The Death of the "Hero"

I did it. I broke my own rule. I'm sorry - can we start over again? No? Well then, I guess I will have to write it down a hundred times so I don't forget it again: "Never read the book before you see the movie." Why? Ninety-nine out of a hundred times the book ruins the movie. I use that figure because I haven't read every book for every movie I have seen: so, I'm sure there must be an exception somewhere. And while a movie might influence your interpretations of characters and scenes, if you see the movie first, you will not walk away feeling devastated as I did after watching (NOT) Ready Player One.

(WARNING: POTENTIAL SPOILERS) Oh, I get the necessary changes made to the plot. The movie couldn't use all those anime "big stompy robots" that caused readers to squeal with delight. The thought of an all out climatic slugfest between our favorite mech warriors excited the inner child within. But all of that was replaced by the Iron Giant (a WB property) and even that was somewhat marred because he lacked all the cool gadgets in the theatrical re-release. What I wanted to focus on was what I consider the greatest shortfall (of many) of the movie: the stripping away of heroism from the main character.

Wade Watts, aka Parzival aka "Z" is the chief protagonist. In the book he carries the, well, the "hero's share" of daring do in the book. Not so in the movie. He is stripped of his most heroic acts which are divided among the others, most especially the female lead. Instead of just being a superlative but geeky "gunter" (egg hunter) she is made into a social revolutionary. The most dangerous thing Wade does in the book (going undercover at IOI) is given to Art3mis. And instead of eight days she does it in eight minutes. They add "depth" to this fortitude by having her hide out in the enemy HQ. Wade has to shoot her avatar (in the game) so she will give up and get to safety.

The only purpose it serves is to make for "stronger" female characters - but at the expense of the male characters in the story. Not necessary, Bro. It can be done (Gail Gadot in "Wonder Woman"). But, hey - why do it the right way when you can do it the easy and lazy way? Most disappointing of all is that when Z wins, in the book he becomes writ large: assuming the mantle of the game's creator with unlimited power. He becomes the sole owner of the game and a multi-billionaire - which he divides among his friends (after wishing the bad guys out of existence). Not so with the movie. He does the "responsible" thing and divides the ownership of the company between the five of them and they decide to close the game down on Tuesdays and Thursdays so people can spend more quality time together. SMH. How 'bout we shut down the game so we can deal with the problems around us? In that one line they tossed away their opportunity for a sequel.

Truly tragic is the most poignant social commentary that was left out - and I would have to guess it was because it made both women look vulnerable. Z's friend Aich is supposed to have a white male avatar. Her reason was because she learned from her mom that there were advantages for white males that black females didn't have. Nice. Great teachable moment. It could have been done in a single sentence. But no, her avatar wasn't even white; it was an ambiguous gray skinned cyborg. Then there is the love interest. Art3mis has a birthmark on her face. And while everyone else's avatar looks vastly different according to their personal fantasies, Art3mis' avatar looked like her, minus the birth mark. Her biggest fantasy was that she might be "normal," that people would look beyond her "deformity" (or weight, or freckles, or skin color, or height) and see her for who he was. There is some of Art3mis in all of us. Another teachable moment missed.

The one positive score the movie makes is the character of the wizard Anarak, the avatar of James Halladay the creator of the game. In the book, he is larger than life as is befitting a wizard of infinite hit points, levels and a list of magical and mundane articles in his inventory that defies counting. In the movie, however, he is somewhere on the spectrum, probably an autistic savant (see Freddy Highmore's character in "The Good Doctor"). That is never explained, but to those who are around autistic children would recognize it immediately. It meshes well with the book's character's description IRL, but not with the description of Anarak. Again, another hero stripped of that heroic aspect.

Geeze. Didn't any of these guys ever play D&D?

Having said all of this: Go see the movie. It's fun.

Just don't read the book first.

Meanwhile, I must do my pennance....

Never read the book before you see the movie.

Never read the book before you see the movie.

Never read the book before you see the movie.

Never read the book before you see the movie.....