Not very entertaining, and not very exciting

Rating: 6/10 (8 November 2015)

I'm an engineer, so I enjoy science in my science fiction. But more than that, I most enjoy a science fiction movie that's exciting and entertaining. "The Martian" is mostly neither. "The Martian" must have been sold to investors as "Robinson Crusoe on Mars" meets "Gravity". Ultimately, though, it is not as entertaining as either of those movies, and here's why.
What I really like about "Gravity" is that they took an otherwise rather slow-moving and potentially boring space story and turned it into a roller coaster ride. I thought the movie had good pacing and good effects. The film excelled -- was perhaps groundbreaking -- in its look and feel of being in space.
"The Martian" presents itself as science that could really happen, almost a documentary of this guy's life on Mars. But the story is full of holes -- see many other reviewer comments -- just as "Gravity" is -- many pointed these out as well. "Robinson Crusoe on Mars" (1964) is a silly tale, with not much scientific accuracy, yet I found it (still do) to be entertaining -- even endearing.
"The Martian" comes off as full of itself. Everything is so melodramatic. The writers feel they have to throw dialogue at us to make us understand just how amazing something is that is about to happen or already happened. I do think Matt Damon is a fine actor and does a good job with his role. It's just that the writers and director chose the easy route of letting their actor's ability and the Mars special effects sell the movie. They made an okay movie, but not a very entertaining or great movie.
If it were me, I wouldn't nominate the director or writers for this one. I've always had a fascination with Mars, so for me it was enough just to see the fantastic landscapes revealed in the movie through some nice special effects. Wish there had been more of that and less gratuitous dialogue.