MovieChat Forums > The Last Days on Mars (2013) Discussion > Do producers and directors really think ...

Do producers and directors really think sci-fi viewers are that stupid?

posted 11 years ago by jvs_gringo
26 replies | jump to latest

It seems directors and producers only focus on big names and visuals nowadays.
There are not many good sci-fi films, simulating a visit to another nearby planet.
As much as I appreciated the visuals, the lack of intelligence of these so called ''scientists'' in this film is absurdly condescending to the viewers.

Why would they investigate a possible ''microscopic anomaly'' without telling their superiors, specially knowing the life threatening risks that might be involved?

Why would any scientist, smart enough to have the privilege to go on a mission to Mars, knowing the possibility of finding extremophiles (bacterial/fungal life), be stupid enough to take samples inside their living quarters and labs without having proper sample containment vessels to avoid any kind of contamination?

Seems to me directors don't research this stuff well enough or they just see the viewers as incredibly stupid.

Since we lack really good new sci-fi's I gave it a 6, ok story but the ending shouldn't have been so open. Specially because with a title like that they shouldn't be planning on making a sequel anyways.

[–] Thrill_KillZ 11 years ago

I'm on board with you 100%.

I think the worst part of this is that I love these type of films and when you have such great cinematography, more than adequate budget and fine acting, to go ahead and insult the viewers from one scene to the next is a crime.

Not a lot of sci-fi films with big budgets get made and it really angers me deep down at the fact that numerous people in charge actually thought that the public would be so dumb to accept a script so insanely illogical.

It does still manage to warrant about a 6/10 from me also, mainly to commend the cast & crew for doing such a fine job regardless of the idiocy of the script.

ALSO, I have to put the director firmly in the crosshairs as he should have demanded changes or walked off

[–] skat1140 11 years ago

I have a more pressing question.

After you've established that the 2 roaming space-zombies are indeed hostile and homicidal and smart, why do you (Liev Shreiber) go alone to the communications area without a weapon?

And screw this injecting them with antibiotics. There are 2 zombies. There are ~5 of you. While smart enough to use tools and form plans, the zombies don't seem smart enough to coordinate efforts or be deceptive (ie, to ambush or lie in wait for you). They'll run at you like a rabid dog, whatever weapon you have ready for them. As a group, let them rush you and then pound the crap out of the zombies. THEN, get communications up.

[–] timlin-4 11 years ago

The thought of quarantine also doesn't cross their minds until the end. That would be the only message I'd be trying to communicate, not "mayday, help me I'm a little girl", and then yes, I'd turn my attention to the zombie war

[–] jvs_gringo 11 years ago

While you have a point on them being hostile, which should have been clear as soon as the infected scientists entered the airlock, I disagree with you on Schreiber going alone and and the use of the antibiotics.

Schreiber went alone for 2 reasons, firstly there was a ''small'' risk of explosion at the other end due to depressurization and second, he was the only one who could fix the communications uplink so there was no need of more people risking their lives for that task. They also did not know of Harrington's fate, not knowing the exact details of how the bacteria worked at the time.
Another thing, because the scientists that were alive did not really have the chance to study the bacteria, they might have thought that their colleagues could still somehow be cured and that the bacteria kept their bodies alive out on the harsh Mars environment, even though their team leader Brunel had already shown that the bacteria takes control of the host's body even postmortem.

Anyways the amount of ''what if's'' and ''they could've'' is way too high ha-ha.

I do agree they could have overpowered their infected colleagues easily by just out smarting and locking them up on one of the airlocks or tying them up so that they couldn't do any harm to themselves and others and of course putting them on quarantine eventually. But the scientists of this Mars station were far from anything you can call smart, they could have already been exposed to the bacteria long before the first 2 infected came back from site 9 where they found the anomaly.
As far as I know since the bacteria had already been inside the labs in the sample Marko took, it could have been dormant or already be circulating through their air supply, just waiting for an opportunity to enter someone's blood stream.

Way too many ridiculous theories because of their stupidity (The idiotic script, no offense to the actors)
Perhaps a good thing that hell broke loose. They might have accidentally carried it back to Earth without even knowing it...

[–] haggar 11 years ago

I fully agree, but I think the plotholes are larger than you describe: why would an antibiotic, designed to destroy bacteria from Earth, have an effect on completely unknown microorganisms from Mars - microorganisms that may or may not be organic, may or may not contain or be made of proteins similar to the ones found in earthlings, may or may not be based on DNA, may or may not have an organic cell membrane (and may or may not have a nucleus) etc. etc. etc.

And also: even IF they found that an antibiotic does kill these bugs, WHY use such a complicated means of defeating the zombies as using sprays and syringes, instead of just bludgeoning them into pieces?

And also also: why is it that the only ones ever walking around armed are the zombies? Did the humans' IQ drop below 80 so they forgot that they should also get some weapon-like tools into their hands?

And also also also: why would it take 15 minutes (last scene) for a radio signal to arrive from the lander to the orbiting station (the one orbiting Mars)? In fact, all previous communication between the base on Mars and the orbiter were near-instantaneous, which makes sense. Yes, communication between Mars and Earth does involve a round-trip of 20 to 40 minutes depending on relative position of the two planets, but NOT between the Martian base and the orbiter.

[–] npanou 11 years ago

to your last point, he isn't radioing the aurora at the end, he is radioing 'command' back home. It seams to imply that the entire aurora crew were part of the landing party (which is dumb i know)

[–] haggar 11 years ago

to your last point, he isn't radioing the aurora at the end, he is radioing 'command' back home. It seams to imply that the entire aurora crew were part of the landing party (which is dumb i know)

Well, if he was sending a message to "command" on Earth, then that sentence mentioning "15 minutes" makes sense, but a few other things just stopped making sense: as you say, why the hell would they send the whole crew of the orbiter with the lander, which has limited capacity and is supposed (as far as the people on the orbiter know) to pick up the whole crew on Mars?

Besides, in the chaotic scene with the lander radio-communication, I had a very strong impression that there was a woman coordinating the operation from the orbiter. But maybe she was on the lander?

[–] FryHigh 11 years ago

I gather you didn't enjoy the movie? I liked it quite a bit and disagree on almost all your points. Guess it's all in the eye of the beholder.

[–] angelos-bakas 11 years ago

Yeah, that makes sense. The eye of the beholder! Jeez! How about the brain of the beholder, eh?

[–] FryHigh 11 years ago

Well, if you have the brain of a beholder then that's your problem completely. Beholders have no brains btw, they're just eyeballs.

[–] rainofwalrus 11 years ago

Technically, a Beholder is a giant floating brain w/ an eyeball, not a giant eyeball.

Enjoy these words, for one day they'll be gone... All of them.

[–] jvs_gringo 11 years ago

Thank you for your delightfully constructive response regarding an issue that is not really being questioned but just used to generalize the idea of how film producers and directors (don't)think nowadays.
As far as I know Liev Schreiber should be considered a big name and that he is. Sounds like you are frustrated with the film and don't really know how to put it to words, perhaps you should keep such a well thought out response to yourself since it has nothing to do with the topic.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pablovi 11 years ago

Is not a sci fi movie, it's a horror film set on Mars...

It makes all the difference in the world what genre it is, in horror people do stupid and naive things because that's the genre.

It's a good horror film, great cinematography, effects and acting.

[–] mel2000 11 years ago

in horror people do stupid and naive things because that's the genre

That's just not true.

[–] Ithilfaen 11 years ago

Well, when you see the number of "good scifi" threads around imdb, I guess they're right.

It's a 5 for me and only for the acting and good visuals. No plot to speak of, no dialog, no construction, plot holes by the dozens...

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

[–] boydwalters 11 years ago

Lets put it in a nutshell ... This film is retarded ... And not in a fun way :)

[–] MidnightThud 11 years ago

Yeah they made many of the same clumsy story errors that Prometheus did, having scientists do really silly and unprofessional actions.