"The Martian" isn't a follow-up to "Blade Runner," nor is it a continuation of "Alien" or "Prometheus." This may disappoint many science fiction fans who idolize Ridley Scott. After all, the legacies of "Blade Runner" and the "Alien" series are monumental—the former cemented the status of variant humans (mechanized organisms) in sci-fi film history, inspiring iconic films like "Terminator 2," "Ghost in the Shell," and "The Matrix." The latter initiated and perfected the species evolution history of xenomorphs (organisms coexisting with humans) through "Alien" and "Prometheus."
However, "The Martian" feels more like a casual project Ridley Scott took on before shooting the sequel to "Prometheus," at best a Mars version of "Apollo 13." The main selling point is undoubtedly the use of limited resources to complete several seemingly impossible tasks: the crew of Hermes performs a Mars exploration mission, encounters a sandstorm, and has to retreat urgently, mistakenly leaving the injured crew member Mark Watney alone on Mars, where he undertakes a survival challenge with scarce basic supplies. Meanwhile, NASA's geniuses must complete a billion-kilometre Earth supply and rescue mission within a limited time. Finally, when his teammates reach the vicinity of Mars orbit, Mark has to take a “convertible” spacecraft to rendezvous and dock with Captain Melissa Lewis in space.
This makes "The Martian" initially seem unlike a Ridley Scott film, at least vastly different from his typical soft sci-fi style heavily influenced by dark themes. Additionally, the overly structured script seems to lead the film down the path of excessive craftsmanship (see "Conquest of Paradise" and "Robin Hood"). The issues addressed in the film are also quite cliché, such as promoting individual heroism (like in "Gladiator"), the sacrifice of undertaking impossible missions (similar to "Black Hawk Down"), or the rebellion and redemption of feminism (akin to "Thelma & Louise").
However, audiences familiar with Scott's work will quickly realize that skilfully integrating these elements into a narrative that's "harder" than typical hard sci-fi novels is quite an achievement; this could be another attempt by Scott to explore the realm of hard science fiction. This sentiment is echoed in Scott's own sketch for the film's script cover, where he wrote, "science the shit out of this planet." This phrase serves not only as a survival manifesto for the film's protagonist, Mark, but also showcases Scott's enduring ambition in the realm of sci-fi. Interestingly, this sketch and the phrase were orbited around Earth for two weeks in December 2014 aboard NASA's Orion spacecraft.
Overall, the fun of "The Martian" mainly comes from two aspects: one is the detailed display of how humans survive on Mars. For example, Mark, a botanist and mechanic, uses his "scientific knowledge" to grow potatoes on Mars. Also, when Mark finds a Mars probe from 1997, he combines the angle of the camera's swing and 16-bit encoding technology to communicate with NASA engineers, which is full of intellectual interest. Of course, these tasks are not always smooth. The various attempts at trial and error and troubleshooting, combined with the protagonist's self-amusing jokes, make up an interesting Mars survival guide.
On the other hand, it's about highlighting the disintegration of personal existence in cosmic space. In traditional sci-fi movies about interstellar travel, the main character's goal is to resolve mankind's dilemma, which could be racial (like in "Prometheus"), political (like in "Star Trek") or ideological (like in "Solyaris"). That's why scientists in “Interstellar” repeatedly caution astronauts to consider issues from the perspective of humanity as a species, because as an individual you no longer matter. Mark's right to survival as an individual has been stripped by NASA—a larger collective entity, and there's no possibility for rescue on Mars. Therefore, the logic that holds up in "The Martian" isn't the Western universal propaganda of "democracy", or the rule where the minority (Hermes crew) obeys the majority (NASA). Instead, it's about mobilizing national efforts to rescue a seemingly insignificant individual billions of kilometres away.
Both "The Martian" and its original novel adopt a three-thread narrative: Mark on Mars, the crew on Hermes, and NASA on Earth. The movie starts with a single viewpoint on Mars, then splits into two viewpoints as Mark is 'abandoned', leading us to the viewpoint of NASA observing the failure of the Mars mission. These three threads interweave and run parallel, forming the major dramatic tension driving the film's plot. As Mark reunites with the Hermes crew in orbit around Mars, three points merge into two, and as Hermes returns to Earth, two points merge into one. At the start and the end of the film, the single viewpoint is always Mark's vision. The difference lies in the starting point being the vast surface of Mars and the endpoint being the equally vast surface of Earth, while all we see is the fate of the protagonist as an individual; the cosmic space has disappeared without a trace.
Interestingly, the entire process of rescuing Mark on TV was broadcasted globally 24/7. His every move on Mars was watched by audiences worldwide, making "stranded on Mars" seem like a well-planned reality show. Even the occasional swear words were censored by the keen-eyed producers. If the universe is a studio and satellites are cameras, isn't Ridley Scott directing a rescue mission? Isn't Matt Damon working hard for commercial success? Four days before the release of "The Martian" in North America, NASA cleverly announced the discovery of water on Mars; a month after its release, NASA revealed a detailed plan for human landing on Mars, showing that it would be executed 15 years later, which coincidentally matches the timeline of Mark's Mars journey in 2030. NASA has done its homework both inside and outside of "The Martian", and Ridley Scott's film complements NASA's publicity efforts perfectly. It's like another "Truman Show".
Share your thoughts!
Be the first to start the conversation.