|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 12, 2015 22:13:45 GMT
The story; During a mission to Mars astronaut Mark Watney gets left behind when the mission is cancelled due to a storm. Cut off from all communications with Earth and with limited supplies he has to figure out how to stay alive until the next Mars mission lands...in three years time.
The book starts out being written in first person, with the chapters being the journal entries of Watney. Later parts of the story change to a more traditional third person writing style and switch between the two. This actually works well, given that Watney is alone while the other characters are not.
The science is explained well, managing to be simple enough for the layman to understand without trouble while at the same time avoiding dumbing things down and annoying those with a decent grasp of science. The plot is...well in parts I found it rather predictable. Normally this is not a good sign. But here it didn't really bother me and I found it satisfying enough.
Descriptions are somewhat lacking, especially for characters - the most description we get of any character is basically 'blonde, attractive'. This isn't as big a deal as it might be, as things move along in a way where this doesn't really matter.
The most annoying thing to me is what at times feels like the endless stream of 'bad things happening'.
All in all this is a book that is well worth getting and reading, it is something that you will probably go back to again and again. Worthy of the hype? For once I'd say yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Nov 13, 2015 3:24:31 GMT
Was the movie based on this book or was the book just written based on the screen play for the movie?
I often find that if the book came first, it is much better than the movie. If the book was written after the fact, it's not worth the read. Just go see the movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 13, 2015 4:15:13 GMT
Was the movie based on this book or was the book just written based on the screen play for the movie? I often find that if the book came first, it is much better than the movie. If the book was written after the fact, it's not worth the read. Just go see the movie. my understanding is the book is the original. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Nov 13, 2015 4:25:03 GMT
Was the movie based on this book or was the book just written based on the screen play for the movie? I often find that if the book came first, it is much better than the movie. If the book was written after the fact, it's not worth the read. Just go see the movie. my understanding is the book is the original. If that's the case, I think I'll read the book before I see the movie. If I even bother to see the movie. I read Jurassic Park a number of years before it was made into a movie. When the movie finally came out, I went to see it and was really disappointed. While it did pretty much stick to the book, the visuals in the movie weren't nearly as good as how I had envisioned it in my mind. That wasn't the case with Apollo 13. I read that book long before seeing the movie. While I really enjoyed the book, the movie really brought it to life. I was still glad I read the book first as there was much more technical detailes in the book that they just couldn't put in the movie. But then, this was not a science fiction book. It's still one of my favorite movies of all time. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Nov 13, 2015 9:48:13 GMT
Books and Films...
It depends on the Director, and screen writer.
I have to say that the people who were responsible for the Lord of the Rings did a bloody good job, and even though I was a huge fan of the books from the original first edition onwards, the past set of films by Peter Jackson is about the closest you can ever get to being absolutely perfect to how would you ever do that book as a film.
Otherwise, I have read books that are damn near impossible to imagine as a film....
Keeping this thread to the book in question, how close is the film to the book, just for comparison?...
Will you get the sense of the book from the film, or is it a "Loosely based" connection?...
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 13, 2015 10:20:42 GMT
The book came first, or to be more accurate the self-published ebook came out. Then picked up by a publisher due to its success and finally picked up as a film. I can actually understand why turning this into a film would be very tempting as several scenes and the overall plot and pacing almost read as if it was a film script. The lack of descriptions regarding the character's might also, and ironically, have been an advantage. No-one can moan about the actors not looking like the descriptions in the book as there aren't any.
I haven't seen the film yet, which is why I didn't do a review of it. However my understanding is that the film differs mainly in cutting out a few of the emergencies Watney has to deal with. Since I felt there were too many problems cropping up in the book anyway, and the basic story being what it is. I would imagine this would actually result in a better 'cleaner' story with those scenes not being missed even by those who have read the book.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Nov 13, 2015 10:26:15 GMT
The book came first, or to be more accurate the self-published ebook came out. Then picked up by a publisher due to its success and finally picked up as a film. I can actually understand why turning this into a film would be very tempting as several scenes and the overall plot and pacing almost read as if it was a film script. The lack of descriptions regarding the character's might also, and ironically, have been an advantage. No-one can moan about the actors not looking like the descriptions in the book as there aren't any. I haven't seen the film yet, which is why I didn't do a review of it. However my understanding is that the film differs mainly in cutting out a few of the emergencies Watney has to deal with. Since I felt there were too many problems cropping up in the book anyway, and the basic story being what it is. I would imagine this would actually result in a better 'cleaner' story with those scenes not being missed even by those who have read the book. Good point... and possibly quite valid... I have read books where the plot jumps about too much, and you wish it had been a simpler read, so can emphasize with that. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 13, 2015 11:45:17 GMT
The book came first, or to be more accurate the self-published ebook came out. Then picked up by a publisher due to its success and finally picked up as a film. I can actually understand why turning this into a film would be very tempting as several scenes and the overall plot and pacing almost read as if it was a film script. The lack of descriptions regarding the character's might also, and ironically, have been an advantage. No-one can moan about the actors not looking like the descriptions in the book as there aren't any. I haven't seen the film yet, which is why I didn't do a review of it. However my understanding is that the film differs mainly in cutting out a few of the emergencies Watney has to deal with. Since I felt there were too many problems cropping up in the book anyway, and the basic story being what it is. I would imagine this would actually result in a better 'cleaner' story with those scenes not being missed even by those who have read the book. Good point... and possibly quite valid... I have read books where the plot jumps about too much, and you wish it had been a simpler read, so can emphasize with that. The plot of The Martian is fairly straightforward and doesn't actually jump around, with practically everything relating to Watney's situation on Mars. (The parts that are not are short and don't slow things down). This is why I said it read in parts like the script for a film, and I'm guessing that it was one of the reasons it was picked up as I don't think they would have needed to mess around making major changes for an adaption. From a production viewpoint cutting some of the emergencies out would save money and shorten the run time. From the story view, well as I said it started to feel a little tiresome to have practically everything that could go wrong actually go wrong. Its not that these are unbelievable problems, more that after a while one or two of them do feel to me to be more like inadvertent padding. (This might be due to how the book was written, as it was written and posted chapter by chapter online and as such I suspect it was easy for the author to loose track of the bigger picture. That it didn't feel out of place says a lot about the quality of the story). I do know of one scene from the book that was cut out (I'm not going to say what it is as that would be a spoiler), and I can understand why as this would have slowed the pacing of the film down. I'd suspect that other parts of the story would have been switched around. I'm guessing for example that how Watney ends up getting left behind is shown in the film before it was described in the book. (The book starts with Watney already stranded and doesn't show/tell us the specifics until much later.) I'm also guessing that some scenes were added relating to events on Earth, and possibly some scenes to help with character development which is something else mostly missing from the book. (Another aspect of the book that, like descriptions, isn't a problem) |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Nov 13, 2015 11:48:36 GMT
From what you are saying, I may try and find that book and have a read before the film gets to Video....
I wont be going to a theatre, I can have a much cheaper fun night in with the "things" with much more popcorn if we wait for it to be on video... and we can pause and rewind as well if we need too....
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 13, 2015 12:01:41 GMT
You will have no problem finding the book, either in a shop or online.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Nov 13, 2015 14:44:58 GMT
I managed to find the book about a month ago, still free for download in its original e-book format from Weir's website where it was first published. Can't find it right now, but I'll try again later and post a link if I do. Now, to chime in on the review, I'm not usually into science fiction at all, so it should tell you a lot about how well written this book is that I read the whole thing in around 4-5 hours spread out over 24 hours. I couldn't put it down! When a book starts with the words, "I'm pretty much f***ed. That's my considered opinion. F***ed." you kinda know from the getgo that this isn't like most of what you're used to reading  I love the format of how Watney's story is told through his logbook. Everything you hear about what's going on with him is after the fact, which really helps give you this feeling that yes, he is indeed all alone on this planet. There's just no one else there - not even a narrator - to tell the story. There's just him in complete solitude and for many many days, his only sense of "communication" with anyone is writing this logbook. I disagree with Cyber about the whole "too many crises" thing. None of the things that go wrong for him during this story seem far fetched and when you consider that the equipment he has to work with isn't meant to do what he does with it and certainly not for the three years he's expecting to be there, it doesn't seem unnatural to me that he runs into all those problems. As for the lacking character descriptions, I didn't even notice that until you brought it up, but you're right. Apart from Johanssen being an attractive, nerdy woman, there's not much to describe what the characters look like, but it doesn't take anything away from the story. If anything, I was kind of glad for once to be reading a book where I didn't need to go through 5 pages without anything new happening in the story, but just reading physical descriptions of people or scenery. I highly recommend this book and I'm looking forward to it coming out on DVD. I watched the interview on tested.com with Adam, Chris Hadfield and Andy Weir after they had a screening of the movie and you just know it's going to be good when the author of the book says it would have been a 6 hour movie if they had to fit everything in there and he thinks they generally made the right choices about what to cut and why. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 13, 2015 19:21:43 GMT
My problem wasn't that they were far-fetched, in fact they were all logical reasonable problems he might have had. The problem was that to me it felt as if there were too many of them, and at least one of them derailed the pacing at the wrong moment. (Apparently the scriptwriters felt the same way as this scene is one that was cut from the film. Again I'm avoiding spoilers for the film or book)
This is an easy trap for a writer to fall into, especially when you are (as I suspect was the case) making things up as you go along. I've done the same in my futile attempts to write before now, only realizing that scenes didn't work in the overall context of the story three chapters later.
It's a fairly minor niggle, if the most serious of the few I picked up on and the only one that did slightly annoy me.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Nov 13, 2015 19:45:11 GMT
my understanding is the book is the original. If that's the case, I think I'll read the book before I see the movie. If I even bother to see the movie. I read Jurassic Park a number of years before it was made into a movie. When the movie finally came out, I went to see it and was really disappointed. While it did pretty much stick to the book, the visuals in the movie weren't nearly as good as how I had envisioned it in my mind. That wasn't the case with Apollo 13. I read that book long before seeing the movie. While I really enjoyed the book, the movie really brought it to life. I was still glad I read the book first as there was much more technical detailes in the book that they just couldn't put in the movie. But then, this was not a science fiction book. It's still one of my favorite movies of all time. I thought there were some major differences between the book of Jurrasic Park and the film. Take John Hammond in the book he is a money grabbing tycoon happy to endanger his staff and even his grandchildren if he survives , which he does not. John ahammond in the film is a cuddly character played by Sir Richard Attenbourgh, concerned for his staff and grandchildren and he lives. in the book the lawyer is a sympathetic character show as a professional doing his job to the best of his ability in difficult circumstances, who acts when he has to with bravery, the film version is a weasel who is killed hiding in a toilet. But I understand what you mean sometimes a film cannot convey the story of. A book correctly, they do not have the time or cannot show the inner workings of a characters mind. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Nov 13, 2015 20:03:34 GMT
I thought there were some major differences between the book of Jurrasic Park and the film. Take John Hammond in the book he is a money grabbing tycoon happy to endanger his staff and even his grandchildren if he survives , which he does not. John ahammond in the film is a cuddly character played by Sir Richard Attenbourgh, concerned for his staff and grandchildren and he lives. in the book the lawyer is a sympathetic character show as a professional doing his job to the best of his ability in difficult circumstances, who acts when he has to with bravery, the film version is a weasel who is killed hiding in a toilet. But I understand what you mean sometimes a film cannot convey the story of. A book correctly, they do not have the time or cannot show the inner workings of a characters mind. I'm sure you're correct. There was a 3 year gap between when I read the book and when the movie came out. And then, I didn't see the movie for another couple of years after it was released. Still really looking forward to picking up a copy of The Martian. Just not sure when I'll have time to read it. EDIT: Just ordered a copy on Amazon. (and it's all Cybers fault) |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 13, 2015 21:48:21 GMT
You will not regret it.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Nov 13, 2015 22:59:04 GMT
Looking forward to it. I'm sure it will be a good read. Will definitely post a review when I finish it. |
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Nov 13, 2015 23:05:46 GMT
I have put in some heavy hints that Santas sack might like to include a copy, with my Birthday and Christmas coming together I do not buy things for myself this time of year.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Nov 21, 2015 4:47:41 GMT
I ordered The Martian from Amazon last Friday and thanks to free, two day shipping, received it Sunday. I finished reading it Wednesday (18th).
Here's my thoughts on the book. While it's fast moving, it's not a "can't put it down" page turner. This is especially true of the first 4 or 5 chapters. And it's normally the first couple of chapters that's supposed to hook you. I believe part of this is the first person, log entry dialog. While the log entry narrative has the advantage in that it allows the character to more easily express his views and emotions, it also takes away from his ability to go into detail about his environment. This is as Cyber pointed out in his opening review. While this normally doesn't bother me as I have a pretty active imagination, it can get a little conflicting later on when Watney is explaining how things went wrong and I have painted a completely different picture in my mind because of the total lack of description from the start. This visualization is one area in which I'm sure the movie will be an improvement. You don't have to visualize anything in a movie.
As for the science in the book, let me explain my preference. If the story is going to be based on real world science, then it should at least start out on solid science. Once the story is grounded in solid science, it's then OK to "bend the rules" a little in order to support the storyline. After all, we're talking Science FICTION here. Michael Crichton was great at doing this. On the other hand, if the story is based on fantasy science, that's OK too as long as the author give some explanation of his fantasy science. This is how we get warp drive, worm holes, transporters and light sabers. And who doesn't love warp drives, worm holes, transporters and light sabers? This book does neither well. The author starts out going into a great deal of explanation of how things work trying to make us believe that it's real science when in fact, it's very bad science. He then uses even worse science to explain how Watney overcomes the bad science to make things right again. Maybe it's just the engineer in me, but if an author is going to pretend that he knows science, then he better know science. If we take bad science as a myth (which I don't), then this book would have enough myths to keep the Mythbusters on the air for another 5 seasons.
Back to the story. I don't agree with Cyber that there were too many "bad things happening" as this is the only thing that moves the story along. Maybe there wouldn't have to be so many catastrophes if the solutions were a little more thought out and took a little longer to complete. For example:This happens time and time again. Watney get's himself into some horrific life threatening event, and then in a few hours, he's back on his merry way heading into his next catastrophe.
Overall, once I got over the bad science throughout the book, it wasn't too bad. It's a good story and moves along well. I would recommend it to anyone that is interested in science fiction and/or space travel. Not on par with Apollo 13, but I'd give it a solid B.
|
|
