Originally posted by Patient_Leech
You know it was a best selling book before it was a movie, right? And the movie follows the book pretty much spot on. I knew every major plot point, but still enjoyed it. Most trailers give everything away. It's not specific to The Martian. That's why I typically avoid them if I already know I want to see something.
Indeed. I specifically avoided seeing anything on Sicario after the first trailer, though from what I've seen since the TV spots, etc, don't give away the plot at all. I like that even the ones that hint at Blunt's character being unsure of what she's gotten into give no clue as to her background, who she is, or why she's where she is, and the same for Del Toro's character as well.
I didn't see Oblivion in theaters because I thought the trailers gave everything away. They didn't fully, but they gave away far more than they should have. I really don't understand who does the cuts for these previews that tell everything that you need to know before you ever arrive and thinks that it's a good idea.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Saw a yahoo article about all the pop culture and Alien/2001 references/nods. Pretty interesting.
Here it is:
https://www.yahoo.com/movies/every-pop-culture-reference-in-the-martian-183355328.html
I enjoyed the hell out of this movie- in Ridley's top 3.
I've seen a lot of complaints about how much of a straight-shooter the film was in regards to Damon's problem solving and the general "safe" tone of the film. But both of those tones are something I actually appreciated. I liked that when shit hit the fan Damon's character just fell back on protocol/scientific knowledge and figured out a way to make the best of the situation. I liked that NASA was portrayed as being fallible yet highly competent and scientific in everything they did.
Not everything needs to be a thriller and/or bloodbath.
Just saw it, an excellent film and a top notch portrayal of science in movies.
NASA people must be ecstatic- they never get portrayals of space this good outside Apollo historical films ^^
Originally posted by Tzeentch
I enjoyed the hell out of this movie- in Ridley's top 3.I've seen a lot of complaints about how much of a straight-shooter the film was in regards to Damon's problem solving and the general "safe" tone of the film. But both of those tones are something I actually appreciated. I liked that when shit hit the fan Damon's character just fell back on protocol/scientific knowledge and figured out a way to make the best of the situation. I liked that NASA was portrayed as being fallible yet highly competent and scientific in everything they did.
Not everything needs to be a thriller and/or bloodbath.
Right, agreed. I'm in it for the *problem solving*. That's unusual in a movie, despair isn't.
Originally posted by dadudemon
It is horrendously unscientific at times. You really have to shut your mind down to try and enjoy the "character conflict."
What are you thinking of?
There's two bits I know of that don't work like in the film, but general buzz is it gets most of the stuff quite right.
Spoiler:
The two bits are, storms on mars don't have enough airpressure to be that strong, and when blowing the air on the ship, the opening's too big so the thrust would be too low for that level of effect.Stuff like potatoes, fuel, ship courses, etc., I gather are all possible.
Originally posted by Q99
There's two bits I know of that don't work like in the film, but general buzz is it gets most of the stuff quite right.Spoiler:
The two bits are, storms on mars don't have enough airpressure to be that strong, and when blowing the air on the ship, the opening's too big so the thrust would be too low for that level of effect.
Yeah, I remember reading that wind speeds on Mars don't ever get that high. But you know, it's fiction, you have to bend the rules a little bit.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Yeah, I remember reading that wind speeds on Mars don't ever get that high. But you know, it's fiction, you have to bend the rules a little bit.
It's not so much wind *speed*-it gets very, very fast there,- it's wind *pressure*- It's less dense so it hits you a lot less hard than the same airspeed on Earth.(And the author knew this, but fudged it)
But pretty much all the on-Mars survival stuff is real things.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
I enjoyed the hell out of this movie- in Ridley's top 3.I've seen a lot of complaints about how much of a straight-shooter the film was in regards to Damon's problem solving and the general "safe" tone of the film. But both of those tones are something I actually appreciated. I liked that when shit hit the fan Damon's character just fell back on protocol/scientific knowledge and figured out a way to make the best of the situation. I liked that NASA was portrayed as being fallible yet highly competent and scientific in everything they did.
Not everything needs to be a thriller and/or bloodbath.
I'm in agreement with you on the tone. Most movies with a theme like this are more along the lines of "This will be bleak and hopeless for 2 hours." But the tone and the jokes made it infinitely more enjoyable.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Saw this movie. Decent.I liked that the Captain/Commander was a woman instead of a man. And she didn't cry her eyes out when things got tough. It is nice to see a normal portrayal of a female in a powerful position.
The movie is a 7 out of 10.
It is horrendously unscientific at times. You really have to shut your mind down to try and enjoy the "character conflict."
You are correct. Pretty much every single major plot point is given away by the trailer. It's odd...they literally spoiled the shit out of the film with the trailer.
I'd go as far to say The Martian is one of the most scientifically idealistic films I've ever seen.
More like Pandora's box and that can-o-worms.
Anyhow, the consensus seems to be that more elements of the film are based on reality than fiction:
http://www.iflscience.com/space/how-accurate-martian-9-things-movie-got-right-and-wrong
Originally posted by Robtard
More like Pandora's box and that can-o-worms.Anyhow, the consensus seems to be that more elements of the film are based on reality than fiction:
http://www.iflscience.com/space/how-accurate-martian-9-things-movie-got-right-and-wrong
How can it be based on reality when Mars doesn't exist and was made up by global warming conspiracy Nazis?