The Martian

Aesop · Post by **Aesop** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:59 am

In short: GO SEE THIS MOVIE.

Absolutely excellent from beginning to end. This movie was everything that the POS Gravity wished it could be.
In Gravity, by ten minutes in, I was rooting for the debris.
By contrast, in The Martian, you have a tale of survival-that-hasn't-been compelling enough to keep you engaged and interested all the way to the final credits. It is absolutely flawless filmmaking and storytelling without any superfluous BS, nor any contrived drama, and no deus et machina flaws. It's funny, it's thoughtful, and it's raw action all rolled up into a perfect ball of movie goodness.

And clearly, Ridley Scott and Andy Weir should be put in charge of NASA, because they self-evidently have a 1000% better idea of what NASA and manned space exploration should be about, and what they haven't been doing for forty-five years.
All of NASA, from director to the newest janitor, should be forced to watch this movie once a week for the next ten years.

And by all means, see this on the big screen. It is not a movie to watch on a little one.

Rating: Out of this world.

Jericho941 · Post by **Jericho941** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:07 pm

Termite · Post by **Termite** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:58 pm

We should have had a resupply/jump-off station on Mars 20 yrs ago, and have orbited Jupiter and returned by now.

JAG2955 · Post by **JAG2955** » Mon Oct 19, 2015 7:04 pm

Termite wrote:We should have had a resupply/jump-off station on Mars 20 yrs ago, and have orbited Jupiter and returned by now.

We traded it for a bunch of Obamaphones and "Swipe yo EBT".

Ain't democracy grand?

dfwmtx · Post by **dfwmtx** » Tue Oct 20, 2015 3:29 pm

America used to send people into space to land on other heavenly bodies. Now we just make movies about it.

I like to imagine where we'd be if the money used to bankroll the welfare state was instead diverted to NASA.

Aesop · Post by **Aesop** » Tue Oct 20, 2015 3:40 pm

This isn't an either/or question.

The correct solution is to send the welfare hordes into space. Win-win.

George guy · Post by **George guy** » Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:06 pm

Aesop wrote:This isn't an either/or question.

The correct solution is to send the welfare hordes into space. Win-win.

Golgafrincham B-Ark?

Jericho941 · Post by **Jericho941** » Tue Oct 20, 2015 7:39 pm

Well, then there's Al Franken's idea to solve the euthanasia debate and Social Security by sending the elderly to space.

"Ah, Houston, we have a problem."
"Yeah? Sorry to hear that, buddy. Good luck!"

dfwmtx · Post by **dfwmtx** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:27 pm

Jericho941 wrote:Well, then there's Al Franken's idea to solve the euthanasia debate and Social Security by sending the elderly to space.

"Ah, Houston, we have a problem."
"Yeah? Sorry to hear that, buddy. Good luck!"

Funny that, once read a short story from someone in the Baen stable who proposed such seriously. Low-gravity/zero g would be easier on the aged' physiology, their experience is already a big benefit.....

toad · Post by **toad** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:28 am

The problem for the aged in space is calcium loss. Already brittle bones would become even more fragile. Also while a heart wouldn't have to pump as hard in zero gravity the calcium problem could lead to heart problems if too much of the calcium leached from the bones ended up in the blood stream. They need to put some volunteer old farts into orbit for multi-year studies. The wouldn't let me go because of my gas problem.

The Gun Counter

The Martian

The Martian

Re: The Martian

Re: The Martian

Re: The Martian

Re: The Martian

Re: The Martian

Re: The Martian

Re: The Martian

Re: The Martian

Re: The Martian