• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary navigation

Ken Liu, Writer

Author of The Grace of Kings and The Paper Menagerie

  • Home
  • News
  • Books
  • Short Fiction
  • About
  • Other Writings
  • Adaptations
  • Talks
  • Events
  • Translations
  • Shop

thinking

Who Should Take Credit for The Martian?

October 10, 2015 by Ken

Lisa and I got to see The Martian last week, and I did enjoy it (as have 93% of the critics on Rotten Tomatoes), though not as much as I had hoped. Among many other problems, the most egregious issues with the adaptation are these:

  1. Almost every single interesting episode in the book has been either eliminated or drastically simplified, which made them less engaging and dramatic. For instance, contrast the “rover hacking” and “blown airlock” episodes from the book with the film versions.

  2. The adaptation failed to give a sense of the long delays required for communications between Mars and Earth — an important contributor to the threat facing Mark. (NASA and Watney couldn’t just IM each other, as the film seemed to imply.)

But rather than going on and on about how the film came up short, I want to talk about something else: most critics are treating this film as though the writer, Andy Weir, was irrelevant to its success.

Take this bit from Christopher Orr of the Atlantic:

In this, the collaborators who put together the film—Scott, Goddard, the cinematographer Dariusz Wolski, the entire cast, and on down the list—resemble the NASA folks and Hermes crewmembers of the movie itself: They are all pulling together toward the same goal, and doing so with extraordinary skill and tenacity.

Conspicuously absent in this list is the author whose novel was the foundation of the film. Is it really right for his name to be left off here, placed below “and on down the list”? (To be fair, Weir is mentioned once in the beginning of the review: “Drew Goddard’s screenplay is a sharp, nimble adaptation of the novel by Andrew Weir” — but the very phrasing here minimizes the value of Weir’s book.)

Even more curious is the fact that almost everything Orr liked about the film was sourced directly from the book:

There are no tedious backstories, no leaps of rampant illogic, no poorly cast performances, no tacked-on romantic subplots, no extended narrative lulls.

These praises are far more accurate when applied to the book than the film.

The Martian has a degree of humor uncharacteristic of a Scott film, including a running gag about the awfulness of the disco tracks that were left behind with Watney … But perhaps the movie’s best joke involves the love for J.R.R. Tolkien that is apparently encoded into the DNA of every living male nerd.

These clever bits are all from … you guessed it, Weir’s book.

I have long been puzzled by our obsession with assigning credit for collective endeavors to a single individual (e.g., scientists who get Nobel prizes are rarely single-handedly responsible for those discoveries). In film criticism, we worship the director as though they’re single-handedly responsible for all good ideas in the result, but in the case of The Martian, this is just wrong. If we enjoy the film, it’s because Weir wrote a great story that could be simplified into a film without too much loss.

Filed Under: thinking Tagged With: scifi

Award Slates

August 31, 2015 by Ken

I’m going to keep this simple and short. My position on slates is perfectly captured by Elizabeth Bear and Aliette de Bodard in their respective blog posts.

TL;DR:

First of all, I’m going to state up front that I will never willingly participate in a slate. If I learn that I have been included on a slate, I will ask to be removed, and I will bring as much force to bear on that issue as I legally can.

Additionally, I’m going to rely on the discretion of readers and fans of goodwill, who I think are pretty smart people. If you see my name on a slate, please assume that it’s being done by ruiners to punish me, and that whoever put it there has ignored my requests to remove it. I have nothing but contempt for that kind of behavior, and I’m frankly not going to do anything to please them at all.

My colleagues, of course, are free to deal with the situation as they see fit, up to and including refusing nominations. As for me, well—while I reserve the right to turn down an award nomination at my discretion, I’m not about to be forced into it by the action of trolls and reavers. I expect my readers to be able to make up their own minds about my work, and decide for themselves if it’s worthy of an award or not, and vote accordingly in a fair and sportsfanlike fashion.

Thanks.

Filed Under: thinking Tagged With: awards

You Can’t Quit

May 22, 2014 by Ken

Apropos my review of the book about Amazon, there’s this NYTimes article about a customer’s attempt to quit Amazon in protest over its attempt to squeeze Hachette by delaying shipment of Hachette authors’ books.

As she found out, quitting isn’t easy:

“I’ve certainly missed Amazon. I bought three bird-watching books from Barnes & Noble about a week ago. So far, I’ve received one. I need to consult Amazon to make decisions about what I want to order because the customer feedback is so weak at B.&N.”

…

“I’m convinced that Amazon will not make any effort to regain me since they can rely on getting me back due to the magnetism of their efficiency and their massive stock of everything,” she wrote. “So, feeling as isolated as I do in my feeble protest, I believe I’ll call it quits soon if there is no prospect of it making a difference to anyone.”

Seems like Jeff Bezos was right about his flywheel.

Filed Under: thinking Tagged With: web

World Scholar’s Cup

November 16, 2013 by Ken

The World Scholar’s Cup, a world-wide academic team-based competition for teens that celebrates learning (think Academic Decathlon), invited me to their Tournament of Champions at Yale today.

I was there to talk to the students about “The Paper Menagerie” — they had read it as one of the resources to be used in their debates and essays. It was really cool meeting the students: bright, eager, and very insightful with their questions and criticisms. I felt like I learned quite a bit about myself and about the story after hearing from them. These young people were having a great time while also honing their academic skills — it was impressive as hell to see and hear them at work.

Daniel Berdichevsky, the founder of WSC, is a pretty amazing individual (go read his bio), and I think his vision for what WSC can do for students around the world is very inspiring. Jeremy, Zac, Grace, and other WSC coordinators (I didn’t write all the names down in time) were all really kind, generous, and brilliant, and everyone exuded positive energy.

It’s heartening to see this kind of positive work being done in the world.

I had about half an hour at one point free, and I popped in at the Peabody Museum of Natural History because this is where the world’s only “Brontosaurus” is located. (Read the plaque for why I used quotes.)

Brontosaurus

Brontosaurus explanation

Filed Under: seeing, thinking Tagged With: talks

Forgot

October 18, 2011 by Ken

It’s more important to feel free than to be wealthy.

This is the sort of wisdom that most teenagers understand, and that many adults have forgotten.

It’s good to be reminded of it.

Filed Under: thinking Tagged With: personal

In Love With Your iPhone

October 2, 2011 by Ken

Martin Lindstrom, writing for the NYT:

But most striking of all was the flurry of activation in the insular cortex of the brain, which is associated with feelings of love and compassion. The subjects’ brains responded to the sound of their phones as they would respond to the presence or proximity of a girlfriend, boyfriend or family member.

In short, the subjects didn’t demonstrate the classic brain-based signs of addiction. Instead, they loved their iPhones.

Now, keep in mind that the way this op-ed interprets the neuroscience evidence is rather unfounded (take a look here to see why).

But that doesn’t really matter as far as fiction is concerned. This is exactly the kind of over-interpretation that can make good sci-fi (remember, while scientific rigor can make for good sci-fi, it’s not required. Much sci-fi is really fantasy).

I actually wrote a story based on this premise almost a decade ago, before the iPhone even existed. Alas, that story never sold, otherwise I’d appear pretty good as a prognosticator.

I do not think this is in anyway a new phenomenon though, nor would I consider it somehow purely negative. I’m sure you can find a caveman whose feelings for his favorite hunting knife could be described as love.

We have always humanized our tools and endowed them with emotional qualities. It’s one of the most puzzling as well as endearing qualities of our species.

Filed Under: thinking Tagged With: iphone, technology

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Go to Next Page »

Copyright © 1996–2026 Ken Liu