In some respects, even better than the enjoyable novel

Rating: Null/10 (4 October 2015)

f you were an American astronaut accidentally stranded alone on Mars an average of 140 million miles away from home, how would you feel? Fear, rage, despair? Except for a few four-letter expletives, Mark Watney sometimes seems as annoyed by the limited choice of music he can access as by the likelihood that he will suffocate or starve. But, listen, this is a guy who has been carefully selected and highly trained - and, what's more. he's a botanist with a huge tolerance of potatoes and a sense of humour.
I enjoyed the novel by Andy Weir and, as I read it, I thought that it would make a good film - and it does. In some respects, the movie is better than the book, thanks in good part to scriptwriter Drew Goddard: a more dramatic opening and a slightly extended ending, less science and fewer calculations, less time on Mars, and more humour - and, of course, the music and the visuals. Visually, it is not up there with "Gravity" and I didn't feel that the 3D added much, but it does look good whether we are on Mars (actually Jordan) or in space or at mission control. And, of course, we would expect no less from director Ridley Scott who has given us such classics as "Alien" and "Blade Runner".
Some of the casting is excellent: Matt Damon as The Martian, Jessica Chastain as mission commander, Jeff Daniels as head of NASA. But other casting choices are odd: British actor Chiwetel Ejiofor (whose parents are Nigerian) playing a character of Asian descent, Sean Bean as the only Brit at NASA - actually the flight director - for no apparent reason, Kristen Wiig wasted in a very minor role.
So this is not a knock-out movie like "Alien" or "Gravity" and it is a bit long, but it has the drama of "Apollo 13" and it is much more credible (and understandable) that the recent "Interstellar".