Movie: The Martian

I watched The Martian mostly because it had a lot of celebrities I knew and because my brother IMed me just to rave about it. I can't say I regret it!

General Review
It was overall a really gripping and entertaining movie - how could it not be? It's a space movie about a guy who gets stranded in Mars and decides to "science the shit out of this" in order to survive long enough to be rescued. It's a space movie that was smart about it without being arrogant or taking itself too seriously, which I think is where its strength really lied (lay? laid?!).

What Worked
There was an incredible amount of actors in this one, so that really helped its appeal. You could like just one of those people and watch it, and you'd probably end up surprising yourself with how enjoyable the movie was! This was a double-edged sword however, and I'll get to that in a bit.

The simplicity of the overarching plot was really what gave the details room to breathe, and that's what made the movie work for me. Like I said, it's about a guy who gets stranded in Mars and has to be rescued as soon as possible. How he survives and how the situation is received on Earth is really what the movie is about.

I really loved how scientifically plausible everything seemed - how he grew potatoes by fertilizing Martian soil with feces, how he "created" water, how he communicated initially with Earth - those were really interesting because they seemed totally plausible! I kept on thinking I want to see a Mythbusters special on the film, from everything I just mentioned to seeing whether you could really plausibly use duct tape to patch holes in your space helmet (probably yes given duct tape's proven powers), or if you could really fly the MAV into Martian atmosphere with only a thin sheet of fabric (was it tarpaulin or plastic?) covering the top half of the vehicle.

In as much as the movie focused on the science and technical aspects of survival, it also equally dealt with the social and societal aspects that factored into the situation. From big things like how Mark Watney became a revered and celebrated symbol for people on Earth, how his crew reacted to finding out he was still alive, how Mark reacted to finding out the crew didn't know he was still alive, and the nuances of the internal politics in NASA. These were dealt with in a way that as believable - easy to buy into but entertaining to watch at the same time.

Mark Watney, as the central figure tying the whole story together, was a surprisingly relatable character, though this was also a double-edged sword at times. His snarky personality served to cushion the amount of hard science he was talking about, making it palatable to young audiences. In fact, there were a lot of cushions to the hard sciences presented in the movie - numerous pop culture references (Three's Company, Iron Man, Disco songs, etc.), funny one-liners ("I'm gonna have to science the shit out of this," "Feel my botany powers!", "I'm the best botanist on this planet," "I've colonized Mars - take that, Neil Armstrong," etc.), among others. This would have been a little overbearing if it weren't for the plausibility of the science going on to back everything up.

Also, I just have to insert this here: Sebastian Stan. And as an astronaut. This has awakened in me feelings I did not expect to be awakened.


What Didn't Work
Despite the gratuitous amounts of Sebastian Stan's jaw that we got see featured, I think there were just too many well-known actors which contributed very little to the overall story. I was wondering a lot of the time if they could have achieved the same effect - possibly even heightening anticipation for the plot - had they not shown a new celebrity every few scenes. It was an all-star cast for a film that didn't really need that amount of star power - what sold the film was the plot and how it was treated, not its ensemble.

I'm not sure if the reason for it was that they had to give more screen time to the other actors since they're all so famous, but I felt like Mark Watney's personality wasn't really fleshed out very well in the movie. For a man who goes through an incredibly lengthy journey (and alone too), there's very little character development. He's changed outside more than he seems to have changed inside, which made it seem like he was (ironically, I realize) a mere vehicle who existed to move the plot forward and show the science things, instead of the main character in the movie. He was just ... there. The scene where he sends a message to their captain telling her to tell his parents he loves what he does made me feel all sorts of things, but even that - where Mark was arguably at his most vulnerable throughout the movie - didn't seem to reveal much about him as a person. That's my problem with it, I think - he didn't seem like a real person, just a character in a book. Just something that's there for convenience so the writer can show us how to science things.


But that aside, I think the movie was overall very entertaining. Where it failed to really flesh out its characters, I think its plot more than made up for it. I don't think the character underdevelopment marred the film as much as inaccurate science would have.

I wanted to write this review after reading the book, but I might lose track of my opinions then (I'm reading the book now, but it's slow going - there's a lot of science they cut out, haha). I'll probably just write a review for it independently when I finish it. For now, I leave you with a GIF of Sebastian Stan:

source

Yay!