Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Neuromancer Movie Deal Moving Forward

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the can-you-think-of-any-reason-not-to dept.

Movies 334

chill writes "After years in development, a film adaptation of William Gibson's seminal cyberpunk novel Neuromancer is finally moving forward. According to a press release, the film has secured sales from distributors at Cannes and visual effects work has already begun. Filming will begin in 2012 with locations in Canada, Istanbul, Tokyo, and London."

cancel ×

334 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Cool (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36192724)

I couldn't read the book, cause I've got too much non-fiction to read.

Not an Easy Book to Read (3, Interesting)

ideonexus (1257332) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192824)

Neuromancer is not an easy read. The text is very dense. I reread it last year and, even at my education level, found I had to go back and reread many passages when I realized I had missed important bits of action (the death of an important character happens so quickly and non descriptively you have to read the passage several times to make sure it actually happened).

That being said, this book will translate magnificently to the big screen. As old as it is, it hasn't lost its futuristic feel and foresight; although, wherever megabytes of data are mentioned, they'll have to upgrade them to tera- or pentabytes. I am very much looking forward to this film, but it is still in the early stages and I've seen many promising projects like this die at later stages when the producers look at what's going on and don't get it.

Re:Not an Easy Book to Read (1)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193074)

Funny, I found it a very easy, page turning kind of read. Unlike, say, Dune, which I think if kind of tedious. I don't generally enjoy flowery, overly descriptive language in fiction. To me, Neuromancer was poetic, but sparse.

As long as we don't have Keanu playing the main character, I think this movie will be all right.

Re:Not an Easy Book to Read (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193088)

I read it in high school, when it first came out. It's not that difficult. 'Course, I was a fan of John Brunner [wikipedia.org] when I read it and already used to New Wave story telling.

Re:Not an Easy Book to Read (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193306)

As old as it is, it hasn't lost its futuristic feel and foresight; although, wherever megabytes of data are mentioned, they'll have to upgrade them

Not to Tera or Peta. Everyone's used to Tera, and Peta's being used in big arrays (and is the next step up). Exa or Zetta, or better yet, a made-up big-sounding prefix: gooliobytes or congrebibliobytes. The benefit of the made up prefix is that the film isn't hilariously wrong (one way or the other) when viewed ten years later.

Re:Cool (1)

schnikies79 (788746) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193052)

Off topic and most likely trolling, but I have to admit I have a hard time getting into fiction as well.

What fiction I do read is the classics; Hemingway, Dickens, etc. Never could get into sci-fi or related genre.

Re:Cool (1)

overlordofmu (1422163) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193438)

Try the book the article is about. Poetry. Fucking poetry. It is not the laser-guns and spaceship sort of Sci-Fi you are used to (even if there are lasers and spaceships in it).

Other reccomendations for the genre:

Stranger in a Strange Land (unabridged only - don't read the 1961 version)
The Ophiuchi Hotline - one hell of a twisted tale
Anathem - but only if you are a nerd (you better be if you are here)

YES! (1)

mrflash818 (226638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192726)

:D

NO! (2)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193054)

:-(

inb4 disaster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36192736)

inb4 disaster

Please (4, Interesting)

Lifyre (960576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192768)

Just Please don't suck... The books are great and there is a story begging to be made into a movie in them but it would be so easy to screw up...

Re:Please (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36192792)

It is being made by the same genius who gave us Splice, prepare for the suck.

Re:Please (1)

Lifyre (960576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192844)

I saw that after I posted... it made me die a little inside... I want to say at least it's not Uwe Boll but I'm not sure that would be accurate...

Re:Please (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193110)

Maybe Ridley Scott coulda' done justice to it.

Re:Please (2)

overlordofmu (1422163) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193542)

My vote would have been David Fincher to direct.

Also, Gibson's short story from the collection 'Burning Chrome', titled 'New Rose Hotel', was made in into a wonderful film by the same title directed by my all time favorite director, Abel Ferrara. Chris Walken, Willem Dafoe and Asia Argento star.

IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133122/ [imdb.com]

Interestingly, Ferrara turns an 11 page story (or is it 17 pages - it is prime anyway) with no dialog (not a single quotation mark in the 11 pages) into a film that is solely driven by dialog. Almost no special effects at all. It is simply actors acting and it is beautifully done.

*** WARNING: Ferrara is arty and this film will not please the popcorn crowd. ***

Re:Please (1)

uncanny (954868) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192840)

Hey, maybe they'll make it in 3D!!!!
oh wait, they probably will :(

Re:Please (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192924)

3D films are dull, nothing ever happens in them. I'm hoping for 4D.

Re:Please (1)

Matheus (586080) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192956)

That's SO 20th century... I want my movies in 5D!!!

Re:Please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193490)

That's SO 20th century... I want my movies in 5D!!!

I bet they'll call it 3.5D in the end.

Re:Please (1)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193082)

You kids and your fancy dimensions. In my day, movies were one dimensional and that's the way we liked it, just moving dots on a line.

Re:Please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193390)

Bah!!!

In my day, they were zero dimensional and we called the singularities or not-movings.

Some times we even called them boring...

Re:Please don't screw it up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193006)

I agree. This book is a bit like "Dune" in that there is a lot of subtlety. If they plan to make a David Lynch monstrosity, then best not to do it at all.

Re:Please (1)

Polonious (1646561) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193036)

William Gibson doesn't seem too worried about that sort of thing. https://twitter.com/#!/GreatDismal [twitter.com] GreatDismal William Gibson A novelist who is absolutely particular about who read the audio book is a novelist with really a lot of free time. 16 May

Re:Please (1)

Legal.Troll (2002574) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193050)

I'll have to adopt the strategy I learned via a painful lesson given me by Fallout 3... Wait for it to come out, then wait to hear what people say; if old-school fans say it sucks, DON'T WATCH IT, to avoid having awesome memories and mental images ruined by a crappy film adaptation.

Re:Please (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193332)

There's always going to be compromise though, you can't put a book directly on screen, there is usually too much background text. Die hard fans will never be happy no matter what happens.

Re:Please (2)

houghi (78078) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193468)

If there are some people who do not like it, that would be normal. But if you take something like 'I am Legend' which was a great story, then alter the story so the the main character looks good, then you have a problem.

LotR? Good, because it mostly stuck to the book. Starship Troopers? Bad.

I can understand if a movie maker does not like the story. But then PLEAAAASE don't buy the rights just for the title. Make your own story that you DO like and let somebody else, who does a better job, turn the book into a movie.

Re:Please (1)

Kierthos (225954) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193362)

Just please don't have Keanu Reeves in it.

Re:Please (2)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193550)

As much as I'd (in theory) really like to see this movie, I can't imagine not being completely let down by it, even it is being done by the same guy who did the wonderfully craptastic Cube (not knocking it, it was just kinda low budget). I can't imagine a modern audience doing anything but laughing at all the neon, Jamaican piloted space ships and a 3D internet. You'd probably have to remove those entirely and then what do you have?

On the plus side, Gibson has always said to take the idea of there being a Neuromancer movie with a grain of salt. The last time this movie was in "pre-production" it was being directed by some guy whose only experience was directing Britney Spear videos. I won't believe this one until I have a ticket in my hand. So yeah, I'll watch it, if it is finished, but I can't say I'd expect much.

Half and half (1)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192786)

Half of me is excited for the white-knuckle thrill ride and half of me dreads what crap they will spew forth.

Re:Half and half (2)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193326)

Half of me is excited for the white-knuckle thrill ride and half of me dreads what crap they will spew forth.

sounds like free taco nite at the local bar...

Neuromancer movie deal ..yay !! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36192798)

Totally awesome. This was way overdue, particularly since the success of Johnny Mnemonic !

The Future of the Past (2, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192808)

This book is from 1984. How can the movie have any fresh ideas? I'm having visions of "lawnmower man."

Re:The Future of the Past (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192822)

Try reading the book. I know 1984 was soooo long ago, but you might be surprised....

Re:The Future of the Past (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36192952)

Agreed—read the book. It's one of the landmark works of science fiction. I'd also go see a movie based on Brunner's "Shockwave Rider" and hope to hear the song of the same name by the Royal Trux.

Re:The Future of the Past (1, Flamebait)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193002)

I read it a few years ago. Apart from being quite badly written, it was painfully dated and showed a distressing lack of understanding of basic computing concepts on the part of the author. I can imagine that someone who read it in the '80s would find it exciting and groundbreaking, but it just hasn't stood the test of time.

Re:The Future of the Past (2, Interesting)

halowolf (692775) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193166)

Yes I made the same mistake with Snow Crash. Read it years after it came out and it just didn't age well at all. If you want to read a good book that focus's on language having power read Spellwright http://www.amazon.com/Spellwright-Blake-Charlton/dp/0765317273 [amazon.com]

Re:The Future of the Past (1)

tgv (254536) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193456)

I think you've mistaken literature for a tech magazine. Same goes for the comment on Snow Crash, which has the added benefit of referring instead to a book that's as innovative as a fantasy novel.

Re:The Future of the Past (1)

mooingyak (720677) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193484)

Read it once around 15 years ago. Never felt the urge to pick it up again. Can no longer remember what it's about.

Re:The Future of the Past (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193242)

How old are you? That book is still awesome. ...and it would be more appropriate to have visions of Johnny Mnemonic [imdb.com] .

Re:The Future of the Past (4, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193566)

The book was decades ahead of its time, it's more topical than ever. Gibson is a miracle, imo, not only because he pretty accurately predicted a future where corporations rule the world and information and information exchange has become omnipresent (ok, he overdid both a bit, but what SciFi author doesn't?), he did so without any idea of how a computer works (IIRC he said in an interview that 'til he got one, which was long after '84, he thought there's some kinda crystals spinning inside or something like that).

Gibson's Neuromancer world is a bit more advanced than ours, in good and in bad, extrapolate our reality, add a bit of pessimism and you'll get there. More corporation control, more religious lunacy, bigger separation between wealthy and poor, more integration of technology into human bodies. Some parts of it are reality already or are "around the corner". A bit more dystopian, a bit more seedy, a bit more corporation controlled, but essentially... I think the mood is quite well captured. It's a gloomy near-future setting, which will probably be near-future for the forseeable future, as it was 25 years ago.

It's going to be tough. (4, Interesting)

Psyko (69453) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192812)

This would have been easier to put together 20 years ago, I think they tried to do a movie a couple of times already but it fell apart.

Nowadays, this is going trying to take the 'futuristic' concepts of global spanning data networks and present them to people that pretty much grew up with them in place, minus the neural interfaces... It was a great book, and I remember in the late 80's was excited to see they were working on a movie. Now, well, I don't think they're going to be able to pull it off.

Next up, Snow Crash? Why not, these things are going to have to be changed so much to make sense in today's terms of technology that they're not really going to be able to resemble the original except in a vague sort of way.

No cell phones (1)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192938)

I wonder how they will deal with the banks of pay phones ...

Re:No cell phones (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193012)

I hope they just stick with the universe the book was in. There is no need to make it historically accurate.

By bringing them back, of course. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193018)

In the future, AT&V, being the sole global provider for cell phones, charges outrageous prices and has bandwidth caps in place so tight that you can't even download a lolcat.

The payphone is reborn.

Re:It's going to be tough. (1)

briansct (1857764) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193032)

I agree, I also wonder how the general pebcak's will react to the theme of the movie. Will they understand that the book was ground breaking stuff? Or will they think it's a cheap knock off of the Matrix.

It's been so long since I read Gibson (and I was so young: early high school) that I just added several of his books to my amazon wishlist! I can't wait to re-read them all!

This is truly news for nerds! Happy Friday!

Re:It's going to be tough. (1)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193260)

I agree, I also wonder how the general pebcak's will react to the theme of the movie. Will they understand that the book was ground breaking stuff? Or will they think it's a cheap knock off of the Matrix.

The only thing Neuromancer has in common with The Matrix is the idea of jacking into cyberspace via a computer-to-brain connection. That's where the similarities end. Neuromancer is totally different material storywise, as are the followups Count Zero and Mona Lisa Overdrive. If done well, Neuromancer would make The Matrix look very 'Hollywood Action Movie with some fancy dystopian Color Grading'. Gibson's world is very very complex, detailed and realistic compared to The Matrix.

Re:It's going to be tough. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193252)

I haven't read Neuromancer, but in the case of Snow Crash, a somewhat dystopian future where the internet's main type of interaction is through a well done sort of SecondLife could be interesting. People will draw parallels with a lot of stuff we have now (the librarian = wiki's future, wireheads = bluetooth future, extreme corporatism = extreme corporatism, etc). Plus the tricked-out motorcycle stuff and physics defying swordplay could make for fun on-screen action.

They should have made that back when they did the matrix!

Re:It's going to be tough. (1)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193340)

This would have been easier to put together 20 years ago, I think they tried to do a movie a couple of times already but it fell apart.

Today's 3D CGI VFX, digital cinematography tools, Stereoscopic 3D film cameras and other innovations will probably make Neuromancer 10 times easier to realize properly compared with what was available 20 or even 10 years ago. Things like digital set extensions (to visualize The Sprawl for example) are done so well these days that virtually nobody 'sees' where the real set ends and the CG extension starts. Provided that the art director is really good (i.e. BladeRunner Syd Mead good), Neuromancer could be real eye candy when its filmed.

Worried. (2)

technoid_ (136914) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192848)

Due to how badly Gibson's big screen adaptation of Johnny Mnemonic butchered the original story, I am worried this too will tarnish my memories of William Gibson's works. Some stories are better off not being made into movies at all versus being made into a bad movie.

While we are at it, lets ruin a few other cyberpunk classics such as Snowcrash by Stephenson and Software/Wetware from Rudy Rucker.

BTW: Get off my lawn.

technoid_

Re:Worried. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36192916)

Diamond Age ONLY if Terry Gilliam were to direct it.

Re:Worried. (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192928)

If you're that concerned, skip the movie and play the video game [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Worried. (1)

Matheus (586080) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192982)

I loved that game. Played excellent on my Amiga 2000 :)

The movie has a high percentage of suckage. I'll be positive and have hope for something great but I'll be surprised if this is any better than Tron Legacy ended up being... (note: I actually liked a lot of Legacy... just didn't live up to expectations)

Re:Worried. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193440)

I played that game when I was 11. It completely blew my mind. Played it again in my 30s and was still very happy with the experience.

Re:Worried. (1)

DaMattster (977781) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192932)

Due to how badly Gibson's big screen adaptation of Johnny Mnemonic butchered the original story, I am worried this too will tarnish my memories of William Gibson's works. Some stories are better off not being made into movies at all versus being made into a bad movie.

While we are at it, lets ruin a few other cyberpunk classics such as Snowcrash by Stephenson and Software/Wetware from Rudy Rucker.

BTW: Get off my lawn.

technoid_

Yeah, that worries me slightly too. The screenplay of Johnny Mnemonic was poor. I think if they borrowed some of the folks that worked on The Matrix trilogy, the filmmakers might actually be able to weave a good story. I think the entire premise hinges on remaining exactly true to the book and only deviating in the slightest, most invisible ways. They should even borrow dialogue from the book.

Re:Worried. (1)

vbraga (228124) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193094)

Johnny Mnemonic was recut to be more of an action movie and was probably botched in this process. The Japanese cut, a little longer, is a tad more interesting. It would be great to see a directors' cut and check if it was better.

Re:Worried. (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192934)

If a botched movie adaption ruins the book for you, you are doing it wrong.

Re:Worried. (1)

An ominous Cow art (320322) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193084)

And "True Names", by Vernor Vinge.

I don't remember there being anything in "Neuromancer" that couldn't be updated to today's technology without any problems, but I don't have much faith in Hollywood's ability to make it appealing to 'Joe Sixpack' (always the highest priority) while still remaining appealing to geek types.

Re:Worried. (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193240)

This just in: Movie studios attempt to make their movies appeal to the people who make up the vast majority of the paying movie goers. Film at 11.

Re:Worried. (1)

An ominous Cow art (320322) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193316)

I was lamenting this, not acting as though it were something new.

Re:Worried. (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193396)

Did you think the movie was ever going to be made otherwise? Unless some indie studio was going to pick it up, you're never going to see a movie made that appeals to a miniscule niche audience as Neuromancer would.

Re:Worried. (1)

SamuraiHoedown (1769404) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193422)

Well its easy to butcher a movie adaptation ofhttp://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/11/05/20/1519252/emNeuromancerem-Movie-Deal-Moving-Forward?utm_source=rss1.0&utm_medium=feed# a story that was all of 21? pages. They had to make up new content for 80% of the movie.

London? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36192862)

Does London replace Amsterdam from the book?

Zeerust (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36192886)

By the time this thing comes out it's going to be contemporary fiction... if not alternate history.

Please be good (1)

oh2 (520684) | more than 3 years ago | (#36192918)

I think Neuromancer has aged quite well. Sure, we dont use VR goggles, but its still early days as far as the net goes. Bionics, custom drugs and corporate espionage...well...I never believed that a company like Blackwater would come into existence...

Re:Please be good (1)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193192)

Neuromancer doesn't feature VR goggles. The characters in the book 'jack in' to cyberspace by plugging a cable into a jack surgically inserted behind the ear. Its a direct-to-brain interface that makes you feel/believe you are really in cyberspace.

Re:Please be good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193302)

Youre right. My bad. Guess I need a reread.

Re:Please be good (1)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193444)

They actually use dermal contact electrodes to get into cyberspace.

The jacks behind the ear are for installing software into your brain (called "microsoft", ironically), like languages or databases.

Re:Please be good (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193224)

...I never believed that a company like Blackwater would come into existence...

And that's just the one that everybody knows about because of their bad habit of killing Iraqi civilians in public. How many other "private security firms" are there out there doing even more questionable things that we never hear about?

Re:Please be good (1)

Coren22 (1625475) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193498)

Already been corrected, but I think you are thinking of Snow Crash, not Neuromancer.

Great. Now where's Snowcrash? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36192944)

That's the movie I'm waiting for....

NO 3D!!!!!! (1)

fallen1 (230220) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193004)

For the love of all that is holy and unholy, please do NOT shoot this movie in 3D. Tell the story as close to "as written" as you can and put good visuals backing the story up on the screen and the audience will get it. No, cyberpsace does not have to be in 3D to tell the story correctly. It can all be done in 2D and tell an amazing story including all the cyberspace portions of it. And for fuck's sake - get the Sprawl correct!! The Boston-Atlanta Metropolitan Axis must have that same Blade Runner-esque feeling to it -- the domes, condensation from them, broken neon, dirty, used up.

Blade Runner was in 2D and would have sucked ass in 3D. Neuromancer can have the same impact as Blade Runner by doing one thing - telling the damn good story from the book on the big screen. Period.

Re:NO 3D!!!!!! (1)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193116)

Neuromancer was the first Scifi book (as far as I'm aware) to feature fully 3D, immersive, abstract CYBERSPACE (called 'Matrix' in the book). What would you gain from portraying that 'natively 3D' cyberspace with flat 2D filmmaking? And btw, BladeRunner doesn't 'suck' in Stereo 3D.

Re:NO 3D!!!!!! (1)

Coren22 (1625475) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193526)

Agreed. Do the matrix scenes in 3D, and do the non matrix scenes in 3D with no depth. This would make it an interesting watch as it would be more true to the material (at least to me). God, I need to reread that one again, it was pretty amazing even as recent as 2002.

Re:NO 3D!!!!!! (1)

Sentry23 (447266) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193172)

Shall we tell them to shoot in black and white or SD as well ?
If you say that 3D sucks, you are just as short sighted as some directors who think that everything in 3D is great.

If the movie is great, seeing it in 3D won't break the story.

However, seeing cyberpunk movies so far.. we'll probably get a 17 year old blond Molly with a soft spot for ponies.
I'm more worried about that side of the movie.

Who should play Molly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193010)

My question is who are they going to get to play Molly the "Razorgirl"? That would be a big make or break decision for me. =)

Molly shows up in a bunch of Gibon's other books so whoever they pick could appear in potential future Gibson book to movie translations.

Re:Who should play Molly? (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193114)

Molly was in the Johnny Mnemonic short story but was replaced in the movie specifically so it wouldn't hurt a movie retelling of Neuromancer. Of course that was so many years ago and studios are so fond of changing details it's hard to tell if Molly will show up or if something else will be written in.... though I am not sure it really could be Neuromancer without Molly Millions...

Re:Who should play Molly? (1)

prgrmr (568806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193132)

I would not at all be unhappy if they got Dina Meyer to do it again.

Re:Who should play Molly? (1)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193414)

Molly is going to be played by Arnold Schwarzenegger wearing a black wig and a leather skirt. She will sound 'a little Austrian', which will add to the mystique of Neuromancer. When her fingernail blade implants don't work, she will pick enemies up by their hair and throw them into the filming 3D camera, making it seem like they fly out of the screen at you in IMAX3D. =)

IMDB scores for Neuromancer Director (2)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193024)

The highest score director Vincenzo Natali has on IMDB is 7.5/10 for the 1997 Scifi film "Cube". He has completed 11 projects as director and has never reached a 8/10 on any of them. Average scores by project type are listed here: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0622112/filmorate [imdb.com] Average scores (IMDB) by type of involvement in projects: --- Art Department 7.24 -- Director 6.59 -- Writer 6.84 -- Thanks 6.77 -- Actor 8.10 -- Miscellaneous Crew 6.50 -- Producer 6.40 -- Unless the strength and originality of Neuromancer's story/characters/universe/plot devices inspires him to "reach new heights", this is going to be a probable 7/10 movie (not bad, but not great either). They could have given Neuromancer to a heavyweight like Fincher, Scott, Spielberg or someone like Mathieu Cassovitz (of "La Heine" fame) and it would probably have turned out tremendous. Alfonso Cuarón who did a tremendous job on "Children of Men" comes to mind as well. I hope they don't f%ck this up. Neuromancer is brilliant material. Definitely in the Top 5 best realistic Scifi books category if you ask me.

Re:IMDB scores for Neuromancer Director (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193144)

Not Spielberg. He really screwed up "AI" simply by going too long. He insisted on doing the whole treatment by Kubrick but I believe Kubrick would have had the foresight to know that the whole ending part of that movie was extraneous. If Spielberg would have simply left the story off where the android "kills" himself if would have been a great movie. He needs to keep away from sci-fi now...

Re:IMDB scores for Neuromancer Director (1)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193472)

AI is a much better film than people gave it credit for (Kubrick's version would probably have been more 'genius' of course). I had a chance to watch it again on cable the other day and AI was much better than I remembered from the 1st viewing.

make a 2x2x2 cube (2)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193042)

the measurements for each dimension are:

x: popular with general audiences, unpopular with general audiences

y: financially successful, financial failure

z: popular with subculture fanatics, unpopular with subculture fanatics

ok, now amongst those 8 spaces, place your bets:

like lord of the rings? (winner on all 3 dimensions)

like watchmen? (winner in both popularities, loser financially)

like solaris? (only a winner with the subculture of diehards)

like tron? (winner in general popularity, failure in subculture popularity, winner financially)

etc., etc.

8 possible outcomes

Re:make a 2x2x2 cube (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193162)

It's really too bad about Solarius... I believed that was a really great movie of a russian movie that, while ground breaking, will put you to sleep in 5 minutes...

Re:make a 2x2x2 cube (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193348)

How could watchmen win in both categories and lose financially?

Re:make a 2x2x2 cube (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193454)

happens a lot, due to 2 reasons:

1. take the shawshank redemption. one of the most beloved movies ever. but it was a box office disappointment. some movies grow on you over time, prove durable and to wonderful stories. but due to bad marketing or timing, just didn't recoup the production fee. i'm not saying watchmen is as good as the shawshank redemption, but reactions have been mostly positive

2. not enough people showed up at the theatres to make the thing profitable. of course, it wasn't even remotely unpopular in theatres: it made over a hundred million dollars. its just that it cost $150 million to make and market! although, with hollywood accounting, dvd, ancillary sales, syndication, blah blah blah, who knows what the real figures are

I just have one question... (1)

Xorlium (1409453) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193058)

...will it have Will Smith in it?

Re:I just have one question... (3, Funny)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193536)

Yes. He will play 'Cyberspace' by wearing a bodysuit covered in blinking LED lights, neon glowstrips and such on a darkened set.

It's a fail - almost certainly (1)

dejaniv (842280) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193072)

It will be so easy to screw up this one. Some stories fit only in books. I guess they can base movie on Neuromancer, but that's the whole different set. Just like Blade Runner - great movie but different story focus from the original book. And that one was made in seventies. You know, before theaters were filled up by Fast And Furious 1 to 16. It's a fail - almost certainly.

Re:It's a fail - almost certainly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193188)

Just like Blade Runner - great movie but different story focus from the original book. And that one was made in seventies.

Since when was 1981 in the seventies?

Re:It's a fail - almost certainly (1)

dejaniv (842280) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193522)

Since when was 1981 in the seventies?

Well yeah, it was shot early eighties, and it started screening in 1982 but there was *a lot* going on before they started shooting, so the whole idea for the movie developed in the seventies.

Anyway, you're right - I therefore correct my previous statement by replacing "seventies" with "early eighties".

Wait until the Hollywood suits get ahold of it (4, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193156)

"We have introduced the idea to demographic panels assembled from shoppers at Mall of America, and feedback is generally ambivalent, with many blank stares. However, we have found that this movie will do better in the 18-34 female demographic if 'Neuromancer' is retitled 'New Romancer.' Also, there should be more bodily humor and scatological jokes. 'Too weird', 'I don't get it', 'Something your weird brother would watch', and a doodle of a cat is the dominant impression of the movie from the questionnaire forms. We also suggest cutting the running length from 2 hours, 30 minutes to 45 minutes. This can be accomplished with little damage to the source material and remaining true to the author's original intent, by removing only the plot and the coherency. Plot and coherency seemed to matter the least to the demographic in our surveys."

Really? (0)

Rizimar (1986164) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193160)

They're remaking The Matrix so soon?

So.... (1)

TimeElf1 (781120) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193184)

So now that Neuromancer is out of development hell can we get Snow Crash next? Preferably with a great script and a great director to helm it.

Re:So.... (1)

tgv (254536) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193466)

I fear that's going to be prohibitively expensive.

Hmm...I don't know... (1)

greymond (539980) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193236)

As someone who didn't read books like Neuromancer or Snow Crash until the early 2000's I don't know about this. The books were originally done in a time when the internet and virtual reality were something people thought they were more than they really are, ideas that lead to such nonsense as the latest Tron movie where a virtual world somehow creates it's own life form and can then come to...our life...Besides a lot of updating would need to take place, remember Johnny Mnemonic could only hold 160GB in his head and that was AFTER a "doubler" was applied...

I would chuckle if they had Keanu do some type of a cameo as Johnny in the movie though his character isn't in that book, I think Molly is the only one who is in all the stories IIRC...

Re:Hmm...I don't know... (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193552)

Don't forget... Molly relates the story of Johnny to Case as she's climbing up to Straylight. You could do a flashback voiceover thing. But I think that'd be a terrible idea.

If nothing else, I think that blecherous losing monstrosity of a movie needs to be dismembered, burned, and buried in multiple places, not referred to.

old crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193254)

Sorry this is about 20 years too late. which means its going to suck as hard as Tron -2 the resurrection of a dead franchise.

Hooray (1)

CSixx (1837044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193294)

I'm excited. Loved the book (and the Amiga/c64 game!). But then again, I also liked the movie Splice...

I bet Gibson is turning in his grave! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36193494)

Oh wait.....

Hopeful, but skeptical. (1)

MaWeiTao (908546) | more than 3 years ago | (#36193590)

The nice thing about Gibson's cyberpunk novels is that the plot is generally compact enough that it should be relatively easy to fit it into a 2 hour movie.

I don't think the subject matter is nearly as dated as some are suggesting. Certainly, it's no more quaint than the junk Hollywood movies constantly put out. But really, a writer with a reasonable amount of talent and sense would update and improve any those elements. The problem, of course, is that good writing seems to be a scarce resource in Hollywood.

While this news has me excited I'm not confident that they wont just botch the whole thing. I can think of quite a few near-future sci-fi movies which have been terrible and have placed far too much emphasis on action.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>