4 ms·
I went looking for a comment I remembered posting on a previous occasion of an impending Neuromancer adaptation, and found the story from 2011: https://news.yco
by mortenjorck 4y ago
I went looking for a comment I remembered posting on a previous occasion of an impending Neuromancer adaptation, and found the story from 2011: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2565734 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2565734
I think it still holds up 11 years later:
> It's almost certainly too much to hope for, but my impossible dream is that this gets done up like it's the 1980s with circa-2012 CGI. A bold kind of retrofuturism we haven't seen yet in film.
> Thing is, you can't take Neuromancer out of the '80s. The newness of computer networks, the ascendancy of Japan, the aesthetics of computer hardware -- boxy, whirring things with stark, green CRTs spewing masses of indecipherable alphanumeric incantations, big clunky cables, heavy briefcase-size mobile units; it's all there. And the mash-up of digital and analog technologies is no less integral than Gibson's opening lines to the book, comparing a halogen-hazed night sky to the analog noise of TV transmission.
> Neuromancer didn't arrive into a world comfortable with computer technology like ours today. The book stands as a fantastic trip back into a time when technology could be dark, dangerous, and foreign, a zeitgeist Gibson leverages to dazzling effect. "Updating" Neuromancer would bring its entire shadowy world out into the unthreatening, mid-day sun.
- tgv 4y agoThey could if they were imaginative enough to project current tech into a similarly dangerous future. It's been said that sci-fi is the easiest to date form of film. Our image of the future is so strongly tied to the moment itself.