Ready Player one

[Cespenar]

I just hope that Spielberg won't turn this into just a nostalgia farming tool like he does for some time now.

[JoshL]

The trailer looks fun, but mostly made me sad that it is 2018 and we haven't had a film based on Snowcrash.

[Ramza00]

but mostly made me sad that it is 2018 and we haven't had a film based on Snowcrash.

I am reminded of an Oscar Wilde quote.

There are only two tragedies in life:
one is not getting what one wants,
and the other is getting it. - Oscar Wilde

[Kato]

Okay, I entirely respect the opinions that RPO is shallow, because it is (for the most part, like 95%) but I think also if you're looking for something that cherishes individual parts of nerd culture.. Well, you're just in the wrong place. If anything it celebrates nostalgia. And yeah, maybe it is cheap to just include lists upon lists of things but as I said before.. Sometimes it's okay to be just dumb entertainment. And it's just as fine not to enjoy that. But since I don't think it attempts to be.. Well, more than simple enter
entertainment I think it's unfair to blame it for not being something else. I'm a huge Gundam fan but I don't mind the story (book or movie) never touching upon the atrocities of war. It's just not what it is about. And in the same way I don't mind what they have the Iron Giant or chucky do..

[Zalabim]

With no exposure to the movie or book at all, I think it's just copying how the internet is. It's not supposed to be symbolic at all. People take as avatars something popular or something they like or make up their own or maybe nothing at all. They aren't always pretending that they are that thing. People actually do this all over the internet, so it's just normal to include it in a fictional online community. It can be nostalgic, but it's not playing on nostalgia in the manner of Robot Chicken. It's banking on generic action and thrills, and I don't expect anything else.

[LaZodiac]

Again, you're putting WAY too much thought into this.
Are you equally pissed at people cosplaying as Venom not actually eating people? You are borderlining Insane Troll Logic here.

Seriously, I get that you apparently have a huge emotional attachment to the character. But if you think for a SECOND that the ACTUAL Iron Giant wouldn't be prepared to use force to actually save the lives of his friends? I think he would.
Also, for the record, I loved BBT for the first 5 or 6 seasons before it basically turned into a standard sitcom. The first three seasons are hilarious.

No, because that's illegal and happening in real life and because Venom has had his anti hero streaks and, importantly, is not the main character of a really good movie about how WAR IS BAD and "just because you're expected to be something, doesn't mean you have to be". The Iron Giant is, literally, a weapon of mass destruction who does not want to be. Making him do violence is very stupid if you're trying to be like "Aaah, look at all this cool pop culture I'm referencing". It's utter nonsense.

That explains it. Just to be clear it was always a garbage fire, and you just said you liked it for three seasons where it was "not generic sitcom" which is wrong because it was, and then liked it for two more seasons after it became something you didn't find unique.

It is entirely possible that the Iron Giant would find situations where force is acceptable (as opposed to situations where his weapons systems kick in automatically). But seeking out such situations is still totally counter to the themes of the movie.

Which is not to say that it necessarily shouldn't happen in RP1. From the trailer, I'm not exactly clear on which side the Giant's fighting for, but it could work either way. The bad guys perverting the Iron Giant to fight for them is an easy way to build pathos. Meanwhile, the good guys are kids who might just think it's cool to be one of the good robots, regardless of the themes of the movie the robot comes from.

Zodi is still correct about the general purpose of references in RP1 the novel: to simultaneously act as nerd gatekeeper and validate nerd gatekeeping with quarter-trillion-dollar significance. There's maybe kinda sort of an Aesop about the unhealthiness of escaping into nostalgia in the face of a sucky future, vis-a-vis Halliday's last words to Wade and Wade's apparent lack of desire to log back into the OASIS, but it's undercut by the fact that this only happens after Wade has literally won at life via exactly that escapism.

One reason I'm optimistic about the movie is that Spielberg, who invented significant elements of '80s pop culture to begin with, might want to say more about '80s pop culture than "Remember this stuff that existed? Wasn't it cool?" We'll see if that happens. But RP1 the movie appears to be much more spread out in its pop culture timeline, so this might not be as relevant as I first thought.

Okay so in the book, the main character can become a giant to do war fighting. In the book it's Ultraman, and he uses it's power to destroy people trying to get in his way of solving the stupid "list all the cool things I know" mystery that is the premise of the book. They don't have the rights to Ultraman for the film so they picked the Iron Giant. It is not a thing he is doing in self defense (not REALLY, since as a digital world no one can actually be truly hurt) he's just doing it to defend his claim to being the biggest and best nerd.

I'm really doubting that Spielberg has anything interesting to say with this film because the book is basically riding his joy buzzer the entire thing. The fact that he invented a ton of 80s pop culture means a lot of this book's writing is "man everything Spielberg did was The Best and you know it's The Best because our nerd hero is using his knowledge of it to solve puzzles, proving he is The True Fan".

[GloatingSwine]

One reason I'm optimistic about the movie is that Spielberg, who invented significant elements of '80s pop culture to begin with, might want to say more about '80s pop culture than "Remember this stuff that existed? Wasn't it cool?" We'll see if that happens. But RP1 the movie appears to be much more spread out in its pop culture timeline, so this might not be as relevant as I first thought.

Given that the original's '80s nostalgia runs from about 1973 to 1999 anyway, spreading it out even more doesn't really matter.

[Lentrax]

Not going to get involved in the "Is RP1 bad troll arguments here, but wanted to comment on this:

The trailer looks fun, but mostly made me sad that it is 2018 and we haven't had a film based on Snowcrash.

Amazon is reportedly working on turning Snow Crash into a TV series. So, hopefully soon we will have the Adventures of Hiro Protagonist and YT on a screen.

[GloatingSwine]

I just hope that Spielberg won't turn this into just a nostalgia farming tool like he does for some time now.

You can't turn something into what it already is.

[Durkoala]

Okay, I entirely respect the opinions that RPO is shallow, because it is (for the most part, like 95%) but I think also if you're looking for something that cherishes individual parts of nerd culture.. Well, you're just in the wrong place. If anything it celebrates nostalgia. And yeah, maybe it is cheap to just include lists upon lists of things but as I said before.. Sometimes it's okay to be just dumb entertainment. And it's just as fine not to enjoy that. But since I don't think it attempts to be.. Well, more than simple enter
entertainment I think it's unfair to blame it for not being something else. I'm a huge Gundam fan but I don't mind the story (book or movie) never touching upon the atrocities of war. It's just not what it is about. And in the same way I don't mind what they have the Iron Giant or chucky do..

Yes, this is pretty much what I think of RP1. It's dumb and shallow, but sometimes you want to see something dumb and shallow with bright lights and explosions.

I also like the unintentional aesthetic of a soulless desert strewn with the debris of old pop culture.

I am reminded of an Oscar Wilde quote.

<quoting doesn't include quotes>

That's kind of terrifying given that the movie adaption of a book I've loved for a long time is coming out this year.

Spoiler: Shameless advertising

Show

[JoshL]

Amazon is reportedly working on turning Snow Crash into a TV series. So, hopefully soon we will have the Adventures of Hiro Protagonist and YT on a screen.

Checking up on this, I see they also have Ringworld, the Culture, the Dark Tower ("more faithful to the books" they claim) and Wheel of Time!!!! I'll be in an over excited shock coma now.

[Avilan the Grey]

It is entirely possible that the Iron Giant would find situations where force is acceptable (as opposed to situations where his weapons systems kick in automatically). But seeking out such situations is still totally counter to the themes of the movie.

Which is not to say that it necessarily shouldn't happen in RP1. From the trailer, I'm not exactly clear on which side the Giant's fighting for, but it could work either way. The bad guys perverting the Iron Giant to fight for them is an easy way to build pathos. Meanwhile, the good guys are kids who might just think it's cool to be one of the good robots, regardless of the themes of the movie the robot comes from.

Zodi is still correct about the general purpose of references in RP1 the novel: to simultaneously act as nerd gatekeeper and validate nerd gatekeeping with quarter-trillion-dollar significance. There's maybe kinda sort of an Aesop about the unhealthiness of escaping into nostalgia in the face of a sucky future, vis-a-vis Halliday's last words to Wade and Wade's apparent lack of desire to log back into the OASIS, but it's undercut by the fact that this only happens after Wade has literally won at life via exactly that escapism.

One reason I'm optimistic about the movie is that Spielberg, who invented significant elements of '80s pop culture to begin with, might want to say more about '80s pop culture than "Remember this stuff that existed? Wasn't it cool?" We'll see if that happens. But RP1 the movie appears to be much more spread out in its pop culture timeline, so this might not be as relevant as I first thought.

I have not read the book, but I have seen all the trailers, and it's abundantly clear to me that they are fighting against a corporate entity that murders children to secure the control of Oasis.
Seriously, it's right there, front and center.
The movie is basically 50% Willy Wonka, 50% Harry Potter and that Triwizard Tournament. Instead of Willy Wonka we have the Easter Egg Dead Guy. Instead of Voldermort we have the 101 corporation who, which we can see, employs hundreds of agents to make sure they win the competition and starts using deadly IRL force when they still can't win all the trials.
So yes, I am not even surprised if the guy "cosplaying" as Iron Giant IS a pacifist and that's why he picked it. But if your friends, or other kids period, are being murdered, AND the place that you call your home is under threat he might be talked into using his impressive weapons to actually take a physical stand.

I don't see this contradicting the movie at all.
And I still find it ridiculous to hold a teenage cosplayer to the same exact moral standards as the character he or she is cosplaying as.

[JadedDM]

Avilan, are you listening to yourself right now? "I haven't read the book, but I have seen the trailers, and that makes me enough of an expert to lecture people who have read the book on what exactly this movie is about."

[jay103]

I'd heard of the book, then saw the trailer a while ago, and bought the book. It was pretty good. Lightweight, sure, but as someone who was born in 1970 and played D&D in the early 80's, it hit enough nostalgia buttons to be well worth it. I totally have a copy of the Tomb of Horrors in a box in my basement, next to all the other manuals from 1980 :)

Oh, and possibly the best thing about the book? It ENDED. It seems like nobody can write a single book any more.. everything has to be a trilogy or more. This is one book, done. Closure.

[Avilan the Grey]

Avilan, are you listening to yourself right now? "I haven't read the book, but I have seen the trailers, and that makes me enough of an expert to lecture people who have read the book on what exactly this movie is about."

Yes.
And um... Did you read the post I was replying to? We were talking about the movie. Not the book.

Also, yeah yeah nostalgia etc. Which is exactly why the also filled it with new stuff. Admittedly it will all be nostalgia by 2043(?) but... I wouldn't call Tracer, Ledger!Joker, Modern!Harley etc nostalgia. It's the main reason it took so long to make this movie; they had to secure tons of licenses from all over the place. And Spielberg wanted this movie to be something else than just "look at Spielberg doing Spielberg stuff".
And again, it seems to me people are reading way too much into this.

[jay103]

Also, yeah yeah nostalgia etc. Which is exactly why the also filled it with new stuff. Admittedly it will all be nostalgia by 2043(?) but... I wouldn't call Tracer, Ledger!Joker, Modern!Harley etc nostalgia. It's the main reason it took so long to make this movie; they had to secure tons of licenses from all over the place. And Spielberg wanted this movie to be something else than just "look at Spielberg doing Spielberg stuff".
And again, it seems to me people are reading way too much into this.

OASIS isn't filled with nostalgia, it's filled with.. everything. It's just that this player is tracing elements within the Oasis that are from the 80's.

(also, how is it a Triwizard tournament??)

[Lethologica]

Okay, I entirely respect the opinions that RPO is shallow, because it is (for the most part, like 95%) but I think also if you're looking for something that cherishes individual parts of nerd culture.. Well, you're just in the wrong place. If anything it celebrates nostalgia. And yeah, maybe it is cheap to just include lists upon lists of things but as I said before.. Sometimes it's okay to be just dumb entertainment. And it's just as fine not to enjoy that. But since I don't think it attempts to be.. Well, more than simple enter
entertainment I think it's unfair to blame it for not being something else. I'm a huge Gundam fan but I don't mind the story (book or movie) never touching upon the atrocities of war. It's just not what it is about. And in the same way I don't mind what they have the Iron Giant or chucky do..

RP1 is what it wants to be. So is Transformers. So is Sword Art Online. A property fulfilling its premise does not exempt it from criticism when it has little else going for it, and of course critics will look at how it could have had something else going for it. Because of course it's acceptable to be dumb entertainment, but there's lots of better dumb entertainment out there. Even in the narrow category of dumb entertainment playing out a power fantasy via '80s nostalgia in a video-game-y environment, I could watch Scott Pilgrim vs. the World instead of reading the 1980s pop culture Wikipedia article pasted over Stock Plot #7.

Okay so in the book, the main character can become a giant to do war fighting. In the book it's Ultraman, and he uses it's power to destroy people trying to get in his way of solving the stupid "list all the cool things I know" mystery that is the premise of the book. They don't have the rights to Ultraman for the film so they picked the Iron Giant. It is not a thing he is doing in self defense (not REALLY, since as a digital world no one can actually be truly hurt) he's just doing it to defend his claim to being the biggest and best nerd.

I'm really doubting that Spielberg has anything interesting to say with this film because the book is basically riding his joy buzzer the entire thing. The fact that he invented a ton of 80s pop culture means a lot of this book's writing is "man everything Spielberg did was The Best and you know it's The Best because our nerd hero is using his knowledge of it to solve puzzles, proving he is The True Fan".

I know how the book plays it. But even in the book, it's not just the Beta Capsule that brings giant robots to the party--all the characters who get past the second gate get to pick a giant robot. So even if the movie plays things the way the book did, that doesn't explain which side the Iron Giant is on.

As for Spielberg, *shrug*. There's nothing that can really say which of our opinions is correct. We'll just have to see. (There is at least some initial chatter suggesting that Spielberg approaches nostalgia in RP1 with a more critical eye.)

I have not read the book, but I have seen all the trailers, and it's abundantly clear to me that they are fighting against a corporate entity that murders children to secure the control of Oasis.
Seriously, it's right there, front and center.
The movie is basically 50% Willy Wonka, 50% Harry Potter and that Triwizard Tournament. Instead of Willy Wonka we have the Easter Egg Dead Guy. Instead of Voldermort we have the 101 corporation who, which we can see, employs hundreds of agents to make sure they win the competition and starts using deadly IRL force when they still can't win all the trials.
So yes, I am not even surprised if the guy "cosplaying" as Iron Giant IS a pacifist and that's why he picked it. But if your friends, or other kids period, are being murdered, AND the place that you call your home is under threat he might be talked into using his impressive weapons to actually take a physical stand.

I don't see this contradicting the movie at all.
And I still find it ridiculous to hold a teenage cosplayer to the same exact moral standards as the character he or she is cosplaying as.

I don't hold a teenage cosplayer to any standards. First, there are no actual teenage cosplayers here. There are instead writers who are trying to communicate ideas. Something can make sense for a teenage cosplayer and still be a questionable decision for someone writing a teenage cosplayer. But second, I devoted a whole paragraph to explaining exactly why including the Iron Giant would still make sense within the world of RP1, whether or not teenage cosplay is involved. So I don't know what you're trying to argue here if you're arguing with me, unless maybe you're quibbling over the exact reasons a teenage cosplayer protagonist might use the Iron Giant.

As for themes: There is a scene in The Iron Giant where the Iron Giant is literally fighting against an organization it believes has murdered children. Even without knowing that this is untrue, this is still not presented as a good thing. Self-defense is typically a justified use of force, but the Giant's defense mechanism is presented as unfortunate, and there's no question of the Giant using force against the military just because they're trying to kill him. The military itself is just acting against a giant war machine from outer space, but of course this is not presented as a good thing either.

Again, this does not mean that the Iron Giant would never decide force was justified. But the world of The Iron Giant is one where fear and violence cause the problems, and peace and understanding solve them. IOI doesn't fit in that world, and the Iron Giant doesn't fit in IOI's world.

With all that said, there's the additional layer that all the violence happening in the game doesn't really matter. So, ya know, have at it, who cares. Which is basically the feeling RP1 left me with anyway (modulo irritation that it didn't do more with the premise).

[Avilan the Grey]

I don't hold a teenage cosplayer to any standards. First, there are no actual teenage cosplayers here. There are instead writers who are trying to communicate ideas. Something can make sense for a teenage cosplayer and still be a questionable decision for someone writing a teenage cosplayer. But second, I devoted a whole paragraph to explaining exactly why including the Iron Giant would still make sense within the world of RP1, whether or not teenage cosplay is involved. So I don't know what you're trying to argue here if you're arguing with me, unless maybe you're quibbling over the exact reasons a teenage cosplayer protagonist might use the Iron Giant.

First of all it was not my intention to appear argumentative or antagonistic.
Second yes you're right. However it seems to me that the idea they are conveying is "teenage cosplayer" or rather "teenage wish fulfillment.. Just from the trailers, mind you, but this movie does not strike me as something you have to go to a philosophy class to understand. And should there be a deeper meaning that I am missing, then I am just as happy missing it.

[Kato]

RP1 is what it wants to be. So is Transformers. So is Sword Art Online. A property fulfilling its premise does not exempt it from criticism when it has little else going for it, and of course critics will look at how it could have had something else going for it. Because of course it's acceptable to be dumb entertainment, but there's lots of better dumb entertainment out there. Even in the narrow category of dumb entertainment playing out a power fantasy via '80s nostalgia in a video-game-y environment, I could watch Scott Pilgrim vs. the World instead of reading the 1980s pop culture Wikipedia article pasted over Stock Plot #7.

No, it doesn't. But it makes it weird to say "it's not properly representing the Iron Giant" if that is not what it tries to do. I can complain about Transformers because it thinks racism and pee jokes are funny but I can't complain because it fails to properly depict the natiral development between a species of AIs coming into contact with humanity... because that's not the point of the movie. You're entirely justified to say the refences in RPO are (probably) for the most part totally superficial and there is no deeper meaning to the movie. But if you blame it for failing at something it never tried, you should at least phrase it as "it could have done.." and not "it sucks because it doesn't.."

[Legato Endless]

Obligatory link: Ready Player One has a book club podcast by the lovely Mike Nelson of Mystery Science Theater 3000 and Rifftrax fame.

http://372pages.com

Ready Player One isn't Twilight for boys. Granted it fumbles around with its core message and the dialogue can be cringe-worthy, but it's got more to it than vapid self-insert fantasy and has an interesting shell for its story rather than pages and pages of nothing leading to a short and ultimately unsatisfying conflict.

No that's Armada, which is what happens when Cline doesn't have the Grail Quest to fall back on.

However, RP1 is absolutely a vapid audience-insert power fantasy. In a world where real life sucks and everything that matters is online, our protagonist, the self-described average-looking heavy nerd and Nice Guy, has his mastery of video games and nerd trivia granted world-saving, girl-getting, gadget-owning, body-building, status-attaining significance, culminating in him unlocking god mode in the all-important virtual world as he becomes one of the richest people in the real world and strikes a blow for geeks everywhere against the evil corporates. Perhaps I'm a fool and there's more to the story, but I sure didn't see much on my read-through.

(And can I just say, "still a better love story than Twilight" doesn't even apply here, which is kind of impressive in its awfulness.)

All of this. RP1's secret is it sprinkles ill thought out half garbled allusions to broader topics but neither examines or comprehends them.

Also if you think the Iron Giant using his gun, even for a good reason, fits at all with the themes of the Iron Giant film, then you just...did not understand the film at any single point .

That's an endemic problem with the book. The way the Tomb of Horrors is implemented in the plot runs contrary to everything that a Tomb of Horror's style dungeon is supposed to be about. (The final boss battle is fine, it's everything else that's bad) Or to extrapolate from a point made by Randall Munroe early on in XKCD, Cline's treatment of Monty Python and the Holy Grail is antithetical to what actually made the Python comedy group legendary.

Sometimes it's okay to be just dumb entertainment. And it's just as fine not to enjoy that. But since I don't think it attempts to be.. Well, more than simple enter
entertainment I think it's unfair to blame it for not being something else.

Which would be fair if it were correct. But Ready Player One attempts to be more than just popcorn entertainment. It has lot of vague rambling about topics that really aren't the province of something that was only meant as dumb entertainment. Cline was quite serious when he put forward his views into the novel.

That's why we get atheist screeds against the conspiracy of religion, the ways the media shames woman's bodies and how the author's fetishes are better, commentary about internet rights, gamer pride, an Aesop about how being black/gay isn't easy along with a ton of other half baked moralizing. None of it's good, but it's there.

It's also a really mean spirited work in a lot of ways including the aforementioned Gate Keeping. The depiction of how the people enslaved by a mega-corporation aren't deserving of your empathy as victims so much as they are obnoxious drones our steely protagonist heroically ignores and shuns.

[Scowling Dragon]

I'm embarrassed this movie exists. It's almost everything wrong with this decade (In USA culture) in a nutshell.

• Nostalgia Pandering
• Using Financial Insecurity to pander to unhealthy escapism
• Defeatist
• Uncreative

Even as popcorn entertainment your still lowering the bar. You are what you eat and you think what you consume. And this is all kinds of consumeristic garbage.

[Avilan the Grey]

I'm embarrassed this movie exists. It's almost everything wrong with this decade (In USA culture) in a nutshell.

• Nostalgia Pandering
• Using Financial Insecurity to pander to unhealthy escapism
• Defeatist
• Uncreative

Even as popcorn entertainment your still lowering the bar. You are what you eat and you think what you consume. And this is all kinds of consumeristic garbage.

Well good for you.
Personally I nerdgasmed about 10 times per trailer.

[Lethologica]

No, it doesn't. But it makes it weird to say "it's not properly representing the Iron Giant" if that is not what it tries to do. I can complain about Transformers because it thinks racism and pee jokes are funny but I can't complain because it fails to properly depict the natiral development between a species of AIs coming into contact with humanity... because that's not the point of the movie. You're entirely justified to say the refences in RPO are (probably) for the most part totally superficial and there is no deeper meaning to the movie. But if you blame it for failing at something it never tried, you should at least phrase it as "it could have done.." and not "it sucks because it doesn't.."

So, we're mixing up comments about the movie and about the book here. We don't know what the movie is trying to do yet--at least, not apart from advance-screening reviews. And the Iron Giant only shows up in the robot lineup in the book, not anywhere else.

But your comment confuses me on several levels.
(1) To say that the Iron Giant is improperly represented is, modulo the above qualifier, a specific instance of the general comment that RP1 uses references superficially. It's not weird to point out that RP1 uses references in a superficial manner, so it's not weird to call out the specific instance, either.
(2) The examination, criticism, and judgment of a work encompasses its choice of goals as well as its execution of those goals. The development of a thematic framework around the chosen premise is a fundamental aspect of storytelling, which can be done well or poorly. So yes, I absolutely can complain about a work failing to do something it never tried to do. With that said...
(3) If anything, I think it's more charitable to conclude that Cline set out to write a fitting tribute to '80s nostalgia but got bogged down in the sheer quantity of references, than to conclude that he set out to wallow in lists of references and counted on nostalgia to market in place of quality. This applies to other things, too, like the "woman as trophy"-level 'romance' subplot. I would rather believe that Cline is a mediocre writer with fun ideas he isn't quite up to executing than to believe that he's a cynical hack. And indeed...
(4) As Legato Endless says, the book certainly appears to be trying for messages on top of popcorn entertainment. It's just awkward and ham-handed about its execution of them, such that the only clear through-line of the story ends up being the uncritical power fantasy of validated nerd gatekeeping.

[Kato]

I'm embarrassed this movie exists. It's almost everything wrong with this decade (In USA culture) in a nutshell.

• Nostalgia Pandering
• Using Financial Insecurity to pander to unhealthy escapism
• Defeatist
• Uncreative

Even as popcorn entertainment your still lowering the bar. You are what you eat and you think what you consume. And this is all kinds of consumeristic garbage.

So... just for my curiosity... are you making this judgement based on not seeing the movie or did you pay and watch a movie you apparently already decided you would hate? Because really, I have no problem if you don't like it, but this kind of anger got me really curious.

Which would be fair if it were correct. But Ready Player One attempts to be more than just popcorn entertainment. It has lot of vague rambling about topics that really aren't the province of something that was only meant as dumb entertainment. Cline was quite serious when he put forward his views into the novel.

That's why we get atheist screeds against the conspiracy of religion, the ways the media shames woman's bodies and how the author's fetishes are better, commentary about internet rights, gamer pride, an Aesop about how being black/gay isn't easy along with a ton of other half baked moralizing. None of it's good, but it's there.

It's also a really mean spirited work in a lot of ways including the aforementioned Gate Keeping. The depiction of how the people enslaved by a mega-corporation aren't deserving of your empathy as victims so much as they are obnoxious drones our steely protagonist heroically ignores and shuns.

It's been a while since I read the book but I'm really not sure what you're getting at...
I can hardly remember any discussion on religion. Same goes for moralizing about gamer pride. Well, it's a story about gaming, yeah but... I have no idea what else you're referring to.
And yeah, Artemis has not the standard Hollywood body shape and yes, there is a black lesbian character. I don't remember any moralizing about that and I don't see why the inclusion need to lead to lengthy discussions about it. Does a story need to pick every one of its aspects apart?
And about the internet rights... I can't remember it dwelling on it too long because it seems kind of obvious you don't want one company to control the internet. How much time should be devoted to explore this idea?

If I get right what you mean by gate keeping... well, it's the central premise of the story. And again, yeah, it's escapism, it's focussed on the interests of the author and people who share those interests but i don't see how it is harmful in any way.
And as for the obnoxious drones... at least in the book at worst they lose their virtual lives... the horror? 90% of other stories treat them way worse.
Again, no, RPO is not deep, if you feel it tries to be and fails... honestly I don't see where you're coming from. Maybe some people read more into it than I do. Maybe I'm oblivious.

So, we're mixing up comments about the movie and about the book here. We don't know what the movie is trying to do yet--at least, not apart from advance-screening reviews. And the Iron Giant only shows up in the robot lineup in the book, not anywhere else.

But your comment confuses me on several levels.

1) I'm not arguing it uses Iron Giant superficially, I'm arguing the claims it's insulting him/it by the way it portrays him or doesn't do credit to his story. That's... well, not totally different but still different enough. (And sorry, I'm too lazy to check if you speficially said something like this but others definitely did, which was what I was disagreeing with)

2) Yes, of course, but as I said the phrasing is relevant. There are many levels of negativity between "this sucks because it doesn't do/ is not what I want it to do/be..." and "I'd have prefered if they did..." I'm perfectly fine with the latter, there is always room for improvement in basically everything. The former however... well, it makes me want to disagree with people.

3) I know this is entirely personal preference but I much prefer a work that knows it is simple and sticcks to it, thn assuming it tries to be more and fails. As said above, I don't remember anything in the book that felt to me like some serious discussion, apart from some notes on escapism (ironic?). I don't think it's insulting towards Cline to assume he just wanted to write a fun book, peple might enjoy, instead of saying he tried to tell something deep and failed.
Also, I mean, yeah, there have been way better stories about this, no doubt, but was the romance subplot really that bad? Iirc the book makes it pretty clear, Wade screws up a whole lot along the way, andArtemis appeared competent enough most of the time. So... I don't entirely get the problem? Because he "gets the girl after he succeeds"?

4) see above

[Scowling Dragon]

So... just for my curiosity... are you making this judgement based on not seeing the movie or did you pay and watch a movie you apparently already decided you would hate? Because really, I have no problem if you don't like it, but this kind of anger got me really curious.

Unless its different from the book in every way:
Its my anger with general mindless fandom. The fandom of the consumer, not the creator.
This is a story that enables (And praises) consumption of pop culture in a really shallow surface level way.
How convenient that this world has no way to better yourself EXCEPT for sitting on ass and escaping to a different time and consume pop culture in a surface level way.

Its the difference between Sword Art Online and Welcome to the NHK. One is a very pathetic, very carnal desire to dominate and be unthreatened surrounded by a harem of women with a mindless unwavering devotion towards you with very easiy to solve daddy issues that you just HAPPEN to be the first one to solve.

The other is the truth that your just afraid of people, and the world you hide in is a fake, and a web of lies and fabrication.

[druid91]

Unless its different from the book in every way:
Its my anger with general mindless fandom. The fandom of the consumer, not the creator.
This is a story that enables (And praises) consumption of pop culture in a really shallow surface level way.
How convenient that this world has no way to better yourself EXCEPT for sitting on ass and escaping to a different time and consume pop culture in a surface level way.

Its the difference between Sword Art Online and Welcome to the NHK. One is a very pathetic, very carnal desire to dominate and be unthreatened surrounded by a harem of women with a mindless unwavering devotion towards you with very easiy to solve daddy issues that you just HAPPEN to be the first one to solve.

The other is the truth that your just afraid of people, and the world you hide in is a fake, and a web of lies and fabrication.

I mean. We must have read two totally different books then.

Spoiler: Spoilers

Show

Given RP1 actually points out that the manner in which Gunter's consume pop culture as an obsession is actually stupidly unhealthy as a worldview. And if you'll recall, it's a key point of the book that the main character, in spite of his sitting and pop trivia prowess, STILL has to work a 9-5 Job to pay his rent. Whose victory is only enabled by him doing something OUTSIDE the virtual world.

The book goes to great lengths to point out that while IOI are most assuredly the bad guys, the Gunters are not good people. And that the Oasis itself might be a bad thing overall for society...

And then points out just how dependent on it Wade is by GIVING HIM THE CHOICE TO END IT and having him choose to give himself god powers and get petty revenge on the Sixers instead.

I mean, unless you're supposed to think Wade is perfect somehow? He's a Jerk with a mind for Trivia with no real self esteem.

[Scowling Dragon]

I mean. We must have read two totally different books then.

Poes Law. The characters from Sword Art Online are all ****ed up and unpleasant and the whole story dances in fetishism but thats if your not the target demo.
In addition reveling in self-masturbatory nostalgia and escapism and then bringing up "Maybe this is all bad???" is also a very common element in these sorts of stories.

You can't have your cake and eat it without being a massive pillock. When you spend all your story on reveling in nostalgia (And using it to sell movies) but then wag your finger at the idea its either immensly hypocritical, or more a deflection to avoid further introspection.

The example I use is a Drunk Friend who always deflects the nature of his addiction as "Just a gag", when in reality the person needs help and is using irony and humor to deflect the truth.

[Ramza00]

I am reading this thread, and reflecting [...] and this is really going to change the subject but does anyone see the parallels of RPO and RahXephon or RPO and Evangelion?

I ask for I think RahXephon just tells this type of story much better than RPO, and same thing for Evangelion.

Does anyone else see what I am seeing? Does anyone else think RPO is similar to Evangelion or RahXephon?

[Scowling Dragon]

Does anyone else see what I am seeing? Does anyone else think RPO is similar to Evangelion or RahXephon?

More Sword art online, or Accel World.

[druid91]

Poes Law. The characters from Sword Art Online are all ****ed up and unpleasant and the whole story dances in fetishism but thats if your not the target demo.
In addition reveling in self-masturbatory nostalgia and escapism and then bringing up "Maybe this is all bad???" is also a very common element in these sorts of stories.

You can't have your cake and eat it without being a massive pillock. When you spend all your story on reveling in nostalgia (And using it to sell movies) but then wag your finger at the idea its either immensly hypocritical, or more a deflection to avoid further introspection.

The example I use is a Drunk Friend who always deflects the nature of his addiction as "Just a gag", when in reality the person needs help and is using irony and humor to deflect the truth.

I mean again, I think you misread the story.

Spoiler: SPOILER

Show

It... literally introduces the character as a more or less unlikeable shut in. Whether it's the way he spends some of his first dialogue whining about the time he was born in for an extended period of time or the way he describes himself as having no life. And then repeatedly reinforcing the fact that he's a Misanthropic Jerk throughout the story, only slightly warming up towards the end. And even then only barely. The repeated mentioning of this can't really help but make me think that was an intended part of the story. Given very nearly EVERYTHING Wade does is kind of jerkish.

And that's actually the issue here, Some of the Nostalgia indulged in in the story is utterly harmless in and of itself. The Story straddles a pretty fine line trying to point out that being Nostalgic is sometimes just good fun, but then the way that Gunters and IOI do so is not that. It does a pretty decent job of, IMO pointing out that there's such a thing as 'all fun and games' and 'taking those fun and games too seriously.'