The Martian (Ridley Scott, 2015)

[flyonthewall2983]

Meet the crew.

EW article.

[Professor Wagstaff]

Trailer

[flyonthewall2983]

Looks good, though I wonder if NASA is being cool with being portrayed as the big bad corporation if I go by what the trailer's telling me.

[George Drooly]

Looks good, though I wonder if NASA is being cool with being portrayed as the big bad corporation if I go by what the trailer's telling me.

The book was decidedly, embarrassingly libertarian, with endless asides from the central character about the wrongheadedness and inefficiency of NASA and governments and parent groups in general. Of course, his ultimate rescue - not, admittedly, his survival - is achieved by

SpoilerShow

the mutinous actions of his crew mates who reverse their earthbound ship to pick him up. I suppose commandeering a billion-dollar, tax-funded vehicle for your own purposes (however noble) is a form of aggressive libertarianism, but it seems more like a selfish, childish act of gimme gimme.

I thought the book was awful, a perfect example of literature reduced to Wikipedia regurgitation from the safety of inexperience and naivete. It wholly lacks the troubling and thrilling complexities of something like Heinlein's The Moon Is a Marsh Mistress which I gather is beloved by libertarians.

[PfR73]

Haven't read the book, but the trailer made this the film I'm looking forward to the most for the rest of the year. Fox has now pushed up the release from November 25 to October 2. Hopefully that's a positive sign about the quality of the film. It's the same release weekend Gravity & Gone Girl had in previous years.

[Ribs]

It's definitely because of the weekend's success and also that as of this moment Thanksgiving is packed this year (the Sci-fi blockbuster "tribute to John Carpenter" Midnight Special still penciled in that date as well)

They really don't care about the awards if it can make anything like Gone Girl or Gravity money.

[flyonthewall2983]

"The Right Stuff"

[flyonthewall2983]

Watched this today. This really felt far removed from Scott's previous forays into sci-fi, in fact far removed from most of what I've seen of his work. It's closer in tone to something like Matchstick Men or A Good Year, but with added peril and some of the best space visuals this side of Gravity.

[hearthesilence]

I liked this but was still somewhat disappointed.

I like Matt Damon, and while there were moments where he came off as a smug douche bag, I should probably dismiss that as a result of the script (and it was explained - perhaps too clearly - that his character did occasionally rub others the wrong way). Otherwise, he was usually his charismatic self.

The whole movie seemed to recall so many others: Cinema-scope was spot on in mentioning "Saving Private Ryan" (in reverse, with the focus on Ryan), also the basic plot formula of "Apollo 13," visual nods to "2001" (not a surprise for any space picture nowadays), all to entertaining effect though.

What I didn't like was that after a certain point, it seemed to settle into a slick approach that walked the line between a Jerry Bruckheimer picture or a typical big-budget, prime time TV commercial, often ping ponging between the two. The worst was when it lurched towards the latter - quick cuts to different shots spanning so many different locations and characters, edited to a pop song that's a bit too on the nose, with one-liners sprinkled throughout. It's machine-efficient storytelling, packing everything you need into a short span in a broadly ingratiating way, but it's also very slick, and it feels like a letdown when there was the potential to do a lot more. I was hoping for more poetry from a 3D film of Mars, but halfway through, it barely seemed to try anymore.

[bdsweeney]

Echoing hearthesilence's views, I found this to be okay entertainment.

If the film reminded me of anything, it was The West Wing, with its display of highly professional, clever people who always seemed to have a quick response to things (whether that be a quick-witted verbal retort or a solution for a real-life problem). But (unlike The West Wing) I found the quick wit and humour too pleased with itself to cause much more that a slight chuckle.

Worse still, everyone’s thorough professionalism seemed to drain the drama of any real tension. While the story plays out over several years, I never felt the weight of that time nor did I feel that any great effort was required by anyone on screen to devise their solutions. Too often we’re told how near-impossible it is to solve something, but only a minute later … shazam … and the problem’s gone.

My fun with the film came from the performances and slick production values. Though, thinking back, they all echo my general problems with the storytelling … it’s all highly professional and a little dull.

[flyonthewall2983]

I definitely felt more emotionally invested in Interstellar (of which this gets obvious comparisons to, but it seems to have wiped the floor with it's box office so far), which focused as much on the heart where this is much more nuts and bolts. It has it's humorous moments, mostly with Watney because at least then the humor is allowed to sit for a little bit more before moving onto something else (like a few moments on Earth, where they are at best fleeting).

Without meaning to sound too politically correct about it, I'm kind of warmed that a movie of this magnitude with characters that solve problems through brain-power instead of firepower has been doing so well at the box office.

[Luke M]

I watched this recently after reading the book over the summer, which now feels like I performed a huge disservice to myself. I fell into the trap of nagging on differences from the book so much so that the experience was nearly ruined for me. Everything that I loved about the book was either truncated or flat out absent. I pictured the movie being more dialogue and process driven ala Sorkin meets Greengrass. Scott wasn't totally bad. He did a serviceable job of showing off the film's production values and there was a sort of epic feel to the whole thing but all that came at the expense of the book's tension and smarts.

I hate being that person that complains that the book was better but it really was in just about every single way.

[hearthesilence]

Everyone I know has been beating the same drum. I haven't read it yet, so I couldn't comment, but I can see it bothering me as well - what I liked best about the film primarily dealt with the procedural aspects of surviving. Even if the visual presentation of Mars was nothing more than prosaic, I could see myself really enjoying a film that just dived further in that direction.

Just out curiosity, is the book basically in the same tradition as Jack London's best books?

[Luke M]

Everyone I know has been beating the same drum. I haven't read it yet, so I couldn't comment, but I can see it bothering me as well - what I liked best about the film primarily dealt with the procedural aspects of surviving. Even if the visual presentation of Mars was nothing more than prosaic, I could see myself really enjoying a film that just dived further in that direction.

Just out curiosity, is the book basically in the same tradition as Jack London's best books?

I haven't read London since high school and none of it has really stayed with me. The book isn't big on prose, it's mostly, "I did this, this, and this to fix this problem today."

[wllm995]

Just watched this last night and found it very enjoyable populist entertainment.

One quibble I have with it is the conceit that the only music that he could listen to was vintage Disco (due to it being the only music that was available from an initial 6 person crew who might reasonably be expected to have a much more diverse collection of personal tunes to listen to on their long trip away from home!).

A very minor quibble - but there nonetheless.

Otherwise I thought that is was a nice change from the usual mindless violence based way to resolve every problem - instead relying on brains instead.

Will definitely get it when it comes out on Blu!

[flyonthewall2983]

It was quite clearly Disco, but you're absolutely right.

[Altair]

I found this an incredibly well-made film - Scott is never less than professional and given as a tight a script as this (by Drew Goddard), it really hits the bulls-eye. The pace never slackens, Matt Damon and the ensemble cast around him are uniformly good and it's admirable that the film resists over-dramatizing - the dangers inherent in Mark Watney's situation are enough and no strained crew tension is necessary. It slips in the science with ease and crucially makes it interesting: it's never just exposition but key to the plotting. It's an extremely likeable, commercial and (dare I say it) intelligent film, not putting a foot wrong. Part of me wishes that it investigated the existential dilemmas Damon's character would've faced stranded on Mars, but this is not a film of philosophising and thus very different to Gravity or Interstellar (other sci-fi films released at the same time in previous years). That's fine though and would be a minor trade-off if more Hollywood studio films could be as fine as this.

[flyonthewall2983]

I do hope that the trend started by Gravity of much more cerebral and intelligent (of either brainy or emotional intelligence) big-budget sci-fi sticks. For the longest time it wasn't taken as seriously by the intelligentsia as it was it's core audience, but now with the advances in technology and the kind of good sci-fi writing that's out there it's easier to take it seriously.

[domino harvey]

A good film, if still a bit disappointing in the wake of the superior genre examples of Gravity and Interstellar. Scott's pedestrian work quite ably explains why he wasn't recognized, as the film's narrative thrust, special effects, and solid work from the principals does a lot of the heavy lifting here. I didn't find Damon's characterization "smug" or negative, and I kinda liked his confidence-- how else could someone survive such insurmountable odds if they didn't believe in themselves to such an extreme extent? Everyone else in the film is just a recognizable face/name phoning it in. There are some real groaners of set-up/punchline script crutches that were old hat decades ago ("I wonder what he's doing right now?!" --> smashcut to Damon dancin' to Disco?! My stars, what comic brilliance!!!!!) but the main pull of the story is strong and I'm curious to watch the inevitable director's cut to see if hopefully the most compelling material, that of the day-to-day quick fixes and false starts, plays a bigger role in an expanded version.

[Trees]

I like Matt Damon, and while there were moments where he came off as a smug douche bag...

I feel that Damon was simply miscast and that there were some cringe-worthy attempts at humor that should have been left on the cutting-room floor. This role should have gone to a Tom Hanks-type actor.

[chavdarpanov]

Hi. The Robinson Crusoe layer beneath, as I could see it.

SpoilerShow

Mat Damon's character being thrown away and abandoned during a storm. His plantation and his references to being a colonist and a pirate. His roofless launch vehicle (clearly standing for a boat), his jump in the open space (the ocean), where he flies (swims) and finally being saved with the help of a rope.

A pure transformation from a 2D world to a 3D one.

[domino harvey]

[hearthesilence]

SpoilerShow

"Grown out of his own feces!"

[domino harvey]

Actually, isn't it

SpoilerShow

grown out of Kate Mara's feces?

I'm sure somewhere, someone on the internet is getting off on that.

[flyonthewall2983]

Not sure if anyone is familiar with LexG but he had a whole thing about it on his Twitter for awhile. I didn't bother looking too deep into it though.