Ready Player One (Steven Spielberg, March 30, 2018) Movie • Page 7

There’s quite a few other things within it as well that are ignored with the reductionist painting of “nerd good at video games” critique. From it’s look at authoritarians to capitalism to poverty to gender. I’m not convinced people read the book that make that argument.

 

You know, you can disagree with someone without coming off as a huge dick all the time.

 

So, should I try just calling someone a “huge dick” in this hypothetical scenario?

 

I mean, I’m not going to read the script because I want to be surprised by what changes there are from the book, but that also means I’m not going to challenge someone who HAS read it on whether or not someone who disliked the book because of the plot/nostalgia will also dislike the movie.

 

But there is far more to film than just the script

 

Obviously. But you’re arguing about things in the script. And my comment was solely about things related to the script.

 

I haven’t argued anything about the script.

I’m just bothered by the notion that this film is only for people who like the novel, ignoring the cinematic elements of film or notions like the theory of auteurism.

 

That’s not what I understand Jason to be saying. From my perspective, he’s just pointing out that, having read the script, if someone was put off by the novel, the way it was written, the themes it trafficked in, the characters, the nostalgia for the 80s, etc., then they will also probably not like the movie for the same reasons. Sure it might appeal to people solely on a visual or technical level, but for anyone interested in film as a narrative medium, it’s probably not going to appeal to those people if they the hated book, or the very idea of the book and what it is. It’s not an unreasonable statement to make, especially considering the author of the book co-wrote the script and most of the preliminary hate the movie has been getting is precisely because of the references and nostalgiac elements (which all come from the script and the source material).

If you hate the neo-noir or cyberpunk genres, just dislike all their attendant elements, or if you’re just totally against the idea of someone making a sequel to Blade Runner in any way, no amount of Denis Villenueve’s auteurism is going to make you enjoy Blade Runner 2049, for another example.

 

There are plenty of instances of writers and their scripts differing wildly from the final output once a director puts it through their lens. It happens all the time, sometimes in some of the greatest films ever made. I’m not against any premise or genre on principle, particularly when entrusted to the hands of a filmmaker I believe to be extremely talented and thoughtful and meaningful. I care about the director more than the premise/source material/script. I understand that I might not like the movie because I couldn’t get into the book and there’s a chance Spielberg adapts it straight. I am hoping he makes a movie with value and that I get something out of it despite that possibility. I don’t know what’s so unreasonable about that.

 

No one said otherwise. I simply said there are not significant changes from the script to the core story which is what the person I was responding to didn’t like, therefore drawing a logical conclusion they will continue to not like the core story. This isn’t hard to follow unless you choose to ignore what I actually said and argue something completely different.

 

Glad I’m not losing my mind and this was obvious.

 

There’s nothing unreasonable about that, but the preemptive hate for the movie has been anything but reasonable and stems entirely from the way the book (and, by extension, the screenplay) was written.

I don’t see what’s so unreasonable about saying that, for the vast amount of people dunking on Ready Player One because of the book and what it’s about (before the film is even released), they’re probably not going to like it because it’s a straight adaptation. I don’t think it’s fair for people on Twitter on the one hand to say “nostalgia-bait trash” and then expect people who liked the book to not say “well, this movie probably isn’t for you.”

 

And anyway, the movie could come out and not be good even for the people who did like the book. The other point is that we don’t know and the Twitter mob needs to chill the hell out, put down their pitchforks, and wait three weeks to unload on the movie.

 

Yeah it’s dumb to trash a movie you haven’t seen. I haven’t done that. I’ve said over and over again that I hope it’s good and that I trust Spielberg to do something more with the premise than I, personally, found in what I read of the book. If someone is mad that people are shitting on a movie they haven’t seen, then take that up with them, not me, because I haven’t been doing that.

I have critiqued the marketing and provided reasoning for why I think there might be such strong backlash to this film on premise alone. But all I ultimately want is for this to be a good movie. Since Steven Spielberg is directing it, I’m thinking and hoping that will be the case.

 

The source material + Cline co-writing the script + Spielberg = my hypeness.

 

I didn’t say you’ve done that, I know you haven’t.

 

+ now lots of footage from the movie showing that yeah, they made that movie.

 

Okay. You were responding to my post, where I was explaining myself here to people who are unwilling to accept my line of thought, a response not to any of the people on Twitter or wherever pre-judging the movie/dunking on the movie, but to me and my reasoning, specifically.

 

Well, I said there was nothing unreasonable about what you said. Your post was just sub-responding to what I had said directly above it, so I just elaborated on the distinction between what Jason appears to be arguing (that it’s LIKELY or PROBABLE that someone who dislikes the book and the concept of nostalgia in general will also dislike the movie) and what he was being accused (not by you) of saying (not understanding the theory of auteurism or something).

 

There’s more than one way to watch a movie!!!
You guys may not be denying that explicitly, but the implication is there.
The discussion with some people on here is mind numbing.

 

I mean, I specifically said it may be possible for people who dislike the book to get visual or technical enjoyment out of the movie, even if they didn’t enjoy the narrative, because the entire discussion was originally supposed to be about the script/narrative, but ok!

 

Then ... leave. You always threaten to leave and never do. Literally no one is keeping you here except yourself.

 

No ...

 

I’ve literally said it once and it’s because you were explicitly being s bully.

When I don’t have to deal with spoiled infants like you this place is fine.

 

Maybe we shouldn’t tell people what they’ll like or not like. Maybe it’s understandable that someone who found value in almost all of Spielberg’s work can simultaneously hope to find value in Ready Player One and at the same time not love the book/critique the problematic aspects of it’s premise.