The film version of my favorite book is going to start filming this month!
The book is fun, but to make a film out of it you'd have to drastically reduce the references, and Spielberg's doing his part by cutting out all references to his movies.
>Steve trying to out-Reddit Based Ridley
A page from Ready Player One. The 80's references, if you didn't realize, are almost half the book, this just happened to be one of the worst examples of that.
Parz1val (or whatever the fuck his name was) going into Chicago was actually pretty cool because it gave some insight into how badly the world had gotten fucked up since the vague apocalypse.
>one stupid reference after another and not an interesting character in sight.
This. This so fucking much. What a terrible book. It's the literary equivalent of Big Bang Theory, just mentioning names and doing jackshit without them. I'll never understand how this dreck passes as good.
TFW if Galaxy Quest came out today idiots claiming TBBT and RPO are good would lose their minds.
Yeah, I mentioned that earlier. Honestly, all the shit about him moving to Chicago could be cut down to him coming into the coty, getting the apartment, then a time card followed by the future repo men coming in and fucking his shit up.
>implying I like this shitpile and I didn't rage-read it
> i hate things because they are popular
Then you missed the most in-depth characterization in the whole book!
Not him, but time is valuable and you don't have to be a genius to realize from the first pages that it's just bad literature.
>Constant references to pop culture just for fuck's sake
He dodged a bullet.
>To my surprise
>To my eyes
>Pretty love interest who's nerdy and shy and has low confidence because she has one minor physical flaw.
>Wasting even a single hour on this piece of shit with so much things to do in life.
If you like shit that's ok, but saying this book is anywhere near a worthwhile read is just crazy.
You don't seem aware of how fat 168 pounds is
Amy Schumer is 165
You just don't get it. Reading bad shit takes away time from doing better things like getting raped in the ass or yes, Internet porno wacky time.
More like, calling a spade a spade.
>You don't like shit?
>Must be contrarian lol
Probably according to tested forumlas since it's just cashing in on a popular YA novel and fans will sperg out (read: give them free publicity) for even the slightest breaks from source material, all while seeing it twice themselves.
>tfw i bought a copy of this book due to popularity and ecstatic reviews from friends
>tfw every single page was infuriating and i only made it halfway through
>tfw i felt broken and "wrong" for not being able to enjoy it and had to leave my rage bottled up until seeing this thread
Thank you /tv/ for providing me a safe space
>The biggest flaw is that the 80s references aren't fun. They aren't interesting. They don't make any commentary or provide insight on the 80s. They're just sort of... there. This is the same problem I have with Family Guy and its endless 80s references. They don't actually amount to anything other than: "Hey everybody, remember the 80s? Yeah - they totally happened!" But it's even worse in RPO, because every reference is provided with an explanation. This misses the point of cultural references, which, in a way, are like jokes, in that if you have to explain them, the purpose of telling them has failed. Also, who are the explanations for, anyway? People who grew up in the 80s or are hip to 80s pop culture don't need them, and those who aren't are unlikely to be reading an 80s nostalgia piece in the first place.
>Also, Cline has no discriminating taste even in 80s culture. Thus, the references come across less as a bunch of hip references from someone who loves good pop culture than just a dump of a list of stuff that happened in the 80s. The disquisition on Family Ties is a good example. I watched that show with my dad back in the 80s, too, and I remember it well. It sucked then, it sucks now, and it will continue to suck in the 2040s. It was unfunny, maudlin dreck then, and now it doesn't even have any kitsch value. Every decade has stuff that's worth remembering and stuff that's worth forgetting in it. This book just seems to take everything equally, no matter where on that scale it lies. It comes off, as one reviewer on Amazon said, like reading a Wikipedia page on the 80s.
>There's also a weird tone of arrogant mean-spiritedness to this book. It's a little hard to describe, but it reeks of that attitude you get at a comics shop if you say that you really don't know that much about Green Lantern or that Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was actually a pretty okay movie. The author's taking occasional breaks to beat you over the head with his sociopolitical views doesn't help, either. The whole "geekier than thou" thing just doesn't work for me. It definitely keeps the book from being as "fun" as a lot of people have claimed.
>And yeah, the writing is clunky and artless. It's of the "This happened, then that happened, then this happened, then that happened" style. The characters are flat and undistinctive, and have more than a whiff of Mary Sueism to some of them. The bad guys are generically bad, mostly because they - horror of horrors - want to run a business at a profit, which reeks of pure evil to those who have the internet generation's "everything ought to be free" sense of entitlement.
Here's Ernest Cline
Wearing an Atari shirt
in his DeLorean
>be this guy: >>64888646
>write a contrived story in which it makes sense to write a book composed entirely of 80s references
>this is okay
Stick to GIFs. Any other medium is probably beyond you.
I don't understand. You do realize that the whole premise of the story (an 80s trivia themed ARG) was created by the author and is thus the root of the problem? He could have written something that wasn't completely stupid instead.
Imagine Charlie and the Chocolate Factory set in an MMORPG in a dystopian future where almost all human interaction is online in aforementioned MMORPG. Except replace any interesting aspects with references to the 80's and "geeky" circlejerking.
Think Willy Wonka mixed with Lord Of The Rings in a virtual world after the apocalypse, then take anything that might be enjoyable about that premise and cover it with references to 80's pop culture.
I enjoyed reading it, but I'm a colossal faggot who likes trash literature. (Inherent Vice, House Of Leaves, Fight Club, etc.)
From the excerpts and answers y'all have given I'm going to say the audience is the same people that read and still like Harry Potter (or like it at all, honestly) into their adult years and say it's "literature."
>but I'm a colossal faggot who likes trash literature. (Inherent Vice, House Of Leaves, Fight Club, etc.)
Still, nowhere as bad as Ready Player One. Try reading something else though.
>critical fanbase with capability of discerning varying levels of quality giving ratings in the 3-5 range
>vs underaged fanbase who just go "video game references in a NOVEL! it's a masterpiece! 5 stars"
Perhaps the die was cast when Cline accepted the idea of Spielberg directing the film; he made sure the story would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody; just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for his book. Ready Player One might portray a fresh dystopian setting (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-Philip K. Dick series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.
>But at least the book is ggood though!
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character did something, the author wrote a meaningless, audience-pandering reference to the 1980s.
I began marking on the back of an envelope every time a pop culture reference appeared. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Cline's mind is so governed by "geek culture" and retro nostalgia that he has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Ready Player One by the same Andy Weir. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Ready Player One at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read The Martian." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Ready Player One" you are, in fact, trained to read The Martian.
I just read this and I spent the entire book repeating the words "This is reddit, this is memes, this is reddit, this is memes..." under my breath.
I fucking hated it. I was writhing around on the floor in front of my sofa for the last 30 pages it was so painful.
>Ayy 80s references lmao
If you liked it you're in the wrong place
Yeah but they're a pretty good demonstration of my taste in literature.
Some other favorites: John Dies At The End, The Disaster Artist, Redshirts, The Last Policeman.
I just read trash. Maybe slightly elevated trash, but nothing that really challenges the mind. I just like fun stories with interesting adventures and characters. I wanna be comfy when I read.
Last one I read was The Tunnel by Ernesto Sabato. Summary sounds like hipster bait but it's a really good book about love and obsession with a main character that would be posting here if he lived nowadays
>my hipster book is better than your meme book
>Summary sounds like hipster bait but it's a really good book about love and obsession
Reading comprehension anon. It's a very short book and it's easy to read.
>mfw /tv/ has reddit tier taste in books
kill your selves you actual fucking plebs
And yet /tv/ circle jerks all over this shit
>Reddit : The movie
First the martian and now this, great. Mediocre books getting a movie adaption as soon as the books go on sale.
It was terrible. Wil Wheaton was name dropped. Theres two agonizing pages of Monty Python being reenacted. Most of the concepts were done better in Otherland 15 years earlier.