Ready Player One

[Lakenheath 72]

I watched the film yesterday.

I was disappointed with the film. One of the biggest issues was that there was no emotional follow-up. I was looking for a human reaction in a character which didn't act human. His only family is killed before his eyes, yet they are not mentioned again and there is no scene with him coping with their loss.

I could identify some of the easter eggs. However, I do not go to films so i can be a easter egg hunter. I go to films to see a well-crafted story.

This film suffers from a mass delusion crippling Hollywood lately - they believe audiences want to see a world devoid of light and smothered in darkness. OASIS is largely lacking in bright vibrant colors; it's hard to see anything at times. As a viewer, I should want to be a part of this world. By film's end, I did not have this want and I could not understand its appeal.

I felt the female and male lead lacked chemistry. It did not help that their romance was not given the time to mature. It was rushed and forced simultaneously.

Finally, I believe they spent more time populating this films with easter eggs than in world-building. There are things which do not make sense and are contradictory.

 

[Dick Whitman]

I enjoyed it much more than I expected. Largely because I found the book awful. Spielberg makes entertaining sequences and Alan Silvestri's score is one of his best in years.

But I mostly agree with every you just said. There is no there, there. No depth at all. If we are comparing to the 80s movies it references it fails. In terms of emotional connection to characters. Compared to the book Wade's teammates have more to contribute to winning the prize. But they feel like they barely know each or have much personalities.

I think the problem is the basic premise of the book and now movie is so flimsy. On film most of the pop culture references are just background. Which raises the question of why they even matter? Most of the characters in that huge battle are so small and dark that you can barely spot them.

Most of all any social commentary about the bad effects of being too dependent on technology and living in fantasy versus using it merely as occasional recreation is barely even mentioned. Wade decides to close The Oasis two days a week??? You would think some other company would create a cheap knockoff version to steal away everyone who does not to leave on those days.

 

[Herbert]

I enjoyed the book. It's not high literature but then again I didn't expect it to be. It was a fun read, overall. Given that I was a teenager in the 80s might have had something to do with me liking it.

Based on what I've heard about the movie though, I likely won't be seeing it and certainly not in the theaters.

Spoiler

I'm quite annoyed that the Dungeons & Dragons references were all but removed.One of the things I was looking forward to was seeing the Tomb of Horrors.

 

[DarthPipes]

To follow up on my thoughts a little more...

It wasn't a bad film but I was disappointed by it.

The cast was very good though (particularly Mark Rylance) and there were definitely some fun moments (the second task). As a fan of the book, I can admit that one of the problems for me with the book was that so much time is spent in the Oasis that the stakes don't feel as high. I will say that Spielberg did a better job with the stakes of this film but I thought he undercut key dramatic moments from the book as well as Wade's development. We don't get to see just how healthy Wade's dependency on the Oasis becomes later in the book for example and that hurt his character arc greatly. The character arcs or lack thereof is definitely a problem. I also thought the movie wasn't as funny as it should have been.

Very good point about the Oasis not being bright. Something like that should be lush with colors while having parts of it that are dark and washed out.

And of course, what a "shock" that the actors cast in this movie weren't fat or unattractive like they were in the books...

 

[B.J.]

I went to see it with my son today. Never read the book, but I enjoyed the movie. Of course, I was watching it mostly from a "brain off - look at all the pretty eye candy" perspective. And I doubt anyone under 30 could catch all the references.

And being on a Star Trek board, I'm shocked (shocked!) that nobody mentioned the photon torpedo coffin yet!

 

[Starscream2112]

I enjoyed the book. It's not high literature but then again I didn't expect it to be. It was a fun read, overall. Given that I was a teenager in the 80s might have had something to do with me liking it.

Based on what I've heard about the movie though, I likely won't be seeing it and certainly not in the theaters.

Spoiler

I'm quite annoyed that the Dungeons & Dragons references were all but removed.One of the things I was looking forward to was seeing the Tomb of Horrors.

And for me I was disappointed that

Spoiler

The Rush Temple of Syrinx part was not included.

That was the main reason I wanted to see the film.

 

[Awesome Possum]

The movie was okay, a fairly average adventure movie with amusing references. I will give it points for making Parzival more likeable, the book version was a creep. Art3mis actually did things, which was nice. Nothing really exciting though. I'd give it a C-.

 

[Herbert]

And for me I was disappointed that

Spoiler

The Rush Temple of Syrinx part was not included.

That was the main reason I wanted to see the film.

I hadn't heard that. That's an even bigger bummer. I'm a huge Rush fan.

Spoiler

Good lord, did they follow the book at all?

 

[Awesome Possum]

I hadn't heard that. That's an even bigger bummer. I'm a huge Rush fan.

Spoiler

Good lord, did they follow the book at all?

It’s the same basic premise, most of the changes were a vast improvement.

 

[Herbert]

It’s the same basic premise, most of the changes were a vast improvement.

Doesn't sound like it for me. Based on what I'm hearing, some of the stuff I was really looking forward to seeing on screen isn't even in the movie. Oh well, not a big deal. Maybe I'll catch it someday on demand

 

[Mage]

Never read the book, my girlfriend did. She enjoyed the movie quite a lot, but was disappointed that a lot of stuff wasn't in the movie. Also, appereantly one of the High Five members is actually murdered in the book. Kinda weird that didn't happen in the movie...

As for me, I enjoyed it. It was entertaining, and as a 80s kid, I loved a lot of the references.

 

[Starscream2112]

It’s the same basic premise, most of the changes were a vast improvement.

Nope. Not am improvement at all.

Spoiler

Sadly, [Rush's] presence is just above zero. There is a poster on a wall and Aech's 2112 shirt, both already shown in stills from the movie. But there's nothing else - no music on the soundtrack, no reference to the band or their music in the dialogue, no visit to the planet Syrinx and the city of Megadon. No reference to the song Subdivisions. Bummer. Well okay the Shining part that was not in the book was cool.

 

[BillJ]

Saw it yesterday with the wife who is a huge fan of the book. She enjoyed it very much. Me? It was a couple hours of completely forgettable (like much of what Hollywood produces for the big screen now).

Though I did see a TMP poster in the background near the very end of the movie.

 

[marillion]

Nope. Not am improvement at all.

Spoiler

Sadly, [Rush's] presence is just above zero. There is a poster on a wall and Aech's 2112 shirt, both already shown in stills from the movie. But there's nothing else - no music on the soundtrack, no reference to the band or their music in the dialogue, no visit to the planet Syrinx and the city of Megadon. No reference to the song Subdivisions. Bummer. Well okay the Shining part that was not in the book was cool.

I'm right there with you... I was REALLY looking forward to that being a part of the movie... And yes, the part you said was cool, definitely was... Overall, I enjoyed the movie. I haven't read the book and probably won't get around to it... But it was really enjoyable.

 

[ALF]

Having a hard time warming up to this. The premise sounds good but the trailers make me cringe.

 

[Gryffindorian]

Wait ... this was based on a book? I hadn't planned on seeing this movie, but it was the only interesting title that was playing at the time I went to the theater on Good Friday. A visual feast with dozens of pop culture references, this was mostly a popcorn flick. Since the audience was a mixed demographic, I wonder if anyone else got the Merlin reference, "Annal Nathrach. Oolthvas Bethod. Dochyel Dyenve," which was the only thing that stood out to me. I didn't like what they did with The Shining challenge, most of which was not part of the original movie.

I give it a B-.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

The extent of my reaction to the film is I'm sorry we didn't get the Blade Runner and WarGames reenactments but The Shining reenactment was very impressive (until it wasn't). That in itself is commentary on the film really.

I read the book and I largely enjoyed it (aside from the creepier aspects that Awesome Possum alluded to) because of the nostalgia connections to Atari and '80s films. We really didn't get much of that in the film unfortunately. It felt like pop culture references for the sake of pop culture references. One of the joys of the book was trying to piece together the puzzles Halliday left behind based on his deep love for '80s pop culture. That barely scratched the surface here. Granted, some of that was because of rights issues, but Spielberg could've still emphasized those puzzles with other lore but he didn't.

At the end of the day, I can't say I'm disappointed but I'm not all that impressed either. Largely forgettable, aside from The Shining reenactment.

 

[psikeyhackr]

I haven't read the book, but the trailer alone makes it clear that the real world of 2045 is pretty shitty with a whole generation of people so disillusioned and so lacking in prospects that they've pretty much given up on real life and seek their life's meaning in pop culture and fantasy worlds. That might not be the most original idea, but it's pretty damn relevant.

I have read the book and have not seen the movie YET!

Judging from the trailers the movie looks similar but with significant details implemented differently. The Iron Giant is not in the book. But I consider watching the movie as though it is a nostalgia trip for people in 2018 to hunt for easter eggs is a shallow interpretation.

Within the context of the story Wade Watts would not be born for another 9 years. What will the US really be like by then? How much is going on now to make that reality possible.

My high school years were in the 60s and the world population had not reached 4 billion. Now we are approaching 8. In the book Art3mis talked about using the fortune to help solve the worlds problems while Parzival wanted to build a star ship to leave the planet.

To me science fiction it thought experiments for guidance to prevent the future as Ray Bradbury said. I made an Internet contribution to the effort.

http://www.spectacle.org/1199/wargame.html

How we use and do not use technology affects the economics. Nobody was talking about Global Warming when I was in high school.

As a near future projection it is better than Interstellar.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I wouldn't save a near future struggling with climate change, overpopulation and widespread poverty is one of the more implausible scenarios, it's probably fairly realistic. Maybe not the Oasis being so widespread that the majority of the population is seemingly addicted. But we'll probably get the depressing bit and we seem to heading pretty quickly towards that unless things change quickly.

They probably won't.

 

[publiusr]

I love the cross-overs. That made the movie--but I'm a cheap date.