third of what it is here on Earth, yet everyone walks around normally. Again, suspension of belief is required here and again, no problems on my part. Both of these play no real role in the movie, it's just reality poking its nose in where it's not wanted.

One last bad thing, while I understand some of the changes made to various characters, I'm not sure they were all neccesary to make. Trying to be spoiler free here, but the role change for the climatic end of the movie was unneeded in my opinion and misses out on allowing the charactor who gets overlooked some much needed screen time. Those who have read the book and have seen the movie know what I speak of.

Overall, I rate the movie a solid A. It's actually been a weak year for movies, IMHO, compared to years past. This movie goes a long way to making up for that and may be the last movie I see this year, depending on reviews of the 007 movie, and it's only the second one we've gone to this year. Next year is looking good though, looking forward to Deadpool for sure.

 

[Campe]

My fiancee and I saw it last night. Loved it. A+! Talk about a great film with science and optimism. Best movie I've seen in 2015. Very possibly the best space film since Apollo 13. Yeah, I went there. (I hated Interstellar with a fiery passion and did not feel as though Gravity held up to repeated viewings.)

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I gave it a B-.

It's a very well shot, well acted movie. Pacing wise I feel it lost steam after the initial fight to grow potatoes and it never really penetrated emotionally beneath the surface, opting for the saccharine, lightly manipulative approach. Like Saving Private Ryan in space.

Still, it will be good to have a movie that might win Oscars that won't make me angry.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

So, apparently some people think "The Martian" is inspired by real events. Because at some point in the last 20-years or so we not only sent multiple manned missions to Mars, but one of them was plagued with numerous problems; including a stranded astronaut, and this all happened without making national news enough to be notrworthily memorable.

If only--though Sally Ride did make a go of it--so to speak
http://spaceflighthistory.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-martian-adventure-sally-rides.html

I left the film feeling a bit more positive about spaceflight and its reception.

Until I saw this:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/entertainthis/2015/09/30/bill-nye-mars-nightly-show/73078282/

What can one say, except that most people are idiots, and the education system is making them that way (mostly thanks to teachers like the type the main character meets and talks to in the first few minutes of Interstellar.)

 

[Tulin]

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?!?!?!

 

[intrinsical]

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?!?!?!

Not everyone is a star wars fan. This may surprise you but I haven't really seen the movies.

 

[Christopher]

Okay, saw it today. First off, I wish I hadn't seen it in 3D. I'm not sure if the theater had its settings wrong or if it was intrinsic to the film, but the 3D seemed to have its stereoscopic baseline too wide or whatever the technical terminology would be -- everything huge (like Martian landscapes and the Hermes) looked toy-sized. I'd read that the 3D was great for creating a sense of grandeur in the landscapes, but for me it destroyed any grandeur by making all the vistas look tiny.

It was a pretty good movie overall, though. Nice to see a feature-film version of the classic science-fiction "problem story" genre, a story driven more by sciencing up solutions to life-threatening problems than by interpersonal conflict or the like. There was a lot of fun problem-solving here. Damon was good as Watney. I did have some issues with some of the other casting, though. The Ares III crew was way too white, with just one exception, and it was odd that they cast Chiwetel Ejiofor as Kapoor instead of an Indian actor. (Though the book author makes a fairly good argument that it's valid casting.) And I was going to say that Jessica Chastain seemed way too young to be the mission commander, but apparently she's 38. She looks more like 28, if that.

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. 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. (On the other hand, the scene where the Hermes depressurized was superbly done, the one time I've ever seen that done believably.)