The Martian

PelicanHazard

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
2,421
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Car(s)
'13 Dart 1.4T mtx, '13 FIAT, '03 Ranger XLT Supcab

I'm reading the book now, and some differences are already apparent, but on the whole it looks promising.
 

Bretton Woods

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
2,055
Location
Australia
Saw the trailer and then binge-read (is this a thing now?) the book in an evening.

Really, really great book. Hoping the film will be just as good.
 

47

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 6, 2006
Messages
5,143
Location
Croatia
Car(s)
Skoda Octavia & Fabia
Well that looks interesting and exciting. Quite a cast they've got there too.
 

TC

aka TomCat
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,436
Started reading the book after seeing the trailer. It's pretty damn good. The main character is very funny in his log reports.

I imagine the film is going to be rated PG-13 though, so the liberal use of F bombs will no doubt be cut. Still, it might not be too bad. How many actors from Interstellar are in this, just 2?
 

blackman

Active Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
401
Location
Bochum, Germany
Car(s)
'06 Cooper S / '89 316i / '15 MT09 Tracer
I loved the book, but I already hate Matt Damon just from watching the trailer...
 

NecroJoe

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
19,303
Location
San Francisco area, CA, USA
Car(s)
2015 Mazda 3 S GT, 2015 VW e-Golf
interesting you say that. The first comments I saw about the trailer were how closely he represents the mental image that many readers had of that specific character.
 

PelicanHazard

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
2,421
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Car(s)
'13 Dart 1.4T mtx, '13 FIAT, '03 Ranger XLT Supcab
Saw it last night. Obviously cut a lot from the book, but still very enjoyable. Matt Damon really embraced the Watney character.
 

TC

aka TomCat
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,436
I quite liked it as well. The rescue scene, though, almost ruined it for me.
Yeah, that part bothered me a little bit as well. Too much Hollywood.

Saw it with my brother the other night. Really enjoyed it. Ridley Scott did a good job. Now I just hope he releases a 3 hour long Directors Cut for the bluray.
 

mikas

Active Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2004
Messages
203
Location
Finland
Car(s)
2009 BMW 330xd, 2009 Triumph Street Triple R
I'm hoping for a mini series. Would be awesome to be like 6 parts with loads of sciencing the shit out of things.
 

Dr_Grip

Made from concentrate
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
14,164
Location
Germany
Car(s)
1979 Opel Kadett | 1972 Ford Country Sedan


What a brilliant movie this could have been. Sadly, it has been partly ruined by two things for me...

1. The pacing.
Really enjoyed it. Ridley Scott did a good job. Now I just hope he releases a 3 hour long Directors Cut for the bluray.
Sorry, but I have to disagree strongly.

Ever since digital distribution came around and studios thus don't have to pay for every single copy of a film sent to a theater by the meter of film stock, there's no one in the editing suite keeping directors honest about their film's length. Like Rick Rubin telling the bands he produces to focus on the essentials, Ridley Scott really needs someone to tell him that while he can make a 144-minute movie, the result would be stronger if he keeps it at 100minutes and simply focuses on what's essential. Same's true for SPECTRE, by the way.

2. If you already have bloated your film beyond the two-hour mark, is it really necessary to add padding "crowds gathering in all key markets" shots to the sappy Hollywood ending? The whole final sequence was just too much, but the crowd shots really killed it for me.

Such great acting by Damon, such attention to detail and love of science and space exploration have been put into this movie.

7/10, nevertheless.
 
Last edited:

TC

aka TomCat
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,436
1. The pacing.

Sorry, but I have to disagree strongly.

Ever since digital distribution came around and studios thus don't have to pay for every single copy of a film sent to a theater by the meter of film stock, there's no one in the editing suite keeping directors honest about their film's length.
I can't agree. I hate films that are made to a duration. They feel like a compromised product. It should be as long as it needs to be to tell the story properly. Sometimes that can be 90 minutes, other times it might be 190 minutes. I've seen plenty of long movies that felt short, and plenty of short films that felt long. It all depends on the direction and the story itself. The Martian didn't feel that long to me, but that might be because I've read the book, which wasn't a short story.

You could never fit an average 400 page paperback novel into a 2 hour film. They have to cut half the book out and rush quickly through the rest, which is why it's so rare to hear that a movie was actually better than the book. Much of the novel was cut from this film. And this story wasn't meant to be a fast paced action movie, it was supposed to be slow and suspenseful. It's mainly about finding solutions to complex problems, after all.

I agree with you about the ending though. It didn't really fit properly. I guess it would be too much to hope they shot two versions of it, the Hollywood ending and an alternative ending closer to that of the novel.
 

PelicanHazard

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
2,421
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Car(s)
'13 Dart 1.4T mtx, '13 FIAT, '03 Ranger XLT Supcab
I guess it would be too much to hope they shot two versions of it, the Hollywood ending and an alternative ending closer to that of the novel.
We kinda have both; the book ending is just the movie ending minus everything on Earth.
 
Last edited:

TC

aka TomCat
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,436
We kinda have both; the book ending is just the movie ending minus everything on Earth.
Spoiler Text: (Click here to toggle display)
Well, the part with Mark Watney cutting the glove of his suit to use as propellant was not in the book and it really clashed with all the math and science the characters used to solve all the problems they faced. Seemed like a stupid thing for such a smart character to do, but that's a common occurrence in Hollywood films and shows.
 
Last edited:

Redliner

Y'all got any lamps?
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
22,834
Location
Lamp
Car(s)
I don't drive, I fly.
What a brilliant movie this could have been. Sadly, it has been partly ruined by two things for me...

1. The pacing.
Sorry, but I have to disagree strongly.

Ever since digital distribution came around and studios thus don't have to pay for every single copy of a film sent to a theater by the meter of film stock, there's no one in the editing suite keeping directors honest about their film's length. Like Rick Rubin telling the bands he produces to focus on the essentials, Ridley Scott really needs someone to tell him that while he can make a 144-minute movie, the result would be stronger if he keeps it at 100minutes and simply focuses on what's essential. Same's true for SPECTRE, by the way.

2. If you already have bloated your film beyond the two-hour mark, is it really necessary to add padding "crowds gathering in all key markets" shots to the sappy Hollywood ending? The whole final sequence was just too much, but the crowd shots really killed it for me.

Such great acting by Damon, such attention to detail and love of science and space exploration have been put into this movie.

7/10, nevertheless.
Hey, we should hang around and be grumpy about movies together. My wife is getting tired of it. :mrgreen::lol:

Spoiler Text: (Click here to toggle display)
Well, the part with Mark Watney cutting the glove of his suit to use as propellant was not in the book and it really clashed with all the math and science the characters used to solve all the problems they faced. Seemed like a stupid thing for such a smart character to do, but that's a common occurrence in Hollywood films and shows.
This. I didn't read the book (yet) but that seemed so out of character.
 

blackman

Active Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
401
Location
Bochum, Germany
Car(s)
'06 Cooper S / '89 316i / '15 MT09 Tracer
Finally got around to watch this. The ending was too much Hollywood for me, but other than that I really liked it! Had my doubts about Matt Damon, but he did great.
 

bone

"bangle for president"
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
16,684
Location
belgium!!
Car(s)
Volvo V40 & Yamaha Banshee
Ever since digital distribution came around and studios thus don't have to pay for every single copy of a film sent to a theater by the meter of film stock, there's no one in the editing suite keeping directors honest about their film's length. Like Rick Rubin telling the bands he produces to focus on the essentials, Ridley Scott really needs someone to tell him that while he can make a 144-minute movie, the result would be stronger if he keeps it at 100minutes and simply focuses on what's essential. Same's true for SPECTRE, by the way.
i couldn't disagree more...
100mins just ins't enough to bring a story that doesn't feature jason statham.
in a movie below 2h, they had to cut so much of the original story, or things seem to happen so spontaneous and simulaneous it becomes totally unbeleivable

besides the last 10 mins, it didn't feel dragged at all to me...
 
Last edited:
Top