BOOK VS MOVIE: The Martian

In space, no one can hear you scream. Over the last several years, fiction has taken a particular interest to the science fiction genre. More specifically, the horror sub-genre. We've been treated to the likes of 28 Days Later, Under the Skin and various episodes of Doctor Who. But science fiction and horror always feature a common feature: the willpower to survive.

And of course many titles within the science fiction genre run around the survival theme. Gravity, Moon, 2001: A Space Odyssey...these are a few of the more prominent titles in this regard. One of the more recent titles to join these is The Martian, and it has a different tone in comparison to some of the other ones. How so? It has a sense of humor to it (albeit a dark one).

Andy Weir's novel is filled with gallows humor, which to be honest is frequently omitted from other fiction of this nature. The novel features a nice balance between that and scientific facts. (Even if you're not well-versed when it comes to science, you can still enjoy the book.) Also, it's nice to see something not take itself too seriously. ("In your face, Neil Armstrong.")

While Ridley Scott's adaptation omits a few scenes (and Drew Goddard's script features less of the novel's dark humor), it's still as entertaining as what Weir initially wrote. And the climax is decidedly way more suspenseful in action. (One can only go so far with the written word.)

So which is better: Weir's novel or Scott's film? Both are quick to grab the audience. Weir's novel has a decidedly more sardonic tone while Scott goes back to his Alien roots for his film to amp up suspense. So it looks like there's only one solution to this problem. (To be honest, it's not much of a problem to begin with.)

What's worth checking out?: Both.

Prometheus

Remember when the news broke that Ridley Scott was making a prequel to his insanely successful Alien? Many opinions towards the story were leaning to the iffy side, but hey. Sometimes the outcome can surprise you.

Prometheus doesn't exactly deliver as well as the film that started it all thirty-three years ago, though it does show that Scott still knows what he's doing after all this time. After all, most sci-fi titles recently only focus on sexy alien chicks and gratuitous violence (and the occasional sex scene). Not in Scott's universe.

One thing the old school sci-fi titles always tend to focus on was the meaning of life and existence. Prometheus does such a thing. It's not exactly the what Stanley Kubrick did with 2001: A Space Odyssey, but what Scott does isn't half bad.

The cast isn't bad either. Noomi Rapace isn't quite like Sigourney Weaver, but she makes the most of her screen time. Charlize Theron and Idris Elba do pretty much the same thing, Guy Pearce just a slight level above them. The MVP of Prometheus has to be Michael Fassbender, who has definitely made a name for himself in a short amount of time.

All in all, Prometheus is quite good but nowhere near the greatness of Alien. The plot holes are slightly bothersome though the actors make up for them more or less. Still, do yourself a favor and wait until it's on DVD to watch it.

My Rating: ****1/2

Alien

Yes, we all know of Ridley Scott's sci-fi marvel that is Alien. The chestburster, well, bursting out of John Hurt's chest. The tagline reading, "In space, no one can hear you scream." We all know that. But there's more to it.

One question that I had slightly persisted as I watched Alien. What genre does it qualify under: sci-fi or horror? On the one hand, it's set in outer space so therefore it's a sci-fi film. Yet on the other hand, it's basically the freakiest shit I've seen since God knows when so therefore it's a horror film. I'm just going to say it's both.

Of course you can't talk about a film without even mentioning what went into it. I personally think it was a very smart decision to make Ripley a woman because let's face it. There are enough male heroes out there. Let the women have some fun. (Oh, Ripley was originally written as a guy, so that's why I'm saying that.) Also, the score by Jerry Goldsmith is pretty much the most horrifying score alongside John Williams' for Jaws and Bernard Herrmann's for Psycho.

I'm not sure if this was the screenwriters or Scott's idea, but the immense suspense building up to each appearance of the alien is genius. It's possible that Jaws provided some inspiration for that aspect of Alien, but for now I love that concept.

Much like when I saw The Silence of the Lambs or Halloween or Rosemary's Baby, I'm really grateful I saw this in the middle of the day. I'd probably have nightmares had I saw it at night. Probably.

My Rating: *****

American Gangster

Ridley Scott's American Gangster depicts the two sides of one world.  White and black. Right and wrong. Good and evil.

The film focuses on the rise of drug lord Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington). He was the gangster of the Harlem criminal underworld during the Vietnam era. That is, until Ritchie Roberts (Russell Crowe) seeks to bring him down.

Washington portrays Lucas as someone who's low key and calculating. He never flaunts his wealth and success in public. He is careful with the distribution of the heroin. In short, he knows what he's doing.

Crowe portrays Roberts as a man trying rectify many wrongs. A pariah among his department, he's looking for a way to be respected by his fellow officers again. (It's not as easy as it sounds.) Once Lucas catches his eye, he knows what to do to get the respect back.

American Gangster definitely captures the true crime aspect. (After all, Lucas and Roberts themselves were creative consultants.) Not exactly much else apart from good work from Washington and Crowe, but at least Scott makes an effort here. Still, a look wouldn't hurt.

My Rating: ****1/2

BOOK VS MOVIE: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?/Blade Runner

I've never been big on the sci-fi genre, but there have been a few books and movies that I managed to take a liking to.

Philip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is a very interesting read. Very philosophical too. It floats through ideas of life and death while at the same time providing imagery of a decaying futuristic Los Angeles.

Ridley Scott's Blade Runner, in my honest opinion, is one of the best sci-fi movies I've seen. I admire how it resembles a film noir from the 1940's in most scenes, meaning such films were an influence on the production. The music also reminded me of noirs from the 1950's. Yet it doesn't overstylize the movies it's influenced by. That I like.

Even though there are several minor differences between Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? and Blade Runner, they're still one in the same. Though personally, I like Blade Runner more. It has an easier flow, therefore making it easier to understand. Still, they're both great.

What's worth checking out?: I'd go with the movie.

BOOK VS MOVIE: Cat on a Hot Tin Roof

I have read five plays written by Tennessee Williams: A Streetcar Named Desire, The Glass Menagerie, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Orpheus Descending and Suddenly, Last Summer.

Brick Pollitt is a former football player who drinks his days away. His wife Maggie has all but failed to entice him. His father Big Daddy, dying of cancer, wants to give his plantation to Brick and Maggie, much to the dismay of Brick's brother and his wife.

Williams' play is a fine drama with excellent characters that always have you interested about them. Richard Brooks' film is well-acted and Paul Newman, Elizabeth Taylor and Burl Ives are perfectly cast in their roles. Cat on a Hot Tin Roof is one of those rare examples where the book and its film adaptation are both very well done, making it almost impossible to say which one is better.

What's worth checking out?: I'd go with both.

Gladiator

The Roman epic. A bunch were made throughout the 1950s and 60s. after the 1960s were through, so was the Roman epic. But Gladiator brought it back.

Victorious general Maximus Decimus Meridius (Russell Crowe) has been named keeper of Rome and its empire by dying emperor Marcus Aurelius (Richard Harris), much to the dismay of Marcus' power-hungry son Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix). Angered by the decision, Commodus murders Marcus and orders to have Maximus executed. Maximus escapes, but is sold into slavery and is forced to become a gladiator.

FUCK, it is good. Crowe is awesome, but I'm wondering if he really deserved the Oscar (IMO, he should have won for A Beautiful Mind). But honestly, the centerpiece performance of Gladiator is not Crowe's but Phoenix's. His performance as the twisted Commodus really gets under your skin. The scene where he tells Marcus his reaction to being overlooked as Rome's emperor is both haunting and devastating. I did like Benicio del Toro's work in Traffic, but I would've been beyond satisfied had Phoenix won that year. As I was watching Gladiator, I detected a few references to past "sword and sandal" movies, particularly Spartacus. Oh yeah, one more thing. The look on Commodus' face when Maximus reveals who he is: priceless.

My Rating: ****1/2

Black Hawk Down

Ridley Scott is one helluva director. Action, sci-fi, war, crime...you name it, he has directed it.

On October 3, 1993, nearly 100 US Army Rangers, commanded by Capt. Mike Steele (Jason Isaacs), were dropped by helicopter deep into the capital city of Mogadishu to capture the two top lieutenants of a Somali warlord. This lead to a large and drawn-out firefight between the Rangers and hundreds of Somali gunmen, leading to the destruction of two US Black Hawk helicopters.

Geez, that was intense. But still, Black Hawk Down is an interesting character study. The intensity of the violence is a little much for me (I'm a wimp, so sue me). Scott still has me interested in his other work (I've only seen Matchstick Men). Black Hawk Down wasn't as notable as other entries from 2001 (A Beautiful Mind, Mulholland Drive, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, etc.), but it's as good as the others.

My Rating: ****1/2

Matchstick Men

Is there one genre Ridley Scott can't direct? I mean, really. Sci-fi (Alien, Blade Runner), crime (American Gangster), epic (Gladiator) and war (Black Hawk Down). I think I proved my point.

Roy (Nicolas Cage) and Frank (Sam Rockwell) are a pair of small-time con artists. Roy has a list of phobias, including obsessive-compulsive disorder and agoraphobia. As they prepare for their next big scam, Roy learns about Angela (Alison Lohman), the daughter he never knew he had.

Having never seen any of Scott's other movies (I'll admit it), I didn't know what to expect. What I got was a hell of an entertaining movie. Cage, of all things, isn't over the top in his performance like he is in his other movies. Rockwell cracked me up. I anticipate for my next venture into the work of Ridley Scott.

My Rating: ****1/2