Then while watching, I thought this was not a remake of Apollo 13? But the last movie was 20 years ago after all.
After reading the film review, I suddenly realized that the old man just wanted to tell a story about Robinson, and the classical spirit broke out again. He gave up Prometheus II to choose this film. Probably originally wanted to discuss the humility of human beings, but now let’s talk about the initiative of humility?
And in the original book, the protagonist's experience is much more difficult than in the film. Rao is so, the original author still can't get around the problem of three life-support systems: water, air and pressure, whichever one has an accident, he can't survive. So the author had to set that all three miraculously were not damaged.
When I was a teenager, I read the Lonely Island Wandering series, but I didn't find Robinson. I started reading from a certain "Lonely Island Adventure" by Verne. I read all kinds of stories about overcoming difficulties and being strong and brave. It was very enjoyable to watch. Years later, when I read the book again, I felt that the luck of those children was unbelievable and unrealistic. But the industrial revolution in the 19th century, the explosion of technology, how optimistic people were at that time. Even the pundits predicted at the end of the century that classical physics had solved all the puzzles, leaving only two dark clouds. It was those two clouds that led to quantum physics at a whole new dimension.
I don't think Ragong wants to repeat a 19th century Robinson story. He probably wanted to show a beautiful vision of science as a universal value and a human spirit that transcends the law of the jungle. No dark psychology, no deep posturing, just knowing oneself and knowing one another, and the classicist spirit of I'm gonna have to science the shit out of this. Compared with Apollo 13, the various reactions of NASA people before the conflict are even more brilliant because they are novels.
In fact, without this film, the stories that actually happened in NASA are very impressive.
Unlike Gravity, there is no attachment to Earth. When people look up at the stars, they probably don't think of the earth under their feet for a while. So I guess, Gravity is a posture of reflecting back to the mother body (a metaphor of the fetus), The Martian is a posture of looking up at the stars, and Interstella is Sartre's existential posture of "others are hell"?
View more about The Martian reviews
