The Martian

Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 7th October 2015
quotequote all
Just been to see it - wonderful!

I read the book about 2 years ago and this is true to it.

Guvernator

13,104 posts

164 months

Wednesday 7th October 2015
quotequote all
Moonhawk said:
I feel exactly the same about TDK. One of the most boring movies I have ever had the displeasure of seeing - yet it gets gallons of fan wk.
If by TDK you are referring to The Dark Knight then YES, finally I've found SOMEONE who agrees. In fact besides a bit of scene stealing by Heath Ledger (RIP) in the second one, I find the whole trilogy to be one massive snooze-fest.

I'm hoping to see The Martian in the next couple of days, I sincerely hope I'm not in for the same disappointment.

croyde

Original Poster:

22,701 posts

229 months

Wednesday 7th October 2015
quotequote all
Even though I wasn't wowed by The Martian, it's a good movie. The Dark Knight stuff is just boring.

justin220

5,331 posts

203 months

Wednesday 7th October 2015
quotequote all
Brilliant IMO!

Loved it!!

gavsdavs

1,203 posts

125 months

Wednesday 7th October 2015
quotequote all
Great entertainment - I already liked Matt Damon a lot, great performance, supported by a good all round cast. 8.5/10.
Nice to see Ridley Scott doing some good entertainment after the forced enema that was Prometheus.

dudleybloke

19,717 posts

185 months

Wednesday 7th October 2015
quotequote all
Well I was pleasantly surprised. A pretty decent film.

Eric Mc

121,779 posts

264 months

Wednesday 7th October 2015
quotequote all
I enjoyed it. The Mars vistas were pretty stunning and true to life. For a Hollywood movie, there weren't too many licences taken with real space so 8 out of 10 for me.

Motorrad

6,811 posts

186 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
The film was ruined by the need to tack on a 'happy ending' (which the book had anyway). I was also narked they cut down the whole 'will he die in the storm' part of the book. The 'road trip' was one of the best bits of the book.


Still overall it wasn't bad.

London424

12,826 posts

174 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
I enjoyed it. The Mars vistas were pretty stunning and true to life. For a Hollywood movie, there weren't too many licences taken with real space so 8 out of 10 for me.
I'd agree with a 8 out of 10 too. I've just started reading the book and I like what the film did with regards to his setting up of the plant growing compared to the detail in the book. Just enough to go through the thought process but without going to the inner monologue depth of the book.

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Motorrad said:
The film was ruined by the need to tack on a 'happy ending' (which the book had anyway).
I was actually surprised that they didn't go with the standard Hollywood line whereby one of his crew mates sacrifice themselves to save him. The fact that they all survived came as a pleasant surprise.

AndrewEH1

4,917 posts

152 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Moonhawk said:
I was actually surprised that they didn't go with the standard Hollywood line whereby one of his crew mates sacrifice themselves to save him. The fact that they all survived came as a pleasant surprise.
I was expecting a Gravity type situation, had me stressing for that section of the film

LHRFlightman

1,929 posts

169 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Saw it with my wife yesterday. We both loved it!

Eric Mc

121,779 posts

264 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
I think it gives a genuine insight into what being on Mars will actually be like. And it also hints at what a fascinating place it might turn out to be.

valiant

10,068 posts

159 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Saw it last Saturday and loved it. Had previously read the book, which was excellent, and was prepared for it to be hollywoodized so assumed most of the geeky science bits would be glossed over and you can't get all the book faithfully into a two hour film so something has to give although I think they should have shown something from the journey to the second Hab.

Still an enjoyable romp though and always good to see a bit of sci-fi on the big screen and at least it's not anther superhero film.

Plus I won't be going to a cinema on a Saturday ever again. Can't people sit still for two sodding hours? Do you actually need another huge tub of pop corn? Toilet? again!!!. Can't you discuss the film after the film? I think I'll stick to weekday afternoons as per usual from now on and damn my impatience...


jingars

1,091 posts

239 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
NASA's Earth Observatory website has (not) just posted this pic:



biggrin

If you want to get the info on the actual image, then see here.

SpeedBash

2,318 posts

186 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Friday 9th October 2015
quotequote all
AndrewEH1 said:
Moonhawk said:
I was actually surprised that they didn't go with the standard Hollywood line whereby one of his crew mates sacrifice themselves to save him. The fact that they all survived came as a pleasant surprise.
I was expecting a Gravity type situation, had me stressing for that section of the film
Yep - exactly.

sebhaque

6,402 posts

180 months

Sunday 11th October 2015
quotequote all
I saw it today with a friend. I've read the book, she hasn't. While we both enjoyed the film, she thought the travel to the ARES 4 MAV was too long and boring - whereas I thought it started way too late and missed out a critical part of the book - separate book spoiler - (Watney flipping the Rover).

She also thought the film was a bit too long, and I can see her point - the film lingers on the early days before jumping from Sol 160ish to Sol 580-odd. That's a long time to skip for someone struggling to live on Mars alone. Meanwhile I wish they'd have added an extra half an hour to the film and conjured up some more perils on the journey - more book spoilers - such as the book's issues of driving around the crater, the decompression of the skin Watney adds to the Rover, or perhaps fabricating another malady such as having to strip the Rover to remove all the sand it's accumulated.

Nonetheless, we both enjoyed it and I'm looking forward to picking up the extended DVD/BluRay.

Otispunkmeyer

12,557 posts

154 months

Monday 12th October 2015
quotequote all
glazbagun said:
Tiggsy said:
and the hollywood notion that space things are always solved by a 19 year old potnoodle eating chav who got into Uni at age 3 and now skateboards to the office always makes me feel the "out there" solution they come up with cant be that hard after all!

6/10 - looked pretty
I hope that part isn't in the book. The part where he has the director of NASA and thier spokeswoman standing in a room whilst he shows them what an orbit is was cringeworthy. Earlier in the film it had the feel of Apollo 13, by the end it felt like it was turning into Armageddon.

The Chinese bit was cool though. Was that in the book or was it axded for the increasing Chinese market?
Rich Purnell being a douch bag wasn't in the book. The Chinese stuff was and it was fleshed out much more as they ummed and ahhed about it.

Like others have said here.... really this would have been better served by being a 4 part drama or something. Something with 4-5 hours total running time. The first half of the movie was good, but towards the back end it all just became too truncated.

I mean his 3200km trip, in a battery powered rover just happened. One shot he's drilling holes in the roof. Next minute he's driving, next minute he's there! In the book this was a much more arduous trip and was rather fraught with danger. They just glossed over it, really didn't do it justice.

Back to the Purnell character, I really didn't like the way he was written. Thats not the Rich Purnell I had in mind. I had a more shy, nervous, quietly brilliant guy who was rather unchallenged in his normal job but who gets overly engrossed in something he does enjoy. Not some clumsy buffoon, who can do complex math in his head but can't walk without tripping over his own feet and who is so absent minded he doesn't react to authority figures like the head of NASA.

Again that scene with him acting out the orbits and the sling shot maneuver. They all work for NASA, that craps routine surely. At best the PR lady is the only one in that meeting who needed it explaining in such dumb terms.

Otispunkmeyer

12,557 posts

154 months

Monday 12th October 2015
quotequote all
GrumpyTwig said:
I've avoided reading this thread till I'd seen it and haven't read what people have put still so I'll say this with no prior bias from others, I see a lot of films and get to see pretty much all the big films and a lot of the b list stuff that's on too...

Easily one of the best films I've seen this year, certainly the best Sci-Fi film.

There were quite a few bits obviously cut out, I don't think it ruined it though. The missed bits did make the whole ordeal seem less.... of an ordeal sure, but I think it got the story across well in the time given and it didn't drag on because of it.

Matt Damon did well, I can see why he was chosen and in reality I couldn't think of someone who could do much better in the part.
The body double scenes were genius; probably more important to the narrative and expresses the rationing and passing time well.

Vincent Kapoor? I don't know why this casting/change annoys me so much but... there are probably a glut of good, competent neigh excellent Indian/Asian actors who could have filled the roll. Nothing against the actor chosen at all, but there's a scene where he talks about his parentage and it just comes across as weird...

All the other casting was good, plus Sean Bean... he doesn't die!!! smile

Edited by GrumpyTwig on Wednesday 7th October 09:24
In the book its Venkat Kapoor as well. Not sure why that needed to become Vincent!