Fogburn95 said:

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Bunk Moreland said:

---

I more meant the way they presented the main characters to us. From what they looked like to also introducing them together physically in reality much earlier on. Instead of an apartment in Columbus, Wade is with Artemis and then Aech. That stuff.

---

Oh, I agree with your review above. The movie removed any parts of the book that provided reasons to get to know and care about the protagonists. But it also took out the uniqueness of the challenges and made it very generic.

---

I don't think the book challenges would translate well to big screen (i.e. watching them play Joust). Personally I would have enjoyed it but I understand why the larger audience probably would not.

---

I get what you're saying. I get the initial thought of "just watching the Joust challenge would be boring", but if you shorten it up and liven up the dialogue a little I honestly think you can make an interesting, fun scene. Plus you still have the chance to introduce Artemis organically like she is in the book.

It feels like these days we're automatically thinking every scene in a movie of this type has to be a dazzling high-speed action scene, and I just find that a little sad. I feel like Hollywood has trained us to think this way. They/we aren't giving ourselves or our kids enough credit for enjoying a scene like Chet being turned into a big blob in Weird Science or the training scenes in Karate Kid. Most of us posting on this thread grew up on kid's/teenager movies that didn't rely strictly on mindless high-speed action. For example Goonies, WarGames, E.T., Ferris Bueller's Day Off, The Karate Kid, Weird Science......the very movies that are revered in Ready Player One. Yet supposedly the Joust Challenge scene in Ready Player One is too boring these days and has to be replaced with a cliche racing scene.

Sorry, old man rant over.

Finally saw it.

As a book reader I wasn't nearly as disappointed as I have been in other adaptations. I'd agree that it stuck 30-50% to the book and main points.

I am sad that they sold out 70s and 80s culture for 90s and 00s for most of it, but I get it... that's going to appeal to most people as opposed to guys in their late 30s and 40s.

Enjoyed and felt like even though they could have been a bit more faithful with the material, they stuck close enough to make it enjoyable for readers and non readers alike.

Finally saw it last night and have not read the book.

Liked it, but not as much as I think I should have as this should have been right in my wheelhouse.

Tons of questions that are nagging me that lower my feelings on the film but I'll try to ask some of my bigger ones:

Was there no way for them to "deposit" the money/items that you accumulate in the Oasis for safekeeping? Seriously, no one thought of some Oasis Bank that'll hold all your online money? IRoc mentioned that he had 10 years worth of stuff on his avatar and apparently lost it all in that explosion. He was also "bleeding" coins when he lost his arm. Seems like someone that smart and wealthy would have known better than to keep literally everything he owned on his person.

I can understand losing a small amount of money when you "die" but then what is to stop some sociopath from buying a Holy Hand Grenade, going to a crowded meetingplace, setting off the bomb and then walk around and pick up all the money lost by those killed? Then use part of that money to buy another grenade...repeat...etc. And can you kill other avatars just anywhere in the Oasis? Or is it only on game programs? Because then it would seem like murder and mugging would be entirely common (since these are only avatars and not real people, you know).

Parzival was clearly scared when Goro grabbed him in the Library, but why? If avatars have the approximate strength of their characters and size, why would anyone choose an avatar who wasn't 8 feet tall with the strength of Superman? For that matter, why not just be Superman? When IRoc went into that private room in the club, he intimidated the women in there to leave. Why? It's just an avatar. It could be an 8 year old kid with asthma.

And if you always dropped part or all of your coins when killed in the Oasis, wouldn't Parzival have gotten the sh*t kicked out of him non-stop, since he's now a super-celebrity and everyone knows he's rich as ****? He's not a superhero who can kick everyone's a$$.....he solved a puzzle. Beat him up and take his money.

Lastly, I know Wade said in the opening narration that living in the Oasis was preferable to the sh*tty real world that "no one wanted to improve", but did anyone who wasn't employed by IOI have a job in this movie?

All in all, this was a very middling effort by Spielberg, who hasn't seem to have made an exciting film since War of the Worlds.

I think Avatar's could keep loot on private dwellings in the oasis, ie Aech's garage.

As for why everyone wasn't just killing the rich, a lot of the "planets" were safe zones that didn't allow fighting, and when they were on a no rules planet they had armor and weapons to defend themselves, ie dance club fight.

I could be wrong on this, but I think the Holy Hand Grenade was a one of a kind artifact that Parzival bought, not a mass produced weapon.

FTACO97 said:

---

So essentially you've never played video games where you build up a character and then loose all your loot when you get killed......which is the whole premise behind this world...

Also, as hurleyag said, you're safe from being attacked in other parts of the Oasis. Only fighting allowed in certain areas.

---

Okay, so you can lose all your loot when killed. Which is the premise behind this world.

Why?

Why would you put all your money in an avatar (since seemingly that's where people earned their money) that could instantly lose everything when killed? Again, why isn't there someplace (like an Oasis Bank) where you could safely deposit your possessions so there is no risk of you losing literally everything you own?

And fighting only being allowed in certain areas makes sense. So why was Parzival intimidated by Goro (who was really Artemis)? Why were those ladies threatened by IRoc? Why would a dance club allow violence in it (since the IOI broke in and shot up the place)?

I'm not trying to be argumentative. There are just so many questions I have about this "reality" and haven't read the book. Maybe I should read it. That way some of my questions could be answered and I might appreciate the movie little more.

I'm right there with you. As a non-book reader, the Oasis hardly made any sense to me. Just so many questions. I'm sure the book explained it well, but the movie most certainly did not.

Most of the other characters in the story had more power. Think level 10 versus level 50.

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

Finally saw it last night and have not read the book.

Liked it, but not as much as I think I should have as this should have been right in my wheelhouse.

Tons of questions that are nagging me that lower my feelings on the film but I'll try to ask some of my bigger ones:

Was there no way for them to "deposit" the money/items that you accumulate in the Oasis for safekeeping? Seriously, no one thought of some Oasis Bank that'll hold all your online money? IRoc mentioned that he had 10 years worth of stuff on his avatar and apparently lost it all in that explosion. He was also "bleeding" coins when he lost his arm. Seems like someone that smart and wealthy would have known better than to keep literally everything he owned on his person.

Like somebody else said, you can keep things in "bases" like Aech's garage. There was no bleeding coins in the book, so my guess is as good as yours on that one.

I can understand losing a small amount of money when you "die" but then what is to stop some sociopath from buying a Holy Hand Grenade, going to a crowded meetingplace, setting off the bomb and then walk around and pick up all the money lost by those killed? Then use part of that money to buy another grenade...repeat...etc. And can you kill other avatars just anywhere in the Oasis? Or is it only on game programs? Because then it would seem like murder and mugging would be entirely common (since these are only avatars and not real people, you know).

Some worlds do not allow combat between players. If you stay in an area that is not a combat area, another player cannot harm you.

Parzival was clearly scared when Goro grabbed him in the Library, but why? If avatars have the approximate strength of their characters and size, why would anyone choose an avatar who wasn't 8 feet tall with the strength of Superman? For that matter, why not just be Superman? When IRoc went into that private room in the club, he intimidated the women in there to leave. Why? It's just an avatar. It could be an 8 year old kid with asthma.

The club was an area where combat was allowed, which is why he could intimidate them. As far as the characters strength goes, the avatars all have a level associated with them, like any RPG out there. Levels range between 1-99. Level 99's have better stats, more hit points, better gear, etc. As far as I know, the look of an avatar is completely cosmetic.

And if you always dropped part or all of your coins when killed in the Oasis, wouldn't Parzival have gotten the sh*t kicked out of him non-stop, since he's now a super-celebrity and everyone knows he's rich as ****? He's not a superhero who can kick everyone's a$$.....he solved a puzzle. Beat him up and take his money.

See above. They didn't do a good job showing it in the movie, but he was a Level 99 by the time he got the 3rd Key.

Lastly, I know Wade said in the opening narration that living in the Oasis was preferable to the sh*tty real world that "no one wanted to improve", but did anyone who wasn't employed by IOI have a job in this movie?

The movie did a terrible job of showing it, but most people worked in the Oasis. Wade took up a job doing IT work through the Oasis. There are teachers and businesses. People like Aech compete in Deathmatch games for money. In the book, the currency used in the Oasis was just as stable as any currency backed by a government.

All in all, this was a very middling effort by Spielberg, who hasn't seem to have made an exciting film since War of the Worlds.

---

Some answers above in bold, the movie didn't do a very good job of showing the minutiae of the universe.

Unthought Known said:

---

Most of the other characters in the story had more power. Think level 10 versus level 50.

---

Fake news

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

If avatars have the approximate strength of their characters and size, why would anyone choose an avatar who wasn't 8 feet tall with the strength of Superman? For that matter, why not just be Superman? When IRoc went into that private room in the club, he intimidated the women in there to leave. Why? It's just an avatar. It could be an 8 year old kid with asthma.

---

This was properly answered before, but another note: the villain literally chose Superman as his avatar. He was Injustice Clark Kent.

Quote:

---

All in all, this was a very middling effort by Spielberg, who hasn't seem to have made an exciting film since War of the Worlds.

---

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but this film was an insane undertaking that few directors would've even tried to pull off.

It may not be the amazing film that some of his work has been, but calling it "middling" and not exciting seems a bit disingenous.

3rdGen2015 said:

---

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

Finally saw it last night and have not read the book.

Liked it, but not as much as I think I should have as this should have been right in my wheelhouse.

Tons of questions that are nagging me that lower my feelings on the film but I'll try to ask some of my bigger ones:

Was there no way for them to "deposit" the money/items that you accumulate in the Oasis for safekeeping? Seriously, no one thought of some Oasis Bank that'll hold all your online money? IRoc mentioned that he had 10 years worth of stuff on his avatar and apparently lost it all in that explosion. He was also "bleeding" coins when he lost his arm. Seems like someone that smart and wealthy would have known better than to keep literally everything he owned on his person.

Like somebody else said, you can keep things in "bases" like Aech's garage. There was no bleeding coins in the book, so my guess is as good as yours on that one.

I can understand losing a small amount of money when you "die" but then what is to stop some sociopath from buying a Holy Hand Grenade, going to a crowded meetingplace, setting off the bomb and then walk around and pick up all the money lost by those killed? Then use part of that money to buy another grenade...repeat...etc. And can you kill other avatars just anywhere in the Oasis? Or is it only on game programs? Because then it would seem like murder and mugging would be entirely common (since these are only avatars and not real people, you know).

Some worlds do not allow combat between players. If you stay in an area that is not a combat area, another player cannot harm you.

Parzival was clearly scared when Goro grabbed him in the Library, but why? If avatars have the approximate strength of their characters and size, why would anyone choose an avatar who wasn't 8 feet tall with the strength of Superman? For that matter, why not just be Superman? When IRoc went into that private room in the club, he intimidated the women in there to leave. Why? It's just an avatar. It could be an 8 year old kid with asthma.

The club was an area where combat was allowed, which is why he could intimidate them. As far as the characters strength goes, the avatars all have a level associated with them, like any RPG out there. Levels range between 1-99. Level 99's have better stats, more hit points, better gear, etc. As far as I know, the look of an avatar is completely cosmetic.

And if you always dropped part or all of your coins when killed in the Oasis, wouldn't Parzival have gotten the sh*t kicked out of him non-stop, since he's now a super-celebrity and everyone knows he's rich as ****? He's not a superhero who can kick everyone's a$$.....he solved a puzzle. Beat him up and take his money.

See above. They didn't do a good job showing it in the movie, but he was a Level 99 by the time he got the 3rd Key.

Lastly, I know Wade said in the opening narration that living in the Oasis was preferable to the sh*tty real world that "no one wanted to improve", but did anyone who wasn't employed by IOI have a job in this movie?

The movie did a terrible job of showing it, but most people worked in the Oasis. Wade took up a job doing IT work through the Oasis. There are teachers and businesses. People like Aech compete in Deathmatch games for money. In the book, the currency used in the Oasis was just as stable as any currency backed by a government.

All in all, this was a very middling effort by Spielberg, who hasn't seem to have made an exciting film since War of the Worlds.

---

Some answers above in bold, the movie didn't do a very good job of showing the minutiae of the universe.

---

Thank you. That did a good job answering those questions.

Again, as a non-book reader, I think the movie didn't adequately convey just how the Oasis worked and left me with many questions.

No problem. If any other questions come up, I'll give my best shot at answering them.

fig96 said:

---

Quote:

---

All in all, this was a very middling effort by Spielberg, who hasn't seem to have made an exciting film since War of the Worlds.

---

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but this film was an insane undertaking that few directors would've even tried to pull off.

It may not be the amazing film that some of his work has been, but calling it "middling" and not exciting seems a bit disingenous.

---

It was an insane undertaking, but I felt that it was a technically beautiful and exciting visual feast, but very cold and shallow from an emotional perspective. It seemed like Spielberg was too caught up in the fake CGI side of the film and not the real actors. Just my opinion, but he's done much better and I guess I had higher expectations.

I guess I should have said Spielberg hasn't made and emotionally deep and visually exciting film since War of the Worlds (which was genuinely terrifying and very emotionally moving).

It's interesting, as a non PVP gamer, the movie gave me a better understanding of how Oasis worked.

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Quote:

---

All in all, this was a very middling effort by Spielberg, who hasn't seem to have made an exciting film since War of the Worlds.

---

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but this film was an insane undertaking that few directors would've even tried to pull off.

It may not be the amazing film that some of his work has been, but calling it "middling" and not exciting seems a bit disingenous.

---

It was an insane undertaking, but I felt that it was a technically beautiful and exciting visual feast, but very cold and shallow from an emotional perspective. It seemed like Spielberg was too caught up in the fake CGI side of the film and not the real actors. Just my opinion, but he's done much better and I guess I had higher expectations.

I guess I should have said Spielberg hasn't made and emotionally deep and visually exciting film since War of the Worlds (which was genuinely terrifying and very emotionally moving).

---

Fair enough. I certainly wouldn't call this one of his best, but I thought it was a really fun ride.

I also think Tintin was surprisingly fun and very rewatchable, but that's a different topic

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Quote:

---

All in all, this was a very middling effort by Spielberg, who hasn't seem to have made an exciting film since War of the Worlds.

---

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but this film was an insane undertaking that few directors would've even tried to pull off.

It may not be the amazing film that some of his work has been, but calling it "middling" and not exciting seems a bit disingenous.

---

It was an insane undertaking, but I felt that it was a technically beautiful and exciting visual feast, but very cold and shallow from an emotional perspective. It seemed like Spielberg was too caught up in the fake CGI side of the film and not the real actors. Just my opinion, but he's done much better and I guess I had higher expectations.

I guess I should have said Spielberg hasn't made and emotionally deep and visually exciting film since War of the Worlds (which was genuinely terrifying and very emotionally moving).

---

And I disagree completely. This is hands down better in every facet than WOW. Storytelling, emotional connection, visuals, plot ending (not really Spielberg's fault, I've always thought WOW had a terrible ending).

This is what I hoped Indiana Jones 4 would be. Not as good as the first three, but a fun, exciting, excellent movie.

Champ Bailey said:

---

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Quote:

---

All in all, this was a very middling effort by Spielberg, who hasn't seem to have made an exciting film since War of the Worlds.

---

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but this film was an insane undertaking that few directors would've even tried to pull off.

It may not be the amazing film that some of his work has been, but calling it "middling" and not exciting seems a bit disingenous.

---

It was an insane undertaking, but I felt that it was a technically beautiful and exciting visual feast, but very cold and shallow from an emotional perspective. It seemed like Spielberg was too caught up in the fake CGI side of the film and not the real actors. Just my opinion, but he's done much better and I guess I had higher expectations.

I guess I should have said Spielberg hasn't made and emotionally deep and visually exciting film since War of the Worlds (which was genuinely terrifying and very emotionally moving).

---

And I disagree completely. This is hands down better in every facet than WOW. Storytelling, emotional connection, visuals, plot ending (not really Spielberg's fault, I've always thought WOW had a terrible ending).

This is what I hoped Indiana Jones 4 would be. Not as good as the first three, but a fun, exciting, excellent movie.

---

I agree completely with Bill. I left the theater after Ready Player One thinking that Spielberg had lost his touch. I'm sorry, but forty years ago he gave us a movie about a shark that hunts people that has more personal and emotional investment in its main characters than this movie which is ultimately supposed to be about personal human interaction (versus virtual reality).

Look beyond the VFX and Ready Player One was about as cliche and average as it gets when you're talking about "popcorn, action movies".

i finally saw this today and agree with most everything said. Did anyone else feel like they did not get into the movie much because they were too busy watching for easter eggs and trying to ID characters? that was my experience. there also needs to be a remake for the nerds who want a better book adaption.

http://ew.com/movies/2018/03/22/ready-player-one-steven-spielberg-references/

Quote:

---

Steven Spielberg vowed to leave his own movies out of Ready Player One his crew vowed otherwise

Before setting off to make a movie from Ernest Cline's 2011 novel Ready Player One, a futuristic tale of a treasure hunt through a virtual-reality universe that's heavy on '80s geek culture, the filmmaker who defined that decade pledged to leave his own movies out of the picture.

There was one exception: He allowed the hero to drive the time-traveling DeLorean from Back to the Future, which Spielberg executive-produced. Beyond that, the director didn't want the new movie to become a series of shout-outs to his older ones.

His crew vowed otherwise.

Thus began a covert campaign to sneak Spielbergia into the background of Ready Player One, often by visually referencing movies he produced rather than directed. Graffiti on one wall of the dystopian real-world set included the grinning green jaws of a fiend from Gremlins. Spielberg killed it.

---

Thanks for linking!

Quote:

---

"I think a lot of the digital artists were trying to get some of their favorite '80s cultural references in there, you know?" Spielberg says. "And having seen every shot 30 times as we go through all the different steps from pre-viz to animatic to final, I started noticing little things. They snuck a gremlin in."

He let them have that one. "I said, 'Well, I guess it's too late to take that guy out.' So he survived the cut." In the epic final battle, keep your eyes open to spot the little monster that hates bright light.

---

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Champ Bailey said:

---

GiveEmHellBill said:

---

fig96 said:

---

Quote:

---

All in all, this was a very middling effort by Spielberg, who hasn't seem to have made an exciting film since War of the Worlds.

---

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but this film was an insane undertaking that few directors would've even tried to pull off.

It may not be the amazing film that some of his work has been, but calling it "middling" and not exciting seems a bit disingenous.

---

It was an insane undertaking, but I felt that it was a technically beautiful and exciting visual feast, but very cold and shallow from an emotional perspective. It seemed like Spielberg was too caught up in the fake CGI side of the film and not the real actors. Just my opinion, but he's done much better and I guess I had higher expectations.

I guess I should have said Spielberg hasn't made and emotionally deep and visually exciting film since War of the Worlds (which was genuinely terrifying and very emotionally moving).

---

And I disagree completely. This is hands down better in every facet than WOW. Storytelling, emotional connection, visuals, plot ending (not really Spielberg's fault, I've always thought WOW had a terrible ending).

This is what I hoped Indiana Jones 4 would be. Not as good as the first three, but a fun, exciting, excellent movie.

---

I agree completely with Bill. I left the theater after Ready Player One thinking that Spielberg had lost his touch. I'm sorry, but forty years ago he gave us a movie about a shark that hunts people that has more personal and emotional investment in its main characters than this movie which is ultimately supposed to be about personal human interaction (versus virtual reality).

Look beyond the VFX and Ready Player One was about as cliche and average as it gets when you're talking about "popcorn, action movies".

---

I agree with Champ. I left the theater feeling more like a kid who had just watched a summer action movie. This movie was far better, imo, than WoW. Great start to a hopefully great summer season.

FL_Ag1998 said:

---

Haven't seen it yet, but there's nudity and/or gore (from some sort of The Shining VR scene)?

Was hoping to take my 8 yr old, figured this would be just a fun movie (I did read the book) that he could enjoy as well.

---

There's a surprising amount of cursing. Most of it was unnecessary to me but that one is a parental call. I usually preface my kids with the "There's language in this movie that if I ever hear come out of your mouth will get you in trouble...." speach.


Just quickly on the WoW topic:

What WoW got wrong is assuming people give a crap about the lore. It should have been the Arthas story right out of the gate. I would have accepted an entire movie around a 10 man Raid in the Firelands. I would love to see a mechanically correct movie or short film completely around dungeoning or raiding but that's for a different discussion.

Frok said:

---

I read the book and also enjoyed the movie. I think you just had to see them as two separate things. Books have the ability to go into complexities that a screen cannot do unless you stretch it out into a Netflix series.

---

This is exactly what I did and how I felt. Movie wasn't great, but it was good enough. Book was great. Both stories were different.

WoW is World of Warcraft

WOW in this thread is War of the Worlds but should have been WotW

get it right. AGSPORTSFAN07

Brennus said:

---

WoW is World of Warcraft

WOW in this thread is War of the Worlds but should have been WotW

get it right. AGSPORTSFAN07

---

Ahhhhh...ok. You see I had a beef with WoW. =)

WOW = Wade Owen Watts

hth

I took my 18-yr-old son to this and we were both underwhelmed, mostly for the reasons that many have brought up already. It just didn't make much sense. The funniest part of the movie happened for me at the end, and was unintentional. When the cops show up at the perfect time at the end of the movie, I turned and looked at my son and he turned and looked at me, and then he said exactly what I was thinking - "where have these guys been the whole movie"? I laughed harder when he said that than at any "comedy" in the movie.

I absolutely loved the book. I did not care for the movie, but it wasn't because it strayed from the book. It was sooooo cheesy. People in my theater were literally laughing bc of how cheesy it wasn't. The cheesiness ruined it for me. This was 3x more cheesy than hunger games and other movies like this. I cringed multiple times because of the dialogue. They should have made this more dark and captured more of why the race was so important.

I saw it 3D so it was still a fun movie experience though.