Rewatched this for the first time since coming out. Still a very fun movie that I felt engaged with the entire time, though I do have to say I think the humor feels a little juvenile, with the "I'm going to have to science the shit out of this" stuff... feels a bit silly now. Good performances from the mains (Damon, Chastain, Daniels, Ejiofor) as expected, but there was a stunning ensemble cast with the likes of Sean Bean, Kate Mara, Donald Glover, Benedict Wong, Michael Peña, Sebastian Stan that ultimately felt pretty wasted. Why cast Sean Bean of all people and give him absolutely nothing to do, with a completely one-note character?

Overall despite these relatively minor issues, my enjoyment of the film throughout was still high enough that it probably still deserves the high rating I gave it years ago. Still one of the better sci-fi movies of the past decade, and one of the best films of its year.

The Martian is a good bit of fun. The biggest compliment I can give the film is that for its two and a half-hour runtime I never once felt extremely bored by it. It's a good blockbuster that Ridley Scott directs the hell out of - yet Adam McKay gets a director nom and Scott doesn't cause lel Oscars. And really that all that there is to Ridley Scott's film for me. I mean if I were going to choose the best man vs nature tale of the year it's going to, without doubt in mind, The Revenant. As far as that type of story goes this doesn't even come close to the latter. But maybe that isn't what is being achieved in The Martian at all. Well then I'd argue what is being achieved in The Martian. Is it a love letter to science? Well from what I've seen I'd say no. To give an example, let us look at #Spotlight. McCarthy's film is considered by many to be a love letter to journalism, specifically investigative journalism. I would agree with such an assessment because the film takes a lot of time to show the process of investigative journalism. With The Martian I felt that such time wasn't given. Mostly it felt like "I'm a science man who knows science stuff so I'm doing science stuff because I know how". The science in this movie fells like it kinda of just happens. And while I don't want just pure science exposition nonsense spouted consistently, what I do want is a sense that what is being achieved is hard and well earned. Like the dude has to grow food on Mars, and then just kinda of does it with what looks to be little ease. For a survival story - which is what I believe is the base of this films narrative - things feels like they come way to easy. Like DiCaprio's character in The Revenant got fucking mauled viciously by a bear, on top of a bunch of other shit - basically the shit Hugh Glass went through is, I guess, 100x worse then being stranded on mars, not sure how that works. Now then I still enjoyed the movie, it is a competent blockbuster filled with great direction and visual effects. It is a fun and enjoyable experience, but really that's all it is for me. Also, just as a sort of side note, the humor in this film can be incredibly obnoxious and more times then not the films comedic side annoyed the hell out of me.

Well, I expected more of this movie. They didn't really exploit the psychology of the main character. He's supposed to be trapped on Mars, and he doesn't even go nuts once, in two years. He was funny yes, but I expected more on his thoughts about his potential death, about his friends and family, about Earth. Dialogues were too specialized to be understood by people without scientific knowledge. I don't even properly remember how he created water. Technical things were explained too fast. So I'm a bit disappointed.

Here's a little teaser for The Martian https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wygmxzp6VzY