Ready Player One

[Ari]

Had a search for a thread on this but couldn't find one (which is a shame), so in case there isn't one I thought I'd start one.

I'm just re-reading it (read it about 3 years ago I guess) and had forgotten just how brilliant it is! The imagination that's gone into describing the OASIS is fantastic, being 'of a certain age' I love all the Eighties references, it's a great read and it's just good fun.

Thoroughly recommend it! (And discovered there's a Ready Player Two whilst searching for a thread on RPO) so have just ordered it.

[WelshRich]

I have Ready Player Two but haven’t read it yet - I loved the first book book but was disappointed by the movie which has kind of put me off the sequel. (Let us know if it’s any good once you’ve read it!)

[robemcdonald]

Ready player two is disappointingly ste.

[Heartworm]

WelshRich said:

I have Ready Player Two but haven’t read it yet - I loved the first book book but was disappointed by the movie which has kind of put me off the sequel. (Let us know if it’s any good once you’ve read it!)

I'm in the same place,

The film I know who saw the film first enjoyed it, but it makes the detail and references of the book.

[Pepperpots]

Saw the film, one of my favourites. Haven't read the book but might well and didn't know there was a RP2

[louiechevy]

I can't say I enjoyed ready player two anything like as much as one, and having read one before the film came out the film wasn't as good as the book. There not terrible just not as good as I hoped.

[Ari]

Totally agree about the film, it definitely doesn't live up to the book and I was a bit disappointed to begin with.

But realistically, how many hours does the book have to engage with you compared to the couple of hours the film gets? So I think, given the time they had and the necessity to keep the story simple and moving along for all audiences, it wasn't a bad job really and, if you disconnect it from the book, it was a fun watch.

Disappointing to hear about Ready Player Two - I was looking forward to that!

[Calza]

Saw the film first, liked it.

Discovered the book and loved it - suspect the other way round I wouldn't so much.

Second book was okay, but obviously not a patch. Still enjoyed it as I was geeking out in the world.

[CheesecakeRunner]

robemcdonald said:

Ready player two is disappointingly ste.

This. There was no easy way to write a sequel that wasn’t just a regurgitation of the first one.

[g4ry13]

It's a cliché, but the book is so much better than the film.

I was honestly frustrated with the inaccuracy of the film that I gave up within 10 minutes.

[robemcdonald]

g4ry13 said:

It's a cliché, but the book is so much better than the film.

I was honestly frustrated with the inaccuracy of the film that I gave up within 10 minutes.

I quite liked the film, but it ain’t got much to do with the book.

The book wouldn’t work as a film or even a long format to show. Imagine trying to make someone playing Pac-Man for eight hours interesting?
The bit that always got me about the film though was the race where the key was “to go in reverse” at the start.
In reality that would have been uncovered in around 30 seconds by a speed runner.

[toasty]

I had RP1 on Audible read by Wil Wheaton (Wesley Crusher from Star Trek NG).

I really enjoyed it bar the need for a perfect score on Pacman. That'd require years of practice and planning

[deckster]

g4ry13 said:

It's a cliché, but the book is so much better than the film.

I was honestly frustrated with the inaccuracy of the film that I gave up within 10 minutes.

This is probably one for the unpopular opinions thread, but I thought it worked better as a film than a book. For me the visualisation of OASIS was the clincher although I also thought the pacing was better overall.

[zbc]

deckster said:

g4ry13 said:

It's a cliché, but the book is so much better than the film.

I was honestly frustrated with the inaccuracy of the film that I gave up within 10 minutes.

This is probably one for the unpopular opinions thread, but I thought it worked better as a film than a book. For me the visualisation of OASIS was the clincher although I also thought the pacing was better overall.

I agree with you. If ever a book was written to be made into a film this is one of them. Pacing was much better and effects felt very natural, in an unnatural sort of way. As with all good adaptations it's not the same as the book but the film works well and stands alone.

[p1doc]

thought the book was great film better altered as wargame owners refused to let them use in film sequel is poor hoisted to to my middle daughter who loved first book and film who gave it back to me after reading 1 chapter says it all really

[toasty]

p1doc said:

thought the book was great film better altered as wargame owners refused to let them use in film sequel is poor hoisted to to my middle daughter who loved first book and film who gave it back to me after reading 1 chapter says it all really

Say what?!!!

[g4ry13]

zbc said:

deckster said:

g4ry13 said:

It's a cliché, but the book is so much better than the film.

I was honestly frustrated with the inaccuracy of the film that I gave up within 10 minutes.

This is probably one for the unpopular opinions thread, but I thought it worked better as a film than a book. For me the visualisation of OASIS was the clincher although I also thought the pacing was better overall.

I agree with you. If ever a book was written to be made into a film this is one of them. Pacing was much better and effects felt very natural, in an unnatural sort of way. As with all good adaptations it's not the same as the book but the film works well and stands alone.

Maybe i'll give it another try if I come across it.

Usually I find it works better to see the film and then read the book as it's less frustrating. When I read Fight Club I could see the differences from the film but still able to imagine some of the scenes better.

[The Rotrex Kid]

Book was much more enjoyable than the film, but both were a cliche wk fest of pop culture references, gets a bit overwhelming. At some points I found myself skipping while paragraphs to get past stuff.

Film was a bit of a poor imitation. Some great breakdowns on YouTube of it as well.

[Ari]

The Rotrex Kid said:

Book was much more enjoyable than the film, but both were a cliche wk fest of pop culture references, gets a bit overwhelming. At some points I found myself skipping while paragraphs to get past stuff.

Guess it just wasn't for you. Not convinced that makes it a 'cliche wk fest of pop culture references' for anyone other than yourself though...

[Motorman74]

Like quite a few others it would seem, I saw the film, loved it, and then read the book - which I also loved.

The second book is just awful - feels like it was written just to cash in on the first.

I still love the film, I watching periodically, with the surround sound cranked - it's a good fun film...