Just watched the movie and it was amazing. Is the book as good?

>>8141181
>watched both
One does not watch a book bro. The film was better.

>>8141193

Most linear narrative structure books with their focus on the spatiotemporal play out like plays in one's head, I think that's an acceptable word to use there.

Is that cover based on Piss Christ?

>>8141197
It isn't.

t. Speaker of English

File: coinkydink.png (148KB, 360x709px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 360x709px

>>8141181
The book is not literature and isn't very well written in general, particularly in dealing with the character and the magnitude of his predicament. (As an example, I can't get on board with the character summing up the desolation and despondency of his plight by going 'Boooo!') The author put some work into the scientific aspects, with results praised by some and criticized by others. On the whole it was of course 'good' enough to get fast-tracked into a movie with a major star.

>>8141198
I really don't think so. I think the color scheme of the cover was dictated by the setting, along with the cloudy/dusty appearance. The composition of the character is similar, but I think the clincher is that his arms aren't outstretched (as they surely would've been if it were an allusion), which could've been managed easily enough. (Also, is there anything especially messianic about the character, to elicit such a basis?)

>>8141181
Wow that movie was real shit, anon. You have shite taste kill yourself, baka.

>>8141318
>The book is not literature and isn't very well written in general

Yeah, well, that's just your subjective opinion, man.

>>8141339

It's literature in the broad sense of being a work of fiction. In terms of any criteria that would elevate it to something literary (dealing in a significant or innovative way with deeper themes, making a contribution to the great conversation of letters, and so on), on the other hand, it falls short.

>>8141181
It's summer beach trash for readers who know fuck all about better written science fiction. Okay for worthless casuals, I guess.

File: CcW119SUkAAe7uV.jpg (26KB, 583x339px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 583x339px

You fucked up anon.

Here's the checklist of things you did wrong (assuming this isn't a troll)

1. Genre fiction pisses these guys off immensely.
2. It's popular, and new, and they wouldn't be into it whether it was good or not because they don't fit in
3. The movie is full of cheeky tumblrite gif tier jokes.

I have heard that it is mostly accurate though.

I'm not gonna knock you for liking it, it's probably highly enjoyable. But not to these people, who either love thier own farts or love the farts of classic authors.

>>8141181
reddit general?

If you liked the movie, you'll love the book. Cliche, but the book was better.

Don't listen to these self important assholes. Nobody on this board can enjoy something for what it is.

>>8141181
If you have any interest in chemistry, physics or comp sci you should like it, most of it is based on hard science (not all). It's a unique book, clumsily written but interesting. Most of the humor is cringeworthy but what it does right it does very well. Don't read it for the characters or linguistic prowess. Have not seen the movie so I can't compare the two.
Oh, and I also agree with the others itt, this board is full of cunts who hate this book.

>>8142423
You have to have a certain level of interest to the degree of "aren't these things I don't understand weally weally cool". From the winds of Mars managing to ever be forceful, to him not getting carbon monoxide poisoning, or any feco oral pathogens... It's like Grimsby and the elephant testicles.

the book is shit
i mean it's shit by the genre fiction standards, i don't even try to compare it with actual books

i bet the movie is shit too

>>8143549
The movie is watchable and you can pretend it's tied into Interstellar. It lacks most of the "lol I was such a nerd :^)" internal monologues for the most part.

A

Christ you people are so full of shit. It's a good book man, very enjoyable and unique. If you like science fiction I recommend it.

>>8141181
The movie was better than the book.

Hello I saw this book on the Random house publication list and I thought I'd read it later. Yeah I do think it's interesting. The theme of the cover seems like the idea "struggling with the dusty" perhaps damp despite the obvious implication.

>>8144475
The theme? The theme is he's on fucking Mars.

The book and the movie are both good (don't listen to all the fake meme posters who don't actually read), but I found the ending in the book to be better. That said, the movie did it justice.

>>8144475
>>8144482
you're both retarded
>>8144504
you're not funny