- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Ridley Scott explained how studios didn’t realize ‘The Martian’ was a comedy.
You must log in or # to comment.
This is my favorite book and favorite movie. So I really must wonder, did they read the script? Mark literally makes dirty ASCII art that is broadcast across the earth.
The book was a comedy as well. Tons of great dry jokes. The two are not mutually exclusive.
There’s a chasm between being funny and being a comedy. Comedy is a genre, and I’d argue doesn’t strictly even need to be very funny, if at all.
It’s a farce: “a light dramatic composition marked by broadly satirical comedy and improbable plot”. It’s played straight. The stakes are serious. It should be a tragedy. But then there’s a literal turning point when they turn around to rescue Watney, and it’s ridiculous.
How did no one realise this? Like half the movie at least is black humour
[Insert standard explanation about the worldwide decline in media literacy here]
“Mark Watney: Space Pirate”
Like Iron Man!
Maybe it was behind-the-scenes commentary? I recall that one of the goals from the author was that they keep the “positive” outlook. Like, there are plenty of stories of people losing their minds after being stranded.
This would be different.
Will have to re-watch. I don’t remember much because I’m old.
Screw watching the movie. Read the book or better listen to the audiobook its freaking awesome! I own both but end up listening to the audio version rather then reread the book.
The film is great as its own thing, but the book is excellent and Wil Wheaton’s narration is perfection.
He does a great job with ready player one as well
The book is hard sci-fi and excellent.
The movie is dumb shit and screwy. The only way this change of tone and content is justified is by realizing that they switched genres and turned it into a movie.
The book is highly comedic.
Yes but it never breaks the science in the name of comedy. Using the other astronauts’ poop to fertilize went against the book just so he could make an extra joke. The Ironman scene was also ridiculous and unnecessary.
The movie didn’t need to dumb down for a few extra gags.
In the book he uses his own poop. Not a huge change really.
It is a very big change because of the reason he only uses his own poop and not the poop of the other astronauts. They broke away from the hard science in order to insert a joke.
I have to agree with both of your points. The poop thing and the iron man thing were my only two real issues with the movie though.
Obviously a ton of the book’s content is removed to make it fit in a single movie, but I think they did a great job, especially when compared to other adaptations.
I like the movie, and I am agreeing with Ridley Scott. It was clearly a comedy. The book had humor in it, but it was science first. I saw it as a thought experiment on what it would take for someone to survive in Mars. The movie’s tone was more of adventure comedy, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Donald Glover was fantastic.
