Ready Player One (2018)

[janeoreilly]

Took my 13yo to see it as she really enjoyed the book (I've got some issues with the book which I think is quite sexist in places but she's 13 so her view is somewhat different). It was OK. I couldn't say it was any better than that. One thing that I do think is a problem is that it doesn't quite know its audience - it is a young film with YA characters, but it doesn't work for a teenage audience because the pop culture references are those that would entertain a 50 yo man. So for example, the whole scene with the shining meant nothing and confused her.

 

[AlexH]

I haven't seen The Shining and that scene didn't confuse me.

I enjoyed the film. My favourite reference I spotted was a Battletoad at the head of the charge near the end.

 

[Onyx]

I probably won't see it. One critique I read was that the main character prevails in part because of his knowledge of video game trivia. Which would be an awesome way of wrapping up Jeopardy, but seems like an odd criteria for "saving the world".

 

[psikeyhackr]

...an odd criteria for "saving the world".

Saving the world and saving the OASIS are different things.

One of the disadvantages of the movie relative to the book was not showing much about the real world.

 

[Onyx]

Saving the world and saving the OASIS are different things.

One of the disadvantages of the movie relative to the book was not showing much about the real world.

My understanding was the that aptly named OASIS is the only world left worth saving.

 

[psikeyhackr]

My understanding was the that aptly named OASIS is the only world left worth saving.

The statement indicates that you should read the book and see what Art3mis said she would do with the money if she won. Even the movie wasn't that shallow, but it might not come across very well in one viewing of the movie since it went by so fast.

The idea of shutting down the OASIS for 2 days a week was to push people into reality more and that was not in the book. In the book it was obvious not all of the people in the OASIS were gunters.

 

[psikeyhackr]

I have listened to Ready Player One audiobook again. Overall the movie is not as good as the book but Daemon by Daniel Suarez is better then RP1.

Daemon-Daniel Suarez

 

[Dave]

I just watched this and loved all the pop culture/gamer references. i have never read the book, so can't make a comparison. I enjoyed it, but it might have been a little too long, and the "corporate greed" "evil corporation" plot was a little clichéd (though when the book was published it probably wasn't.) If the film glossed over the real identities of some of the characters (as @kythe says) then that was a mistake. That would have added some gravitas to the plot which it needed.

 

[Phyrebrat]

Enjoyed it mostly but God, it was about 20-30 mins too long.

Preferred the female lead to the really vanilla Male lead.

But overall I liked it. Lite and fun with some really enjoyable pop references.

pH

 

[Rodders]

I watched this quite recently. It was okay, enjoyable, but I found the whole thing pretty silly in the end.

 

[psikeyhackr]

I watched this quite recently. It was okay, enjoyable, but I found the whole thing pretty silly in the end.

The book gives you a better feel for life in 2045 than the movie does. The movie ending by shutting down the OASIS two days a week is BS.

It sort of depends on what trends you see in the world as it is NOW and trying to extrapolate what might happen by 2045 and what to do about it now. Is it just a movie that you decide about for entertainment or is it a potential extrapolation. Anybodies extrapolation is sure to be wrong but 2045 is coming no matter what.

I have tried poking the system in the eye.
Economic Wargames: How the economic model is unsustainable and enslaving.

 

[SilentRoamer]

Watched this again recently and really enjoyed my second viewing. Just some thoughts:

In any case, I didn't quite like that the protagonist was a White Male Geek

I loved that he was a White Male Geek - his geekiness just seems reflective of wider gamer culture to be honest. Did you equally have a problem with Aech being a Black Female Geek?

I thought the casting was good, all the portrayals and acting was solid. Good casting choices IMO, although I would have liked Daito and Shaito ages/differences to be closer to the books though.

Preferred the female lead to the really vanilla Male lead.
pH

When you say really vanilla are you talking about naivety?

The Wade in the books is a lot more sceptical and in the books Wade is probably the best gamer and gunter on the globe.

I thought Atr3mis, Aech and Wade were great choices of casting. I also thought Sorrento was a good choice. I didn't like the changes to Og and really wanted him to wreck IOI in the disco scene.

Overall I really liked the film but the book is so much better, I just think it's a hard book to adapt.

Interestingly Spielberg removed a lot of pop culture references to films he made or had involvement with.

Some of the scenes are pure geek out moments, I expect licensing for some parts would have been a nightmare but I can live with the changes. ☺

 

[Phyrebrat]

@SilentRoamer. Totally agree with you about the male protagonist needing to be a white boy. To have a girl or any other ‘minority’ to settle the passion of militant equality delegates with no sense of context would’ve been a huge own goal. More importantly it would have served only to erase or revise the white maleness of geek culture’s origins.

My thing about his vanilla-ness wasn’t just his naivety but also he was just a bit meh. I didn’t care for him. The girl was far more interesting and skilled and the port wine mark gave her a deeper story than his simple ‘we broke!’ one.

In fact Aitch had more depth of character than the main. (I don’t recall his name).

 

[SilentRoamer]

@Phyrebrat I never said the male protagonist needed to be a white boy, a male was probably better suited due to the male dominance in geek culture but I think Art3mis or Aech could have both been the protagonist without any loss to the story. The protagonists race is completely irrelevant, after all most of their time is spent being Blue or a huge ORC in the Oasis where they spend their time as an Avatar. Geek culture is not some exclusively male, or exclusively white culture group so I just don't understand why race was even brought into it. The author was white and the movie is set in a predominantly white country so I see no problem with the racial spread present in either the films or the novels. Although before reading this thread I never looked at the film through the prism of race - that really doesn't matter to me. Anyway I don't want to discuss that anymore and risk breaking the forum rules. There was a point, I made a counter point and I'm happy to leave it there.

Wade is a bit meh in the film, that's definitely something I agree with, a lot of his agency has been moved over to Art3mis in the film, so it is Art3mis that hatches most of the plans and puts them into motion which is not the case in the books. There's also a whole weird sex simulation and shaved body part which (thankfully) never made it into the films.

I-Rok was much improved in the film though, I liked his expanded role. I didn't like the real world assassin lady - seemed a bit OTT.

You get a lot more of Wades personal story in the books and I think they enamor you to him a lot more. I also prefer the challenges in the book.

Having thought about it - I'm not so sure Wade is definitely the better gamer/gunter in the book, as although he beats Joust faster than Art3mis she consistently jumps him on the scoreboard.

I also really liked that they gave Art3mis a birthmark and made her character a lot more interesting that way.

As I said overall I really liked the film but I preferred the book.

 

[Dave]

I didn't like the real world assassin lady - seemed a bit OTT.

Having watched her in the lead role in the TV series Killjoys I found it impossible to see her as the baddie in this, but that was just my problem.

I thought all the characters in the team were a little stereotyped really, especially the Asian child prodigy, which is why if @kythe is correct and the book had much a more detailed character development, then this wasn't a good adaptation.

 

[Phyrebrat]

@SilentRoamer I wasn't aware we were at odds with our discussing the male protag, or in any way near forum rule transgression. If you're happy, I'm happy.

If you mean supporting the maleness (or as I said, the whiteness) might be a transgression of rules, I'd disagree. We're talking ethnology of gamer/geek culture here. There is a heavy bias to white males in that regard which - thank goodness - is changing. And there are countless times I've seen (and supported) threads about the marginalisation of women in SFF (although not, strangely, horror). It goes both ways and so far -as is the norm for chrons - it's been discussed maturely and sensitively.

I don't have your in-depth knowledge of the book from which this film is based, but I can well imagine your points on it. We so often see more depth in the novels than the films.

Having watched her in the lead role in the TV series Killjoys I found it impossible to see her as the baddie in this, but that was just my problem.

Deev! So glad you posted this. I spent the entire duration of her screentime trying to remember where I'd seen her. I kept getting her confused with the engineer in The Expanse, and gave up.

My sis, a huge gamer/geek fan is staying with me this weekend so I'll show her the film and see what her take on it is. I suspect it'll be the same as ours; she's also probably read the book.

pH

 

[psikeyhackr]

@SilentRoamer.
In fact Aitch had more depth of character than the main. (I don’t recall his name).

Her name. Helen with an Aitch.

 

[Phyrebrat]

Her name. Helen with an Aitch.

No, the main character. The Male.

 

[psikeyhackr]

No, the main character. The Male.

Sorry, Wade Owen Watts alias Percival(sp).

 

[Dave]

Preferred the female lead to the really vanilla Male lead.

When you say really vanilla are you talking about naivety?

My thing about his vanilla-ness wasn’t just his naivety but also he was just a bit meh.

Wade is a bit meh in the film, that's definitely something I agree with, a lot of his agency has been moved over to Art3mis in the film, so it is Art3mis that hatches most of the plans and puts them into motion which is not the case in the books.

What about the naivety of mentioning his real name and that he had bought the top of the range suit, which then allowed 101 to track him down, and ultimately meant he was responsible for the death of his aunt, step-uncle and the majority of his friends and neighbours (something he seemed to get over rather quickly)?

In the book did he also do that?

It doesn't strike me as something that a "better gamer/gunter" would do. In the film they also made a reference to him being so inexperienced and unsophisticated that during the first task he had not joined a Clan yet. So, they were certainly trying to paint a picture of him being simple and naive but intelligent and tenacious. That made him unlike the other gamers/gunters but quite like Halliwell himself. At least, that was my take on it.