The Martian

I've just finished the Martian. Great book. I can tell it was a great book because I was disappointed when it ended. You can spend a lot of time worrying about character development, and dramatic use of language, and even clever use of simile and metaphor, but at the end of the day, what makes a great book is the fact that you want to read it, even when there is no more book left to read.

What was interesting about this book, though, was that I broke with my usual tradition when reading a book that has been made into a film. I read the book first. Normally, I am of the firm opinion that, once you have read the book, the film is ruined forever. A film can only ever give you a superficial version of the story – a focus on the visual elements and the broad strokes of the plot. There simply isn't time to delve into a lot of the character motivation and back story. Which is fine, it just means that if you already know the plot from reading the book, a lot of the joy of the film is gone. And worse, you find yourself concentrate on the bits they didn't get right. In order to fit into the allocated one and a half hours, the film will undoubtedly have left out some sub-plot, or one of the less relevant characters, which naturally will be the one you loved and really wanted to watch the film for.

Worse is when the author has painted a vivid picture of what the characters should look like. This leaves the films director with a tricky conundrum – find an actor who looks right for the part, or find one that can actually act. Rarely outside the world of prosthetic make up and heavy CGI do the two fortuitously come together.

What films can do, however, is provide visuals for your inner eye. It can provide spectacle and haunting sound tracks and beautiful cinematography, none of which come for free from the black and white text on the page. So, I like to watch the film first in order to enjoy the plot twists and the director's vision, then follow up with the book to delve into the deeper backstory and understand the author's original intent. It's not perfect, and I'm sure plenty of people will disagree with me on the correct order to experience the two in, but it works for me.

For the Martian, however, I was strongly advised to read the book first. Having finished it, I can see why. I loved the book, but it's clearly written from a scientific perspective of how to survive rather than the psychology. Robinson Crusoe', trapped on an island for 28 years, maintained his sanity by letting his feelings of loneliness and solitude fall from him like grains of sand, instead replacing them with the practicalities of daily life and his continued existence.

Compared to Mark Watney, however, Crusoe is a mopey emo. Watney appears blithely unconcerned about the fact that he is existing in a small bubble of oxygen whose fragile shell is the only barrier between him and death by explosive decompression.

In fact, this works because it adds an element of light heartedness and dogged stubbornness to the dry technical facts of how he pieces together his life on Mars.

I think, however, if I had already seen the film, the depth I normally enjoy in a book would be distilled down just to those dry technical facts. Geek that I am, even I don't want to read a book entirely consisting of the chemical formula for decomposing hydrazine and the power to weight ratio of a solar powered Martian rover.

So I've opted to reverse my options. I've read the diary entries, enjoyed the dry asides, and thrilled at the disasters encountered along the way.

Now I want to see it. I want to see the delight on Mark's face when he manages to make things right, the devastation when things go wrong, and I want to see those amazing red dust vistas of the Martian landscapes.

I should be incredible. I hoping Matt Damon won't prove me wrong.