littlebitsofspider t1_it5vutn wrote
Reply to comment by Valdotain_1 in ‘The Peripheral’ Is a Grim Vision of the Future From ‘Westworld’s’ Creators: TV Review by TheUtopianCat
So much of that book is internal to the characters, though. You'd need some kind of infodump to explain Cayce's aversion to logos, for example.
ebietoo t1_it8ejov wrote
The problem with adapting Gibson to movies or tv is that much of the cool factor resides in his prose. I think so far, this show is managing to show the coolness in visuals. I love that The Shards actually giant statues rather than simply big weird buildings. I hope the show goes into the genderqueer aspects of Flynn in Burton’s peripheral, and I’m excited to see Lowbeer in action. I don’t feel bad about missing Daedra West’s naked base-jumping from trash island, though I wonder how the story will resolve without her and king of the primitives—guess they’ll pick another villain. Jonathan and Lisa, don’t stray too far from the source material, ok? That’s usually a recipe for disaster.
hangingonthetelephon t1_ita7t8q wrote
No patchers? Interesting…
one of the things that makes the book great IMO is that the stakes of the London storyline are actually quite low - effectively a Chinatown style story in the London storyline - despite their immense implications in the Canton storyline -it really nicely, subtly reflects the core premise of the books, ie the unequal distribution of the impact of uh late-stage capitalism or whatever. Trying to be vague to avoid spoilers. But yeah, it’s Gibson’s best attempt IMO at finally capturing his famous line that the future is here, just unevenly distributed - but with the realization that it’s climate collapse and not technological innovation that defines the future and it’s unequal distribution.
The fact that a lot of the actual machinations stuff which drive the plot are all in the background and only peripheral (ahem) to the main storyline is a really great, subtle touch, and the Patchers are a perfect example of that...
I’m not sure if I’m going to watch… the London storyline seemed all too glamorous and fun and exciting and action-packed in the trailers, though it could just be the trailers and a question of it being Flynne’s perspective… but still, the whole thing that makes the book so amazing is the deep ennui and emptiness that permeates the London storyline, and even the Canton one too. Despite the craziness there, it comes across more as just a matter of characters accepting the weirdness that is life, rather than some grand adventure. Trailers gave a bit of the opposite vibe, but again, they are trailers. I love that in the book, when Flynne first works as Milagros, it’s piloting a tiny drone doing pretty boring, mundane surveillance/security work, not some cool adventure - it’s more Rear Window and Blow Up/Blow Out or the Conversation than James Bond…
I would love to see an amazing adaptation of this, even with the difficulties of translating his prose to screen… but I’m nervous about this one.
tomcmackay t1_ittyuej wrote
then let's be very clear. like yourself.
this television series has zero chance of living up to the brilliance of it's parent novels. Gibson has that trait. bladerunner has already sucked most of the air out of the onscreen room, and Gibson is simply too prosaic, well past whatever bladerunner tried to teach us about sci fi and androids and our future
mybadalternate t1_it7j3wg wrote
Or just good writing and directing. That absolutely can be told visually.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments