[Jim Jones]

Just got round to reading it. Did it in one session. Real science in science fiction, Arthur Clarke and Stephen Baxter style. Just what I like

[Dave W]

(From here, where there's also an apposite caption.)

Trailer on IMBD here. Could be good. I'm SO excited.

[garethep]

Just got back from watching the film. If you enjoyed the book then i thoroughly recommend it. Yes it missed some 9 the more "sciency" aspects of the book and I'm glad I had read the book first but generally I was very impressed. Even my wife who really doesn't "do" science fiction enjoyed it!

[Miscellaneous]

I confess to not having read the book, or watched the below (yet). However I thought it may be of interest to those contributing to the thread.

[PeteSpencer]

I read it on page 5 of this thread a year ago.

Postby PeteSpencer » Sun Sep 07, 2014 12:18
Saved it up for poolside reading on hols last week.

Gripping stuff: would make a great movie IMHO.

Pretty cheap cast budget I guess.

Peter

Seems like my prediction was right: Mark Kermode on BBC News 24 was wetting his knickers over the movie just half an hour ago.

Planning to see it next week....

Peter

[ChampChump]

A review on R4 this evening thought the 'stellar' cast was rather underused, understandably, so the budget may have been larger than you thought, Pete. It sounded as if the film isn't too far from the book, which is a good reason to see it sometime, I reckon. Ever wary of seeing anything I've really appreciated in print, I'm prepared to be impressed.


Oh and 3D unnecessary, they said.

[Pete L]

Acid test was Viv liked it. She fell asleep in 2001, enjoyed Outland, was lukewarm over Gravity and bored by Interstellar.

I think I'd agree with the slightly under-used cast.

I disagree on 3D. Unlike the "Hunger Games: Mockingjay: Part 2"* trailer immediately before, which looked cartoonish, the 3D really worked. It got the small moving object in a sea of nothingness, like a single aircraft in the sky, absolutely perfect. And it really worked in the last action scene of the film.

They didn't need to be big screen stars to carry the movie - heavily story driven - but to be fair, none of them played the star. I think Matt Damon was an excellent choice for the lead - the closing scenes show that to perfection. From a one shot deal in the vastness of space to reflection on the ground, he played it beautifully. The aftermath scenes aren't in the book but I found them an uplifting addition in making heroic behaviour real.

Interesting stuff was how they pitched the NASA scenes. Possibly too British, but the rest was how I'd expect a modern NASA to be - mix of the oldsters and the young.

Nothing can beat the excitement of a first time read of the book, but if I hadn't have read it, I think I'd have been truly impressed. It is very well made, and miles better than either Gravity or Interstellar.

Apart from Sandra Bullock. Who I'd watch if she was reading her shopping list out.



* Enjoyed these more than I expected. Got sucked in by The Hanging Tree but for what is nominally teen fiction, the stories are great. The action heroine kills almost no-one rather than the typical blockbuster or videogame body count.

[Yankee-K]

I read the book a while ago, later than most on here, and thoroughly enjoyed it so to see the film was almost a given.

I saw the film, in 3D, today and was impressed. Although the 3D enhanced the depth perception I don't think you would lose much watching in 2D.

This was the first cinema visit in probably 40 years so it was a bit of technology shock and I prefer polarized glasses to anaglyph

Might be tempted to go and experience IMax now!

[leiafee]

Only just got round to readin the book.

Slurped up in two massive sittings. Been a long time since I was so sucked into a story and character, and I resd a lot.

[ChampChump]

Having read it purely because it was mentioned here, I thrust it at others subsequently and the verdict was unanimous. I thought then it might well get filmed, but I then worried about what would be done to it... I'm pleased that the reviews are all good, in varying degrees.

I've just booked tickets for The Odeon; once again if it doesn't work it'll be All Your Fault.








I suspect I can trust you again though.

[Boxkite]

I suppose it was inevitable really that several events or scenes in the book would not be included in the film.
Anybody notice which?

[TheKentishFledgling]

Significantly, they made the long Rover journey towards the end seem like a Sunday afternoon drive - I remember it being somewhat more challenging in the book. Good film though.

[Boxkite]

Significantly, they made the long Rover journey towards the end seem like a Sunday afternoon drive - I remember it being somewhat more challenging in the book. Good film though.

Yes, in the film one didn't get the sense of how long the journey really was, and the dust storm and rover accident were both completely missed out. Not to mention the sleeping arrangements he had catered for - just showed him under the rover.

[rf3flyer]

After being introduced to The Martian here on the forum I found the book 'on offer' at half price in my local Tesco. Bought and enjoyed immensely.

Went to see the movie yesterday and enjoyed that too. Necessarily it left stuff out but I agree the 3200km trek to Sciaparelli did not really come across as being the momentous undertaking it would actually be.

The other slightly jarring note, to me at any rate, was the size of the spacecraft and of some of it's parts. The hatch and ladder to the MAV seemed unnecessarily large. Mass is critical so I'd have expected that to be as small possible for personnel access. Same thing about Hermes. The interior seemed implausibly roomy, but that's pretty much standard for movie spacecraft.

But as I said, I did enjoy it, its 'gallows humour', I found it encouraging and positive and that's no bad thing.

[joe-fbs]

Excellent interview with the author on this week's Planetary radio:

http://www.planetary.org/multimedia/pla ... -weir.html