I will start off with the book review, followed by my thoughts on the adaptation. The adaptation part will have TONS of spoilers.

Book Review

Mickey7 by Edward Ashton

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

First off, the production values on the audiobook are great! The main narrator does the many voices very well, especially Mickey7 and Marshall. The female narrator mostly narrates for a computer system. Chats have radio static behind them so that you know they are chats and not the narrator speaking to someone in person.

For the story: Like many modern books, this book is an amalgam of what has come before. I’ve read many of these ideas before. Cory Doctorow’s Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom deals with the ability to move consciousnesses to new bodies. Too many books to name have dealt with the pros and cons of colony ships/generation ships. Parts of the main plot echo Avatar (the blue people, not the cartoon) and other books that would spoil a late book plot twist. What makes this book work well is how Edward Ashton takes all these prior science fiction concepts and remixes them into his own unique story.

I’ve done no research into the backstory of Mickey7, but if I were told it was a short story that was filled out into a novel, I would believe it. The main plot is actually pretty short and could go by incredibly quickly. It does not because Ashton interweaves the main character remembering the deaths of Mickeys 1-6 and the histories of other colonies. The result is a story that I delighted in (I LOVE world-building), but that might frustrate you if you prefer the story to always have forward momentum.

Ashton also did a good job on Mickey7. I would say he starts off as a lovable loser, but I don’t think he merits the adjective lovable. I started off more or less hating Mickey. His personality and the way he goes through the world irritated me. But, darn it, by the end Ashton had me rooting for him and cheering his victories and being afraid when he was in danger.

I have not yet seen the movie, but I’m glad that at this point in my life I’ve made my peace with the fact that adaptations are just that. There’s almost no way the movie could follow the book directly as it depends too much on the aforementioned memories and histories. Also, the movie ups the body count to 16 prior deaths for even more dark humor.

That reminds me that I should mention this book has some pretty dark humor. It didn’t bother me for one second, but if you are sensitive to death, suicide, and related topics, you should probably stay away.

I added the sequel to my wishlist so I can grab it on my next audiobook credit, which is one of the best accolades I could give to a book. I’m not sure exactly how Ashton will pull another story out of this universe, but I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Comparison to the Movie Adaptation: Mickey17

Final warning…..spoilers below!

Book adaptations exist on a spectrum. On the most faithful end, the canonical example is the comic to movie adaptation of Watchmen. Closer to the “in name only” end of the adaptation spectrum - many Philip K Dick short stories that get turned into movies. I mentioned in my review that I knew that there would be challenges in this adaptation. I also am more chill about changes than I once was. But I have to say that Mickey17 definitely is a lot further from the point of the book than I thought it would be. (Reminded me of the 1990s (or early 2000s?) adaptation of Starship Troopers in how much it seems to subvert the message of the source material) It also seemed to take the plot from dark humor to absurdist. (Reminded me of a Terry Gilliam film)

I’m going to start with what I believe is both the biggest difference and biggest subversion of what the author is getting across with the book. The running theme throughout the book, both in Mickey’s mind and in conversation with others, is whether Mickey is immortal. If his consciousness is written into each new iteration and really only has potential discontinuities when he couldn’t upload before death, what’s the difference between being unkillable and being reprinted with his memories? In fact, Mickey’s key realization near the end is that the six weeks since his last backup is both the reason that Mickey8 isn’t the same person as him and the reason that Mickey9 would not be a continuation of his life. The movie subverts this message in 2 ways. First of all, Mickey18 is much more violent, assertive, and sexually aggressive than Mickey17. He does not seem like the same person at all. Second, in a bit of narration, Mickey17 tells us that Nasha noticed differences in each of his prior iterations. As I said, this was a KEY point of the book - are you immortal if your memories persist? And how much memory is needed to make a new person? If each version can be different, then the answer is a clear “no” rather than a fuzzy one. Mickey would have realized a long time ago that he was not functionally immortal.

Continuing with Mickey differences in the movie, book Mickey is a dilettante. He’s a useless member of Midgard (more on that later) because he’s a historian instead of having a real job. He just lives on the universal basic income. Movie Mickey is kind of more of a dumbass. He doesn’t really seem to have much to offer anyone, including Nasha. This change is more understandable because movies don’t have as much space for nuance and backstory as books. I do wish they had made him less of a loser, though. The movie also robs Mickey of an important milestone. In the book Mickey has to pull the trigger to prove he’s ready to be an Expendable. The movie having the person just pull the trigger on him subverts that whole idea that Mickey THINKS he has come to terms with his fate.

I think this is a great spot to quickly mention that the ships for the different colonies leave from Earth, not Midgard. The movie lacks all of the history (and the messages about war, division, etc) of the book related to why humans left Earth. I don’t mind this change. Again, it is semi-necessary for the adaptation to tell the story without throwing us into an info-dump. (And it’s not really important to the main story of the book)

Getting back to changes that seem to change the meaning of the book: Mickey’s relationship to Bertos (Timo in the movie). It once again changes Mickey’s agency in becoming an Expendable in a way that mucks with what the author was going for. In the book Mickey has been friends with Bertos since elementary or middle school and has a semi-jealous relationship with his ability to excel at everything he does. Mickey, ON HIS OWN, makes the bad choice to bet on Bertos in some fake science fiction sport. This leads to his problem with the loan shark and the need to get on the colony ship. Contrast this with the movie where Timo convinces Mickey to invest in a restaurant and tricks him into putting most of the loans in his name. (Also, they were orphans together?) This completely changes the relationship. Instead of one where Mickey semi-resents him (while Bertos is clueless about that) for something that Mickey himself did, he has a legit reason to be upset with him. Also, I don’t get the reason to make Timo a drug dealer in the movie. And while Bertos has some shame about his actions - including leaving Mickey to die - Timo is shameless about murdering Mickey to take Mr. Blank’s heat off himself.

The final huge difference that truly changes the tone of the story being told is the change made to Marshall. In the book Marshall is a competent leader with some hard ass tendencies that most people find kind of annoying. He has a religious component to his character, but only to make him a natalist so that he hates Mickey. In the movie he seems to be a parody of televangelists and politicians. (Especially with his wife, which doesn’t exist in the book) Also, a good chunk of the ship seems to treat him as a celebrity and seem to be part of the same religion. He’s also surrounded himself with sycophants - instead of Arkady being an awesome scientist, he seems to be a bumbling idiot. Not only does this undermine most of Marshall’s opinions (he seems like a real idiot in the movie), but he is framed as a villain. In the book, it is easier to see things from Marshall’s point of view.

A smaller difference, but still grating is the fact that the book is dark humor while the movie seems to be more absurdist. The science team seems to be sadistic or negligent. In the book they dismiss his concerns since he’ll be rebooted, but they don’t seem to be criminally negligent. (See movie scenes where they forget to put the tablet to catch Mickey as he’s being printed)

All these changes that seem to undermine a lot of what the author is trying to say make it all the more strange to me that the movie hits a lot of the same beats from the book like the three-some, Nasha being there when he’s having the vaccine tested on him, and the thing with Kai. However, on the compressed timeline of the movie, a lot of the impact is blunted. The book has Mickeys 7 and 8 trying hard not to get caught and having to go through 48+ hours of bumping into random people who know them. The movie has Mickey8 immediately reveal himself to Nasha.

Overall, it seems as though the book is trying to have a philosophical discussion with the reader while the movie reads as political. We have a dumbass politician in a position of power with a bunch of idiot sycophants around him. The stuff he says about what he wants for the colony (at the dinner, with the rock, etc) seems to be Hitler-esque and focused on eugenics. None of that was in the book and I think the book was better for it.

• Science-Fiction