Rules: explain why
Ready player one.
That has to be one of the cringiest movies I’ve seen, is tries so hard, too hard with it’s “WE LOVE YOU NERD, YOU’RE SO COOL FOR PLAYING GAMES AND GETTING THIS 80S REFERENCE” message and the whole “corporation bad, the people good” narrative seems written for toddlers… The fan service feels cheap and adds nothing to the story.
Finally, they trying to make the people believe that very attractive girl with a barely visible red tint spot on her face is “ugly”… Like wtf?
Yet it received decent reviews plus being one of the most successful movies of that year.
The film is a 1984 adaptation of a 1982 novel by Philip Dick, one of the most prolific and visionary scifi authors of all time. It precedes GitS by 11 years and Fallout 4 by 31. It makes no sense to compare it to those later works of fiction imho.
I agree however that Roy’s character is underdeveloped, I would have loved to learn more about him.
androids was 1968, blade runner 1982.
but yeah, this movie is foundational, and you don’t get gits and fallout without it. edit - a word
why did I ever think it published in 82 ? I’ve had this date in mind as long as I can remember
I think the movie explains Roy’s character enough, he’s a roboman, forced to fight a war and wants freedom to make his own way and is instead murderized for that want. Not much more needs to be developed there.