The Martian

[upperdeck]

pretty good movie. not over the top scify, nice story, good effects, good humor. .one of Damon's best efforts I think. well worth the trip.. i didnt read the book but several who did thought they did a good job with some pretty complex ideas to transfer it to the screen.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

They did a great job adapting the book. The movie was really well done.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I was not moved. Knew he would get rescued.
How correct is the science?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I was not moved. Knew he would get rescued.
How correct is the science?

Pretty accurate. Written by a major nerd.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Pretty accurate. Written by a major nerd.

The science was pretty cool.

 

[jekelish]

I was not moved. Knew he would get rescued.
How correct is the science?

I'll put it this way: Neil deGrasse Tyson went on Twitter and praised the science of the movie. So...yeah, it's accurate.

The book was excellent. I was a little stunned at how faithful the movie was, give or take a few scenes.

 

[upperdeck]

I was not moved. Knew he would get rescued.
How correct is the science?

does this mean you didnt like apollo 13 either?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I'll put it this way: Neil deGrasse Tyson went on Twitter and praised the science of the movie. So...yeah, it's accurate.

The book was excellent. I was a little stunned at how faithful the movie was, give or take a few scenes.

The two challenges they cut (shorting out his comms with the drill/running in to the sandstorm en route to the shuttle) were exactly the right things to drop from the movie.

 

[jekelish]

The two challenges they cut (shorting out his comms with the drill/running in to the sandstorm en route to the shuttle) were exactly the right things to drop from the movie.

Exactly - those were the two big things I noticed in terms of what they cut, and I thought the exact same thing. It would just have confused things in the movie a bit. It made a lot more sense to just chop them.

 

[jekelish]

does this mean you didnt like apollo 13 either?

It's funny that everyone seems to compare this movie to Cast Away. I see it as 100% in the spirit of Apollo 13. One of the reasons I love Apollo 13 is because of how the true hero of the movie is science, reasoning, and brainpower. That's what I love about The Martian, too: it all comes down to incredibly smart people calmly using their intelligence to solve life and death problems. Ingenuity fascinates and impresses me to no end.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

does this mean you didnt like apollo 13 either?

I did like 13 more than Martian, but I think that is because it was a true story, one that I could remember happening, and thus the "how did they do that" made it more engaging and climactic to me. Plus, Hanks. (and I a pretty big Matt Damon fan, other than the soap box stuff he does).

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I'll put it this way: Neil deGrasse Tyson went on Twitter and praised the science of the movie. So...yeah, it's accurate.

The book was excellent. I was a little stunned at how faithful the movie was, give or take a few scenes.

Yeah, but he is on Sheldon Cooper's bad side for the whole Pluto thing, so there is that issue.

 

[jekelish]

I did like 13 more than Martian, but I think that is because it was a true story, one that I could remember happening, and thus the "how did they do that" made it more engaging and climactic to me. Plus, Hanks. (and I a pretty big Matt Damon fan, other than the soap box stuff he does).

But hey - they do make a reference to one of the people involved with Apollo 13 in The Martian. "Steely Eyed Missile Man" is a direct reference to John Aaron, who was portrayed as the main science guy back on earth in Apollo 13. The term was basically coined to refer to him and now it's the highest praise you can give a NASA scientist or astronaut.

 

[orange79]

But hey - they do make a reference to one of the people involved with Apollo 13 in The Martian. "Steely Eyed Missile Man" is a direct reference to John Aaron, who was portrayed as the main science guy back on earth in Apollo 13. The term was basically coined to refer to him and now it's the highest praise you can give a NASA scientist or astronaut.

Yep - when I read that in the book, I laughed because I wondered how many people would realize what that meant. The first time I came across the term was in the book 'Lost Moon', about the Apollo 13 mission. But Aaron earned the title on the Apollo 12 mission.

When Apollo 12 launched on November 14, 1969, John Aaron was on shift. Thirty-six seconds after liftoff, the spacecraft was struck by lightning, causing a power surge. Instruments began to malfunction and telemetry data became garbled. The flight director, Gerry Griffin, expected that he would have to abort the mission. However, Aaron realized that he had previously seen this odd pattern of telemetry.

A year before the flight, Aaron had been observing a test at Kennedy Space Center when he had noticed some unusual telemetry readings. On his own initiative, he traced this anomaly back to the obscure Signal Conditioning Electronics (SCE) system, and became one of the few flight controllers who was familiar with the system and its operations. In the case that first drew his attention to the system, normal readings could have been restored by putting the SCE on its auxiliary setting, which meant that it would run even under low-voltage conditions.

Aaron surmised that this setting would also return the Apollo 12 telemetry to normal. When he made the recommendation, "Flight, EECOM, try SCE to 'Aux'", most of his mission control colleagues had no idea what he was talking about. Both the flight director and the CapCom asked him to repeat the recommendation. Pete Conrad's response to the order was, "What the hell is that?" Fortunately Alan Bean was familiar with the location of the SCE switch inside the capsule, and flipped it to auxiliary. Telemetry was immediately restored, allowing the mission to continue. This call earned Aaron the lasting respect of his colleagues, who declared that he was a "steely-eyed missile man", the absolute highest of NASA compliments.

From Wikipedia (yeah, I know..)

 

[Halfmooncuse]

I saw it twice. Liked it both times. Sick of movies that always end with a disaster.

 

[jekelish]

I will also say this: I don't particularly care or 3D movies, but this one utilized the technology to perfection. The sweeping landscapes of Mars are phenomenal with 3D, and the (very few) actual action set pieces are really enhanced. This is the kind of movie 3D was made for. I'd highly recommend seeing it in 3D if you are on the fence.

 

[orange79]

I will also say this: I don't particularly care or 3D movies, but this one utilized the technology to perfection. The sweeping landscapes of Mars are phenomenal with 3D, and the (very few) actual action set pieces are really enhanced. This is the kind of movie 3D was made for. I'd highly recommend seeing it in 3D if you are on the fence.

I'll have to see it in 3D. Some of those landscapes were pretty impressive in 2D.

 

[jekelish]

I'll have to see it in 3D. Some of those landscapes were pretty impressive in 2D.

I would love to see it in IMAX 3D if I could, but don't have an IMAX theater within 45 minutes of me. I have to imagine it'd be awesome on an IMAX screen.

 

[upperdeck]

this was a much better movie than gravity/interstellar and made several hundred million less. such a crap shoot understanding what people want to go see.

 

[jekelish]

this was a much better movie than gravity/interstellar and made several hundred million less. such a crap shoot understanding what people want to go see.

Hm...it's only made $3 less than Interstellar did already. Gravity made $274 million domestically, Interstellar made $188, and The Martian is up to $185 after one month.

 

[upperdeck]

i was talking world wide. the martion may get to 200 domestic 500 WW.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Okay, bit of a spoiler alert here, so if you haven't seen the movie and want to, look away.






For anyone who read the book, here's a rather large flaw I saw that I can't get over. I'd love to know how they explained it in the book.

We see the reason they have to leave early from their mission is because their MAV is about to tip over (beyond 13 degrees is fatal they say). So why would they preposition the MAV for the next mission so early, exposing that ship to the known winds/sandstorms of Mars for so long? That seemed like a rather large logic flaw.

 

[orange79]

Okay, bit of a spoiler alert here, so if you haven't seen the movie and want to, look away.






For anyone who read the book, here's a rather large flaw I saw that I can't get over. I'd love to know how they explained it in the book.

We see the reason they have to leave early from their mission is because their MAV is about to tip over (beyond 13 degrees is fatal they say). So why would they preposition the MAV for the next mission so early, exposing that ship to the known winds/sandstorms of Mars for so long? That seemed like a rather large logic flaw.

Yeah, I agree it is an issue. But following the science, while trying to minimize the size and/or the amount of payloads needed and balancing that with the amount of time needed to create fuel/oxygen, I guess it was a risk they were willing to take.