Movie Steven Speilberg's Ready Player One!!! 3^30^2018

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
I probably should give a more definitive answer. I thought that movie stunk. If it focused on one or two areas of the book. Make it more about the hunt. Make it more about I0I trying to take over. Make it more about Halliday/Pegg. Make it more about the world's dependence on Oasis. But it felt like none of those things had the appropriate focus so everything felt rushed and surface.
I think stunk maybe too strong. I really think having any opinion about it might be too strong. Despite Speilberg’s best efforts, it just didn’t feel like a movie that was intended to evoke any emotions at all. I poke fun at Joey and Bill for their non commital reviews, but looking back at my own posts, I don’t know how I felt about it. It was...fine. I guess? I don’t know.
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot in the Galaxy
I think stunk maybe too strong. I really think having any opinion about it might be too strong. Despite Speilberg’s best efforts, it just didn’t feel like a movie that was intended to evoke any emotions at all. I poke fun at Joey and Bill for their non commital reviews, but looking back at my own posts, I don’t know how I felt about it. It was...fine. I guess? I don’t know.
I don't think stunk is too strong a word. I mean sure, I don't have "strong" "feelings" about it one way or the other, but I thought while technically it was fair, the story was poorly done. I understood what they were going for because I read the book, but I thought all of the plot elements were mostly glossed over, rushed, or ignored.

None of the characters were particularly well realized. Like you mentioned Krennick didn't know if Sorrento was supposed to be a genuine threat or a buffoon from a kid's movie. Why is he leaving his password lying around for anyone to see? It's not like he's tech illiterate; he interned for Halliday.

Rylance was the best part (I wanted more of him), but I thought Pegg's character was given the shaft to the movie's detriment. We should have felt some emotional connection between Halliday/Ogden, but the movie didn't try to do that. It was pretty much "and they were friends once." At least the book had Ogden reminiscing.

Outside of Rylance, I thought Cooke did a good job giving some personality to a role that could have easily devolved into manic pixie dream girl. And I want to say Sheridan was fine as Wade, but was he? He was a bit more mature than any Cline character, so he works as Movie Protagonist Man, but I thought he was also a bit too serious. I never got a sense of pure geek joy from him. All of the other characters had a bit of that quality (not to a Cline level but something), yet not him. Maybe he approached it as though being a Gunter is his job, but I don't think that necessarily worked.

I never felt the importance of the Oasis or the squalor of the world, and I don't think this movie captured the joy of solving something in the way it really should have. The only sequence that kind of pulled that off was The Shining, because it actually fed into something thematic and character driven (for Halliday) instead of "drive backwards or whatever."

As a collection of scenes that flash in front of you, it's okay enough. But at the end of the day I didn't care enough about any of it to even feel as though it's a bad movie. I think it will be ultimately forgettable.

I did REL at a couple of points though.

1) When that weird red haired girl who worked for I0I (who probably had a bigger role in the original draft because she's always looking conspiratorial about something) explained the Adventure Easter Egg gimmick as Wade was playing it. Where were you when the company needed you? You're not a team player.

2) When Wade said "you killed my mom's sister!" Because I immediately imagined him saying "Who is not as hot as my mom, but still."

But I didn't mind sitting through it. It was a fine enough diversion.
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
I don't think stunk is too strong a word. I mean sure, I don't have "strong" "feelings" about it one way or the other, but I thought while technically it was fair, the story was poorly done. I understood what they were going for because I read the book, but I thought all of the plot elements were mostly glossed over, rushed, or ignored.

None of the characters were particularly well realized. Like you mentioned Krennick didn't know if Sorrento was supposed to be a genuine threat or a buffoon from a kid's movie. Why is he leaving his password lying around for anyone to see? It's not like he's tech illiterate; he interned for Halliday.

Rylance was the best part (I wanted more of him), but I thought Pegg's character was given the shaft to the movie's detriment. We should have felt some emotional connection between Halliday/Ogden, but the movie didn't try to do that. It was pretty much "and they were friends once." At least the book had Ogden reminiscing.

Outside of Rylance, I thought Cooke did a good job giving some personality to a role that could have easily devolved into manic pixie dream girl. And I want to say Sheridan was fine as Wade, but was he? He was a bit more mature than any Cline character, so he works as Movie Protagonist Man, but I thought he was also a bit too serious. I never got a sense of pure geek joy from him. All of the other characters had a bit of that quality (not to a Cline level but something), yet not him. Maybe he approached it as though being a Gunter is his job, but I don't think that necessarily worked.

I never felt the importance of the Oasis or the squalor of the world, and I don't think this movie captured the joy of solving something in the way it really should have. The only sequence that kind of pulled that off was The Shining, because it actually fed into something thematic and character driven (for Halliday) instead of "drive backwards or whatever."

As a collection of scenes that flash in front of you, it's okay enough. But at the end of the day I didn't care enough about any of it to even feel as though it's a bad movie. I think it will be ultimately forgettable.

I did REL at a couple of points though.

1) When that weird red haired girl who worked for I0I (who probably had a bigger role in the original draft because she's always looking conspiratorial about something) explained the Adventure Easter Egg gimmick as Wade was playing it. Where were you when the company needed you? You're not a team player.

2) When Wade said "you killed my mom's sister!" Because I immediately imagined him saying "Who is not as hot as my mom, but still."

But I didn't mind sitting through it. It was a fine enough diversion.
You make some valid points. I thought it was ok but a year from now, no one will really remember this movie. And the fun of "Spot the reference" will be gone on subsequent viewings.

I do agree with RLM when they said that someone would have gotten all 3 keys within a day (the only reason it kind of works is because you don't get the next clue until you solve the clue before it. Otherwise the "Adventure" clue would have been solved in seconds). Also with RLM, I kind of agree with their ratings board discussion. Spielberg has always had clout with the MPAA just for being Spielberg and also spearheading the PG-13 rating. I took my seven year old (yeah I know he's not 13 but who takes that seriously? I mean TFA and TLJ were PG-13 too) to see this and I picture my wife killing me for it. A decent amount of foul language and I found it strange that a PG-13 movie assumes familiarity with at least two hard R rated movies back from the 80s. Spielberg always gets away with more. I remember in Minority Report in the Spiders scene that there was an overhead shot of a couple fucking. He strategicly blocked any nudity but I thought any sex scene with "thrusting" was an automatic R.

Anyway my Son loved it and can't stop talking about it.

I also thought they could have cut the Wade's aunt and her dick lover subplot out. It really had no impact on the plot.

PS: I'm embarrassed that I knew the "Cocktails and Dreams" neon sign reference in Aech's lair.
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot in the Galaxy
You make some valid points. I thought it was ok but a year from now, no one will really remember this movie. And the fun of "Spot the reference" will be gone on subsequent viewings.

I do agree with RLM when they said that someone would have gotten all 3 keys within a day (the only reason it kind of works is because you don't get the next clue until you solve the clue before it. Otherwise the "Adventure" clue would have been solved in seconds). Also with RLM, I kind of agree with their ratings board discussion. Spielberg has always had clout with the MPAA just for being Spielberg and also spearheading the PG-13 rating. I took my seven year old (yeah I know he's not 13 but who takes that seriously? I mean TFA and TLJ were PG-13 too) to see this and I picture my wife killing me for it. A decent amount of foul language and I found it strange that a PG-13 movie assumes familiarity with at least two hard R rated movies back from the 80s. Spielberg always gets away with more. I remember in Minority Report in the Spiders scene that there was an overhead shot of a couple fucking. He strategicly blocked any nudity but I thought any sex scene with "thrusting" was an automatic R.

Anyway my Son loved it and can't stop talking about it.

I also thought they could have cut the Wade's aunt and her dick lover subplot out. It really had no impact on the plot.

PS: I'm embarrassed that I knew the "Cocktails and Dreams" neon sign reference in Aech's lair.
Here's a Spot the Reference question I have. Did they do anything with it?

As in, in Ted 2, there's a scene where they're at a Comic Convention and it turns into an all out brawl as Cosplayers fight Cosplayers split into their actual rivalries. There's a guy dressed as Peter Griffin fighting a guy dressed as a Giant Chicken. It's the only clever moment in the entire movie.

But does anything like that happen in the final battle? Do we see Chun Li vs. M. Bison? Or the Justice League vs. the Suicide Squad? The Iron Giant vs. The Giant Iron? (I would have also accepted The Iron Giant vs. The Iron Lady.)

Because all I can remember from the end is a bunch of characters screaming at nothing and running towards nothing. Do all of the other IOI guys have the same basic avatar? Is there a variety in the battle?

Also they turn into coins, but I don't think the coins ever actually do anything.
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
Here's a Spot the Reference question I have. Did they do anything with it?

As in, in Ted 2, there's a scene where they're at a Comic Convention and it turns into an all out brawl as Cosplayers fight Cosplayers split into their actual rivalries. There's a guy dressed as Peter Griffin fighting a guy dressed as a Giant Chicken. It's the only clever moment in the entire movie.

But does anything like that happen in the final battle? Do we see Chun Li vs. M. Bison? Or the Justice League vs. the Suicide Squad? The Iron Giant vs. The Giant Iron? (I would have also accepted The Iron Giant vs. The Iron Lady.)

Because all I can remember from the end is a bunch of characters screaming at nothing and running towards nothing. Do all of the other IOI guys have the same basic avatar? Is there a variety in the battle?

Also they turn into coins, but I don't think the coins ever actually do anything.
You're not wrong. Fun references don't compensate for a basic story.
 
You make some valid points. I thought it was ok but a year from now, no one will really remember this movie. And the fun of "Spot the reference" will be gone on subsequent viewings
You should read Armada, the references are much more concise and pertinent to the story.

First minute of RPO and they play Van Halen, all I could think was FUCK YES, ARMADA! Coming to theaters soon, get hype!
 

crippledalbino

The God of 42nd Street
Donator
You should read Armada, the references are much more concise and pertinent to the story.

First minute of RPO and they play Van Halen, all I could think was FUCK YES, ARMADA! Coming to theaters soon, get hype!
That day will be a glorious day for the bag.
 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
Here's a Spot the Reference question I have. Did they do anything with it?

As in, in Ted 2, there's a scene where they're at a Comic Convention and it turns into an all out brawl as Cosplayers fight Cosplayers split into their actual rivalries. There's a guy dressed as Peter Griffin fighting a guy dressed as a Giant Chicken. It's the only clever moment in the entire movie.

But does anything like that happen in the final battle? Do we see Chun Li vs. M. Bison? Or the Justice League vs. the Suicide Squad? The Iron Giant vs. The Giant Iron? (I would have also accepted The Iron Giant vs. The Iron Lady.)

Because all I can remember from the end is a bunch of characters screaming at nothing and running towards nothing. Do all of the other IOI guys have the same basic avatar? Is there a variety in the battle?

Also they turn into coins, but I don't think the coins ever actually do anything.
You son of a bitch you never even read my post.
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot in the Galaxy
You're not wrong. Fun references don't compensate for a basic story.
I'm not asking if I'm right or not. Yes, fun references don't compensate for a basic story. But if you're going to have references, try and do something fun with them.
 
I liked it. I saw it in Imax 3D. I didn't know this was a book and knew nothing about the story because I don't watch commercials and my only exposure to it was a preview when I went to see Jumanji in IMAX. Maybe it was the IMAX 3D, but I thought it was a great movie. It precisely spoke to my love for that type of nostalgia which I know is directed pandering but I didn't expect too much from a movie that I could tell was facing a lot of licensing hurdles. I thought the movie was entertaining and not too campy. I think people once again expected too much from a film and those who went into it just to "see a movie" enjoyed it and Fan Boi's were let down and mad...
The only thing that let me down was
There should have been a post credit easter egg, especially in a movie that pays homage to easter eggs. It should have been Matthew Brodderick TODAY dressed as old Ferris Bueller doing the "What are you still doing here? The movie is over...You can go home now". I waited through the credits and was disappointed by that. There was another guy in the theater as well. He too was waiting for something post credits and the excitement on his face when I suggested the Ferris call back indicated he was a massive fan of this book.
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
There should have been a post credit easter egg, especially in a movie that pays homage to easter eggs. It should have been Matthew Brodderick TODAY dressed as old Ferris Bueller doing the "What are you still doing here? The movie is over...You can go home now". I waited through the credits and was disappointed by that. There was another guy in the theater as well. He too was waiting for something post credits and the excitement on his face when I suggested the Ferris call back indicated he was a massive fan of this book.
I was conserding waiting for that, but figured that really wasn't Spielberg's style. He's a pretty traditional filmmaker. I know some movies way back when did that, but nowhere near as common as today.
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot in the Galaxy
I was conserding waiting for that, but figured that really wasn't Spielberg's style. He's a pretty traditional filmmaker. I know some movies way back when did that, but nowhere near as common as today.
I think what it comes down to is that Spielberg was the wrong director for this movie.
 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
I think what it comes down to is that Spielberg was the wrong director for this movie.
Disagree. Worst thing they could have done was get some 30 year old directing version of Cline and turn the movie into a reference fest with no story and no characters. One Rogue One was more than enough. As I said, Spielberg did his level best to strip away the bullshit and get to the heart of the story, he just found that once he did that there wasn’t a lot of story to be told. I don’t think there’s a better version of this movie that could have been made, only a worse one.
 

Floyd1977

Registered User
I think what it comes down to is that Spielberg was the wrong director for this movie.
Yes and no. Spielberg is a geek when it comes to this kind of thing (I don't think it was an accident that the guy they cast as Wade looks almost exactly like young Spielberg) and he had the right attention to detail. But he may have lost his touch when it comes to youthfulness (he's famously said that today he never could have ended CE3K the way he did back then)
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot in the Galaxy
Disagree. Worst thing they could have done was get some 30 year old directing version of Cline and turn the movie into a reference fest with no story and no characters. One Rogue One was more than enough. As I said, Spielberg did his level best to strip away the bullshit and get to the heart of the story, he just found that once he did that there wasn’t a lot of story to be told. I don’t think there’s a better version of this movie that could have been made, only a worse one.
I disagree to your disagree. What you're saying is that this movie has two options: 1) Steven Spielberg's Ready Player One. 2) The Japanese poster for Ready Player One.

I think there's a wide range of options. Yes, it could have been a worse movie. But I definitely think it could be a better one. Like I said, it felt like it lacked focus and that a lot of the concepts were glossed over or poorly explained. It's not impossible to find what works in the book and bring it to the forefront instead of choosing a lot of the things and making them just okay at best.

You can do an homage to an older style of movie without it being nothing but references to said movie. Steven Spielberg did it himself. In a little film called The Indiana Jones. That's what this should have had, but it didn't. Even though Spielberg did those 80s movies, I don't think he captured the feel of them. I don't think he captured the feel of much of anything. I felt the excitement was lacking and the emotion was lacking. It had a slight heart, which Spielberg was able to bring at the end and I do give him credit for, but wasn't a beating one.

I think there are plenty of directors today who could do something akin to that. Who would know how those 1980s movies made them feel. Who understand video games/game culture. Who have an appreciation for pop culture and can integrate them in a way that isn't overbearing or [INSERT REFERENCE HERE]. Because pretty much all the references were interchangeable.

Just not Tony Gilroy. http://www.darkhorizons.com/gilroy-opens-up-about-rogue-one-problems/
 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
I disagree to your disagree. What you're saying is that this movie has two options: 1) Steven Spielberg's Ready Player One. 2) The Japanese poster for Ready Player One.

I think there's a wide range of options. Yes, it could have been a worse movie. But I definitely think it could be a better one. Like I said, it felt like it lacked focus and that a lot of the concepts were glossed over or poorly explained. It's not impossible to find what works in the book and bring it to the forefront instead of choosing a lot of the things and making them just okay at best.

You can do an homage to an older style of movie without it being nothing but references to said movie. Steven Spielberg did it himself. In a little film called The Indiana Jones. That's what this should have had, but it didn't. Even though Spielberg did those 80s movies, I don't think he captured the feel of them. I don't think he captured the feel of much of anything. I felt the excitement was lacking and the emotion was lacking. It had a slight heart, which Spielberg was able to bring at the end and I do give him credit for, but wasn't a beating one.

I think there are plenty of directors today who could do something akin to that. Who would know how those 1980s movies made them feel. Who understand video games/game culture. Who have an appreciation for pop culture and can integrate them in a way that isn't overbearing or [INSERT REFERENCE HERE]. Because pretty much all the references were interchangeable.

Just not Tony Gilroy. http://www.darkhorizons.com/gilroy-opens-up-about-rogue-one-problems/
Was The Indiana Jones filled to the brim with references to other films? No. As you said, it was a homage to those films. And that’s precisely what this film was. It captured the spirit of the 70’s and 80’s without getting bogged down in specific references. If you can’t see that, you’re simply choosing not to, and we can just disagree to our little hearts’ content. But most if not all of the major beats of the movie were homages to films of the 80’s. The Shining scene being the one scene that felt kind of unique. But only briefly.

You’re asking for homage, but then also asking for the movie to take a break during the climax to have Chun Li fight M. Bison for no reason. Which do you want? Because trying to walk the line doing both doesn’t work. Name even one movie that’s pulled it off. The Force Awakens probably comes the closest, but even that is sparse on specific references.

Yes they glossed over the complexities of the story. Sit down and watch The Goonies and tell me that story is complex or even makes the slightest bit of sense. The characters were mostly lacking in comparison to the films of the 80’s, but that can be said about just about every modern blockbuster save perhaps the Marvel movies. Action set pieces are the building blocks of movies. It’s been that way since at least 1999.

The major problem here isnt the movie - it’s you. You’re too old for this shit. Was The Indiana Jones made for 50 year old men who grew up watching serials? No. It was made to give a younger generation a taste of what inspired George and Steve to start making movies. So yeah maybe there’s a 30 year old whiz kid that may have made a better homage to Spielberg than Spielberg could have made himself. JJ, I guess? But he’s made homages to those guys already. Several of them. I honestly think anyone else who would have tried would have made the tragic mistake of jamming the movie with references and missed the entire point in the process. There’s been too many recent examples of this to think any differently.
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot in the Galaxy
Was The Indiana Jones filled to the brim with references to other films? No. As you said, it was a homage to those films. And that’s precisely what this film was. It captured the spirit of the 70’s and 80’s without getting bogged down in specific references. If you can’t see that, you’re simply choosing not to, and we can just disagree to our little hearts’ content. But most if not all of the major beats of the movie were homages to films of the 80’s. The Shining scene being the one scene that felt kind of unique. But only briefly.

You’re asking for homage, but then also asking for the movie to take a break during the climax to have Chun Li fight M. Bison for no reason. Which do you want? Because trying to walk the line doing both doesn’t work. Name even one movie that’s pulled it off. The Force Awakens probably comes the closest, but even that is sparse on specific references.

Yes they glossed over the complexities of the story. Sit down and watch The Goonies and tell me that story is complex or even makes the slightest bit of sense. The characters were mostly lacking in comparison to the films of the 80’s, but that can be said about just about every modern blockbuster save perhaps the Marvel movies. Action set pieces are the building blocks of movies. It’s been that way since at least 1999.

The major problem here isnt the movie - it’s you. You’re too old for this shit. Was The Indiana Jones made for 50 year old men who grew up watching serials? No. It was made to give a younger generation a taste of what inspired George and Steve to start making movies. So yeah maybe there’s a 30 year old whiz kid that may have made a better homage to Spielberg than Spielberg could have made himself. JJ, I guess? But he’s made homages to those guys already. Several of them. I honestly think anyone else who would have tried would have made the tragic mistake of jamming the movie with references and missed the entire point in the process. There’s been too many recent examples of this to think any differently.
I asked what I thought was a fairly simple, fairly basic question. In the background of the final fight, did they do anything interesting/clever with references or was it just a bunch of characters screaming and running? That was it. That was the extent of my question. How that became me wanting a five minute sequence focusing on Chun Li fighting M. Bison? I don't know. I don't care. This is clearly going down the Bucky trail, so I'll say fine.

And I'll concede your other points too. It perfectly captured the spirit of an 80s movie. Spielberg was the only one who could have possibly made this movie. I used the word 'stunk' when I should have used 'was fantastic.' And I'm the problem, not the movie.
 

Pigdango

Silence, you mortal Fuck!
Donator
I asked what I thought was a fairly simple, fairly basic question. In the background of the final fight, did they do anything interesting/clever with references or was it just a bunch of characters screaming and running? That was it. That was the extent of my question. How that became me wanting a five minute sequence focusing on Chun Li fighting M. Bison? I don't know. I don't care. This is clearly going down the Bucky trail, so I'll say fine.

And I'll concede your other points too. It perfectly captured the spirit of an 80s movie. Spielberg was the only one who could have possibly made this movie. I used the word 'stunk' when I should have used 'was fantastic.' And I'm the problem, not the movie.
The movie was a 5 out of 10, but given the source material that’s all it could have been. It wasn’t fantastic, and it didn’t stink. It was a competently made adaptation of a book written by an adult child for other adult children. If it was successful at all, it was that it packaged the spirit of the book and the films of the era into a movie made for children. Sort of like a live action Pixar movie. And that’s not a success that should be overlooked in an era where too many films try only for this:
 

LiddyRules

I'm Gonna Be The Bestest Pilot in the Galaxy
The movie was a 5 out of 10, but given the source material that’s all it could have been. It wasn’t fantastic, and it didn’t stink. It was a competently made adaptation of a book written by an adult child for other adult children. If it was successful at all, it was that it packaged the spirit of the book and the films of the era into a movie made for children. Sort of like a live action Pixar movie. And that’s not a success that should be overlooked in an era where too many films try only for this:
I understand your point better now and therefore will respond less snittily.

My personal belief is that very few movies need to be a 5/10, which this was. If I was generous, I'd say 6/10. It's watchable but ultimately forgettable. I definitely think Spielberg (to his credit) showed that there was some heart/life to the story. However, I thought his approach just broke surface. I think a different director (even Zemeckis if you want to go older) could have really honed in on the emotional elements and made the movie something powerful. Instead it jussssssssssst makes it there. I think that's obviously a problem with the source material, but it's not an unfixable one - find what works for you, discards what doesn't.

Spielberg's approach to the references also showed that pop culture didn't need to be the be all - end all of RPO. For the most part, he downplayed them, making most references interchangeable stickers and avatars, as opposed to something that reflects the characters or the world. I don't think not using licensed characters is a Spielberg Exclusive Quality; I think many directors would do the same thing because they're not 'special' like Cline who can only associate with the world if he can link it to Emmett Otter's Jug-Band Christmas. I also think there could be a middle ground there. You don't have to be a Spielberg ignoring the prevalence of pop culture, and you don't have to be Rogue One Slobbering Cline Fan Service. I thought The Lego Movie walked that line well, integrating references as part of its wider story. I think Lord and Miller actually could have been great for this.*

(Snitty comment #1: Something I do, which I think is why you misunderstand my points a lot of the time is that, when I throw out different options, it's not that I want them all in the same thing. I'm throwing out different alternatives completely exclusive from the other. It's not contradictory, it's parallel.)

Or maybe I should be placing more of my blame on Tye Sheridan. I think with a better lead this movie could have been better. Obviously I don't want a Cline-style slobbering fanboy, but someone who displays some excitement and wonder could have gone a long way towards making me buy into this movie.

Also, I never liked Goonies. Ever.

* Going along with paragraph, there's a reason why The Shining sequence is the best regarded/most memorable bit in the entire movie. It's the only sequence that really integrates the pop culture aspect well and poignantly by letting it contribute to the plot, the characters, and the themes. I wouldn't want 100 Shining moments, but a couple of cleverer set pieces could have definitely bolstered the movie. But that sequence shows that it's not impossible to do. And of note it's also the sequence farthest from anything in Cline's book.
 
Last edited:
Top