Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

After Johnny Mnemonic, I'm kinda shocked that he'd allow this. Granted film effects have come a long way, but it'll take a hell of a screen writer and director to bring that to the screen.

Edit: Guess the point is, even if it is really good, I'm not sure it could live up to expectations.



On top of that, can you imagine how tiresome the repeated "what a Matrix rip-off" claims are going to be?


The sad thing is you're most likely right :-(


It will however give an opportunity for Eldernerds to post a link to this:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/04/10/


> I'm not sure it could live up to expectations.

Oh, it's almost guaranteed not to. But who cares? Even if it's only half as good as the book, it'll be a great movie, particularly when you compare it to the bilge that permeates cinemas these days.


The director is apparently Vincenzo Natali (Cube, Splice).


The Cube was utter garbage.

This hack does not deserve to make Neuromancer.


I didn't like Cube very much. The acting was bad, the premise was a bit silly... but still, it had something which made it interesting.

And it was the guys first movie, on a tiny budget.

I haven't seen Splice yet, but have heard mostly good things about it. So don't write off the guy just because of Cube.


Be glad...initially the guy who did Torque was slated to be the director


WG has actually maintained, even very recently on twitter, that he quite enjoyed JM. He did write the screen play.


I didn't hate it, but I have never felt the need to watch it since I saw it as a teenager.


Same here. I remember liking it, but I was 12...

Gibson's writing is good because he develops incredibly complex social systems and structures for the reader to navigate. He does this mainly by leaving gaps in the world that the reader has to imagine or guess at. Some of them are filled in, as the plot progresses some of them are filled in and explained. This is incredibly difficult to do well in film. Directors are always tempted to show everything and producers demand it if there is the budget for it. The world becomes simpler, flatter, maybe a little silly.


Call me a lunatic, but I really enjoyed Johnny Mnemonic (the international version with the extra scenes from the extended Japanese version spliced in and sub'd). It was by no means a flawless movie (Keanu Reeves' acting was about as bad as bad Keanu Reeves acting can get, and they royally fucked up Molly Millions' character (apparently because they didn't have rights to use the actual Molly Millions character due to a Neuromancer movie attempt or somethig)), but all in all it really felt Gibson.

Stylistically, I think it was dead on.

EDIT: goes over the differences between the international version and the Japanese version: http://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=1523&In=Qu... basically, they removed nearly every supporting scene for the main Japanese character, and the explanation of the ending.


Vincenzo Natali actually seems to know what he is doing unlike the so called director of Johnny Mnemonic.


A worse problem with JM was the so called actors.


Which the director has at least some control of right?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: