Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
CelticPredator
Oct 11, 2013
🍀👽🆚🪖🏋

Weirdo posted:

I saw this tonight and honestly the most memorable part was before the film when the FOX PR guy who intro-ed the movie came dressed up in a spaceship Columbia flight suit and was joking about it ("What too soon?" :wtc:)

drat. That joke crashed and burned.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

tetrapyloctomy
Feb 18, 2003

Okay -- you talk WAY too fast.
Nap Ghost
Sometimes those things just blow up on you.

drunkill
Sep 25, 2007

me @ ur posting
Fallen Rib
I just got back, full cinema (so like ~750 people) and the next session has a long queue as we exited.

It was a good movie, it wasn't ever going to be as good of a space movie as Apollo 13 but it was pretty fun. It was more serious then the books, although it still had quite a number of jokes and light moments throughout. Visually it was very nice, Mars looked really cool although the clouds were a bit too thick and moving too fast and when they were in space the planet was moving too fast too but whatever, it has to move otherwise it'd look kinda bad I suppose.

Two fucks in the movie (spoken) with many others implied/muted or as censored text, I'm wondering if the USA version only has the one, since that is what they said.

Quite a few big changes from the book in some aspects, Watney had a pretty easy time in comparison.
Book spoilers/differences:
No communications failure/short circuiting Pathfinder so he was in full (text only) contact with NASA for the second half of the movie really. No second storm during the rover journey. No rover rollover entering Schiaparelli Crater, so he had an uneventful rover trip. it meant it was less of a challenge or less ingenuity to survive for Movie Watney vs Book Watney, which is mostly understandable.

Sean Bean talking about Project Elrond was great, some meta humour over the top of that book scene given the casting choice, that got quite a laugh from the crowd

edit: Hey Americans, when it comes out how many 'Fucks' does Watney say? There were two here, wondering if your censoring/ratings stuff would allow the second for a pg film.

drunkill fucked around with this message at 13:43 on Oct 1, 2015

zandert33
Sep 20, 2002

drunkill posted:


edit: Hey Americans, when it comes out how many 'Fucks' does Watney say? There were two here, wondering if your censoring/ratings stuff would allow the second for a pg film.

I've seen PG-13 movies that have 2 (can't remember which off the top of my head), it can't be sexual though.

MikeJF
Dec 20, 2003




zandert33 posted:

I've seen PG-13 movies that have 2 (can't remember which off the top of my head), it can't be sexual though.

You're allowed one gently caress, but a second gently caress is a case-by-case basis.

Weirdo
Jul 22, 2004

I stay up late :coffee:

Grimey Drawer
I think it was one gently caress and one poo poo in this movie, the rest being subtly censored.

Nail Rat
Dec 29, 2000

You maniacs! You blew it up! God damn you! God damn you all to hell!!
One gently caress and a conditional gently caress to be named later.

Arglebargle III
Feb 21, 2006

CaptainViolence posted:

That part of the book was the only one I really rolled my eyes at, but not because it was unrealistic. The time I spent in engineering school made me nearly immune to awkward curve-breaking schlubs who still thought Chuck Norris jokes were the height of comedy ten years after they'd gotten irritating for everyone else.

Annoying repetition and an inability to understand others' concepts of humor are classic signs of autism.

VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE
Aug 1, 2004

whoa, what just happened here?







College Slice

Arglebargle III posted:

Annoying repetition and an inability to understand others' concepts of humor are classic signs of autism.

How about an insane inferiority complex about Mad Max Fury Road (the best movie of the year) (and it's criminal that it's being out-grossed by such pablum as Pitch Perfect 2 *spit* and Terminator: Genisys).

Negative Entropy
Nov 30, 2009

Outstanding

Interesting point to note, in the Ares 3 promo pdf, all the crew photos show them wearing their mars suits, which are damaged and show wear.

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014


broken clock opsec posted:

How about an insane inferiority complex about Mad Max Fury Road (the best movie of the year) (and it's criminal that it's being out-grossed by such pablum as Pitch Perfect 2 *spit* and Terminator: Genisys).

you had it until you threw genisys in ther esince it's unmitigated garbage.

Arglebargle III
Feb 21, 2006

broken clock opsec posted:

How about an insane inferiority complex about Mad Max Fury Road (the best movie of the year) (and it's criminal that it's being out-grossed by such pablum as Pitch Perfect 2 *spit* and Terminator: Genisys).

Sorry I don't know what you're talking about.

drunkill
Sep 25, 2007

me @ ur posting
Fallen Rib

Weirdo posted:

I think it was one gently caress and one poo poo in this movie, the rest being subtly censored.
Two fucks and probably 20 shits with the rest of the fucks censored.

Kommando posted:

Interesting point to note, in the Ares 3 promo pdf, all the crew photos show them wearing their mars suits, which are damaged and show wear.

The captions of one of the photos in that pdf said it was taken during field trials in Utah.

Immortan
Jun 6, 2015

by Shine
This movie was entertaining as gently caress with some truly surreal visual effects; especially during any scene involving Mars. It was much better than both Gravity and Interstellar. Thanks for reading.

Jonas Albrecht
Jun 7, 2012


Just got out. Loved it. It was more anxiety inducing than any horror movie I've seen recently.

Mars4523
Feb 17, 2014
There are, by my count, two "fucks", a bunch of "fucks" that are creatively censored, and a lot of "shits".

I just saw this. It was a great movie, and stayed pretty true to the spirit of the book. The big difference is in the end, where instead of the explosive decompression assisted deceleration going off without a hitch Watney pokes a hole in his suit for thrust and Lewis catches him in a tethered Manned Manuvering Unit.

The cast was great, with my favorite "settings" being with Watney on Mars and the crew of the Hermes (Chastain and Pena are fantastic).

Surprisingly I liked Mindy Park, despite having doubts about her over an apparently Korean character being cast with some random white chick. She's played a lot like Felicity from Arrow before the writing went to poo poo and she morphed into hot CW female lead #215.

Things I didn't like:

Kristen Wiig as Annie Montrose was hit and miss. She gets some good bits, especially when she gets to be snarky or curse, but for large stretches she is just a Worried Teary Eyed Female to contrast with the senior dudes at NASA. All of the Mission Control cheering scenes (there are at least 3 or 4 of them) aren't necessary, and most should have been cut. It's pretty weird contrasting the professionalism of the Hermes crew (who still get to have fun and joke around) with the unprofessionalism of Johnson Mission Control. Still, these are minor flaws in a movie that was otherwise pretty drat good.

Platystemon
Feb 13, 2012

as a person who never leaves my house i've done pretty well for myself.
The number one flaw with the film is that the bomb “beeps”, and is audible even through vacuum.

Senjuro
Aug 19, 2006
Saw the movie last night and now I get to be one those guys that tells everyone that the book was better. The things that made the book popular, the in depth science and engineering details and the clever and creative problem solving, are almost completely gone. The constant feeling that Mark has to keep using every bit of ingenuity in him to keep on surviving is just not there. I'd only recommend the movie if you think you can enjoy the same story but without those elements in it. Also the movie spends a much larger percentage of time with the Earth characters than the book does which really undermines the strong sense of isolation you're supposed to feel when it focuses on Mars.

Senjuro fucked around with this message at 15:05 on Oct 2, 2015

VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE
Aug 1, 2004

whoa, what just happened here?







College Slice
Eh, pacing wise the movie works way better. Putting comparatively more focus on the Nasa and JPL folks versus the balance in the book, etc.

(Because there's 3-4 too many "and then catastrophe X happened and Mark thunk up ingenious Y to get by" in the book so cutting much of that out worked out pretty well for the movie)

Senjuro
Aug 19, 2006

broken clock opsec posted:

Eh, pacing wise the movie works way better. Putting comparatively more focus on the Nasa and JPL folks versus the balance in the book, etc.

(Because there's 3-4 too many "and then catastrophe X happened and Mark thunk up ingenious Y to get by" in the book so cutting much of that out worked out pretty well for the movie)

But the ingenious problem solving is the best part. It's the meat of the story. Sure, it had to be simplified to fit in 2 hours but I think they went too far.

To put it another way, near the end of the book when the Hermes is trying to close the distance to the MAV and Mark suggests puncturing a hole in his suit and using the escaping air for thrust Martinez asks "how does he come up with this poo poo?" which is pretty much the reader's reaction because we've seen by then how smart and creative Mark is. In the movie Martinez's line is missing because in the movie Mark doesn't really come up with much poo poo. You wouldn't even guess he's supposed to be a mechanical engineer in addition to a botanist if you only watched the movie

mareep
Dec 26, 2009

I understand why some would enjoy the book, but I could barely make it through the first few chapters and it's one of the few books I just couldn't bring myself to press through because it was so boring (and I agree that Watney sounded like a huge dork and reading his writing was painful). It's a cool concept, and again, I can see the appeal for those who enjoyed it, but I also personally think a 400-page word problem makes for a pretty terrible novel. On the other hand, I love space films and the trailer looks awesome, and I think I'll have way more fun with the movie than the book. It looks like it'll appeal to a much wider audience and in this case I think it makes a lot of sense.

KonMari DeathMetal
Dec 20, 2009
Read the book a while ago, liked it pretty well. Saw the movie, thought it was alright, not great but I was entertained for most of it.

SuperMechagodzilla
Jun 9, 2007

NEWT REBORN

Senjuro posted:

Saw the movie last night and now I get to be one those guys that tells everyone that the book was better. The things that made the book popular, the in depth science and engineering details and the clever and creative problem solving, are almost completely gone. The constant feeling that Mark has to keep using every bit of ingenuity in him to keep on surviving is just not there. I'd only recommend the movie if you think you can enjoy the same story but without those elements in it. Also the movie spends a much larger percentage of time with the Earth characters than the book does which really undermines the strong sense of isolation you're supposed to feel when it focuses on Mars.

The movie is very pointedly about a man not being in tremendous danger and not going insane, because he's in constant communication with people (even if only through his video logs).

The Martian is very much in the style of old utopian sci-fi films like The Sky Calls and Conquest of Space, where it's just everyone cheerfully working together.

SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Oct 2, 2015

gohmak
Feb 12, 2004
cookies need love
Way to go Hollywood for totally making GBS threads up the climax by changing the rescuer to the commander and having Mark actually go through with the Ironman thing. Very good movie.

I wish they wouldn't have left out the power drill killing Pathfinder, the rover flipping and the dust storm he had to traverse on his way to Ares IV MAV.

gohmak fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Oct 2, 2015

gohmak
Feb 12, 2004
cookies need love

Platystemon posted:

The number one flaw with the film is that the bomb “beeps”, and is audible even through vacuum.

To be fair the light it was attached to beeped and the sound was from the perspective of the ships atmo pressure before evac. Immersion preserved?

Mars4523
Feb 17, 2014

gohmak posted:


I wish they wouldn't have left out the power drill killing Pathfinder, the rover flipping and the dust storm he had to traverse on his way to Ares IV MAV.
All of which was pretty pointless, easily defeated, or unfilmable.

Senjuro
Aug 19, 2006

Mars4523 posted:

All of which was pretty pointless, easily defeated, or unfilmable.

Hardly pointless. it meant he had to figure out most of the rover mods on his own and that NASA couldn't help him navigate or warn him about the dust storm.

I personally think they should have at least kept the explosion the way it originally happened. In the movie it just happens right away. In the book first it gets your hopes up because everything seems to be going great, then he realizes his mistake, has to come up with a solution, makes another mistake and then explodes. The other thing they should have kept is the original airlock sequence. In the movie it's solved in a minute with duct tape. In the book he has to deal with a broken beyond repair visor and leaking airlock at the same time with minutes of air left meaning that we get to see him solving problems again.

Megazver
Jan 13, 2006

robot roll call posted:

I just got to the part of the book where he renames a scientific unit to "pirate-ninjas". That's so random!!!

Apparently this actually became a popular thing to use in NASA.

NASA is full of loving nerds.

Nelson Mandingo
Mar 27, 2005



Really enjoyed the film. I honestly want to go see it again.

I liked Mark's 100% justified reply to the insane plan to get him into orbit. "Are you loving kidding me?!"

MisterBibs
Jul 17, 2010

dolla dolla
bill y'all
Fun Shoe

broken clock opsec posted:

How about an insane inferiority complex about Mad Max Fury Road (the best movie of the year) (and it's criminal that it's being out-grossed by such pablum as Pitch Perfect 2 *spit* and Terminator: Genisys).

Niche genre movie loses out to popular, mainstream movies. News at eleven. (You should like Genesys, if for no reason than it being FR's partner in the "Did badly domestically, rear end saved by foreign markets" category.)

On to the topic of The Martian, I found it reasonably entertaining but not super engaging. I haven't read the book, but everything seemed rather predictable (Dude is doing well, so the potato plants have to die. Probe full of food will allow dude to do well, Probe has to explode. Funny where it needed to be without overdoing it; some of the actors felt wasted with not enough enough to do.

There was a major plot error that I'm surprised nobody caught: Who the hell would bemoan running out of ketchup when your meals are primarily potato-based? Thou shalt not put ketchup on thy taters!

Yaws
Oct 23, 2013

Ketchup on potatos owns

ijyt
Apr 10, 2012

MisterBibs posted:


There was a major plot error that I'm surprised nobody caught: Who the hell would bemoan running out of ketchup when your meals are primarily potato-based? Thou shalt not put ketchup on thy taters!

What loving swamp do you live in?

Powered Descent
Jul 13, 2008

We haven't had that spirit here since 1969.

There was a recommendation in the spaceflight thread to see this in 3D, which is somehow the first I'd heard that it was a 3D show at all.

What's the hivemind of this thread think? Is the 3D worth it?

MisterBibs
Jul 17, 2010

dolla dolla
bill y'all
Fun Shoe

ijyt posted:

What loving swamp do you live in?

The good part of the world, where one understands that the only acceptable things to put on your potato is butter, salt, pepper, and bacon bits.

Everything bad that happens in the film is God's way of telling the dude to stop putting ketchup on his potatoes.

Panfilo
Aug 27, 2011

EXISTENCE IS PAIN😬
In the scene where he takes his shirt off, why was his entire body covered in sores? Malnutrition? I know he hadn't been eating much at that point due to rationing.

In the trailer I didn't understand why having the potato plants exposed to martian atmosphere was so catastrophic. But seeing it realize that such a rapid decompression flash froze all the plants. Still, why Chuck the plants afterward? Food was the big limitation, I half expected to see watley gnawing on frozen potato plants for sustenance.

We're constantly reminded how Watley is in danger of starving to death. But what's funny is in most of his journals he's eating. I know he was pretty heavily rationing his food, I just found it a funny contrast. I guess the act of eating was meant to symbolize the one proactive element that was sustaining him.

The exasperated JPL chief was funny. "It'll take 3 months to get Iris ready" "You got 2 weeks" ":jeb:"

Seeing them do that amazing rendezvous reminded me of all the times in KSP I was trying to rescue a kerbonaut whose lander didn't have enough delta v to get back into orbit.

Panfilo
Aug 27, 2011

EXISTENCE IS PAIN😬
What was the one NASA guy saying to the Chinese official when he mentions "We haven't done that since Apollo 9" ?

gohmak
Feb 12, 2004
cookies need love

Nelson Mandingo posted:

Really enjoyed the film. I honestly want to go see it again.

I liked Mark's 100% justified reply to the insane plan to get him into orbit. "Are you loving kidding me?!"

But was it "Are you loving kidding me?!" or "Are you loving KIDDING me?!"

gohmak
Feb 12, 2004
cookies need love

Powered Descent posted:

There was a recommendation in the spaceflight thread to see this in 3D, which is somehow the first I'd heard that it was a 3D show at all.

What's the hivemind of this thread think? Is the 3D worth it?

For the landscape and planetary shots alone. Go see it in a quality 3D

gohmak
Feb 12, 2004
cookies need love

Panfilo posted:

What was the one NASA guy saying to the Chinese official when he mentions "We haven't done that since Apollo 9" ?

That the Chinese space program is antiquated and in need of good ol' Murican advise?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Dr. Stab
Sep 12, 2010
👨🏻‍⚕️🩺🔪🙀😱🙀

Senjuro posted:

Hardly pointless. it meant he had to figure out most of the rover mods on his own and that NASA couldn't help him navigate or warn him about the dust storm.

I personally think they should have at least kept the explosion the way it originally happened. In the movie it just happens right away. In the book first it gets your hopes up because everything seems to be going great, then he realizes his mistake, has to come up with a solution, makes another mistake and then explodes. The other thing they should have kept is the original airlock sequence. In the movie it's solved in a minute with duct tape. In the book he has to deal with a broken beyond repair visor and leaking airlock at the same time with minutes of air left meaning that we get to see him solving problems again.

Honestly, all that stuff is super cuttable, as evidenced by the fact that the story functions without it. This movie doesn't need to be 3 hours long. If it were to be extended, I'd rather see more scenes giving weight to what already happens in the movie instead of even more plot.

  • Locked thread