The Martian (2015): A Looking Closer Film Forum

The Martian has a reputation: Science enthusiasts — even more than science fiction enthusiasts — think the novel is the best thing since the Large Hadron Collider.

Of course, it takes more than a lot of scientific details to make a great novel. And it's even more of a challenge to turn a great novel in to a great movie — or even a good one.

Turning to my go-to community of film-loving writers, I find some enthusiastic responses to Ridley Scott's film — which is built on an adapted screenplay by Drew "Cabin in the Woods" Goddard. But I also found some expressions of frustration and disappointment that remind me of how many "event movies" like this one have failed to live up to the hype for me. (Can anybody say... Interstellar?)

King of the Geeks, Drew "Moriarty" McWeeny at HitFix, turns in a review that suggests this movie might restore my interest in the work of Ridley "I Once Spent a Few Years Making Masterpieces, But Decided It Wasn't for Me" Scott:

So how does the guy who fumbled "Prometheus" and "Exodus" so hard that it felt like he was trying to sabotage the studio turn around and absolutely nail this in terms of tone?

Ken Morefieldat 1MoreFilmBlog writes:

The MartianBlade Runner

And Jaime Christleyat Slant gets right to the heart of what frustrates me about so much Interstellar-like science-fiction:

The Martian

Nor is there much awe. ... When Watley muses to his video diary about the billions of years that'd passed on Mars before he set foot on this or that hill, he's only right in fact. In spirit, in imagination, we'd already conquered it, and Scott's intrepid botanist is merely a johnny-come-lately, in a film where curiosity is in shorter supply than the oxygen.

But I'll go see the film anyway — probably because I'm encouraged by Alissa Wilkinson's carefully modulated praise at Christianity Today:

The MartianThe Martian