/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19172329]

How do we bring back Cyberpunk?

[Anonymous No.19172340]

You don't

[Anonymous No.19172348]

>>19172340
why?

[Anonymous No.19172349]

>>19172329
Video gamers already did

[Anonymous No.19172362]

>>19172329
>Gibson is an awful writer.
>Blade Runner was not a good movie.
>Cyberpunk 2077 was a bad game.
Just let it die, it's just fash shit for normed audiences.

[Anonymous No.19172369]

with robot art, of course

[Anonymous No.19172375]

>>19172349
that game might be the nail in the coffin if a book or movie doesn't come along to reverse its damage

[Anonymous No.19172387]

>>19172375
This. Just let it die.

[Anonymous No.19172393]

>>19172387
NO WE MUST SAVE MOLLY

[Anonymous No.19172525]

Cyberpunk as a concept is likely to go the way of all other predictions of a brighter future, forgotten because the real thing is completely different, and usually much worse.
We already live in a technological dystopia, it just turned out to be way less cool than we thought
>Blade Runner was not a good movie
Filtered

[Anonymous No.19172563]

>>19172362
>Blade Runner was not a good movie.
Uhh. No.

[Anonymous No.19172567]

>>19172525
>>19172563
It wasn't - Ford's not a good actor and it's a shit adaptation of Dick. The aesthetic approach was/is influential. That doesn't make it a good movie (and I like the movie). I'd argue that the 1997 BR point-and-click has a better narrative that's also more congruent with the original short.

[Anonymous No.19172572]

>AAAH BIG RAINY CITY WITH NEON KANJI LETTERS AND SOME DELINQUENT IN A HAN SOLO COSPLAY HOLDING A PISTOL AND THINKING ABOUT TAKIN' SOME TECHNODRUGS
how does this shit not wear off on people after like two or three pieces of media?

[Anonymous No.19172594]

>>19172563
I finally got around to watching it a few months ago and was kinda underwhelmed tbqh. It's really slow-burn for something that ended up inspiring decades of edgy game plots and techno music.

It wasn't a bad movie, but I was expecting more with how hard it gets dicksucked.

[Anonymous No.19172597]

until the zoomers understand cybernetics there will be no true cyber punk, only rehashed sci fi dystopian trash

[Anonymous No.19172604]

>>19172567
I guess you haven’t seen it. Never mind you than.

[Anonymous No.19172651]

>>19172567
(You) unironically got filtered
>it's a shit adaptation of Dick
Literally who gives a fuck. Something being a poor adaptation in no way speaks to its quality as a piece of art or media. The only argument you can make is that being a poor adaptation makes a film worse in the context of the original, which is still stupid, but not as retarded as what you're suggesting. The original might as well not exist
>Ford's not a good actor
He's not phenomenal, but he's nearly perfect for the role. He's not overall good, yes, but he's "good" in the very specific way that lends itself to the character. If he did give a tour de force performance, it'd detract from the overall theme, message, and narrative "artstyle." All of which hinge on emphasizing the isolation and devaluation of humanity. The overall story doesn't actually matter in the grand scheme of the universe. There's no real antagonist. The individual has no value in the grand scheme of things. It's a great representation and critique of urban living and the inflation and atomization of the individual.
I can see why someone might not like it, or consider it imperfect (it definitely is. Especially the "definitive" cut), but to say it's outright bad honestly just speaks to your cinematic illiteracy

[Anonymous No.19172657]

>>19172594
>>19172567
Reassessment. You didn’t get it I’m guessing. Did you see the sequel?

[Anonymous No.19172660]

>>19172329
How can you make fiction when it's already fact?

[Anonymous No.19172686]

>>19172604
I have, but think what you will.
>>19172651
Mate, that means fuck-all. I unironically think Johnny Mnemonic is a better film.
>emphasizing the isolation and devaluation of humanity
I know you think you're making a point, but the pointed pointlessness of it robs it of any explanatory power (topos isn't deep, anon). Also, that's not the point of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep(?), ask me how I know you haven't read it.
>>19172657
I haven't. It's better narratively?

[Anonymous No.19172687]

>>19172572
Unironically filtered. Guarantee you think LOTR is soul like the dumbfuck you are.

[Anonymous No.19172711]

Cyberpunk is dead. There won't be any innovation in the genre, just endless rehashing. The next trend will be modemwave, nostalgia for the period between 9/11 and the first iphone, combined with the anxieties of modern times. Basically bloomer fiction taking place in bright, cheerful settings, celebrating a bygone era of discrete electronics designed for singular purposes, each with it's own unique design and style. Something like:
>2027, five years after The Burn
>some anonymous hacker group managed to compile and release every bit of personal data ever entered into the internet
>browsing history, financial info, private messages, pornography habits, message board posts
>all organized and collated by name, cross-searchable by topic and keyword
>chaos ensued as people fled rather than face the consequences of having their private secrets revealed
>mobs attacked corporate headquarters of tech titans such Google, Facebook, and Amazon, utterly destroying their servers
>criminals seized the opportunity to commit fraud on a mass scale, draining bank accounts and opening new credit cards
>society barely managed to survive the ensuing famine, infrastructure failure, and refugee crisis
>civilization has pulled back from the brink, with Tiger Electronics buying out Apple Computers and Lycos being the largest search engine to survive with servers intact
>internet mostly replaced by cable television info-nets, offering personalized weather, communication, shopping, and news
>but scraps and pieces of the old web survive, on discs and hard drives, if you know where to look
>fragments of old secrets, some of which can be very valuable indeed...

[Anonymous No.19172718]

>>19172393
Your waifu is pure shit. She's not even hot.

[Anonymous No.19172722]

>>19172686
>but the pointed pointlessness of it robs it of any explanatory power
It's not pointlessness, it makes a very specific point.
>Also, that's not the point of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep(?), ask me how I know you haven't read it.
Are you actually retarded? I was talking about the movie, not Dick's work. No I haven't read it, but if you bothered to open your eyes, you'd see that i specifically said that it holds no weight when talking about its adaptation as a separate piece of art (whether bladerunner even is an adaptation of Dick is arguable). You have 0 reading comprehension

[Anonymous No.19172725]

>>19172711
>The Burn
Is this the Bernie Sanders coup?

[Anonymous No.19172729]

>>19172686
>It's better narratively?
It’s the continuation of the mystery/ambiguity of the original. It’s dark and murky existentialism. They fit well together, but it leaves the viewer to imagine the rest

[Anonymous No.19172742]

Concrete and LEDs are cheaper than neon lights and flying cars. Capitalist realism already made all the worst parts a reality. Cyberpunk is now just pure aesthetic nostalgia trash for a past’s future that will never happen. It has outlived its usefulness within the science fiction cannon. It can no longer tell meaningful stories with its tools. It’s now just going to flood with trans rights because every other plot of bodily autonomy, cyber privacy, and corporate domination have already come true. It would be more interesting to write a book based on the current actual dystopia but pushed to its extremes. That’s what I always thought burgerpunk was supposed to be. A melding of Americana and cyberpunk, used to paint a portrait of the modern world in a more believable way.

[Anonymous No.19172768]

>>19172722
A point about pointlessness, yes, you said that. I'm saying that that's shit. The film is an ADAPTATION, anon - meaning elements with contiguity are present (and explored with a good deal more insight in the novella). I'm begining to think you might be retarded. You point to some void-topic and cry that it's deep, when it has all the depth of a Flat-Stanley (as an aside, you probably aren't deep enough to step in, but at least explore some literary theory if you want it to "feel" like you're saying something when you post).
>if you bothered to open your eyes
Anon, we're talking about cyberpunk generally, and Blade Runner specifically. There's no proviso, calm the fuck down.

[Anonymous No.19172775]

>>19172329
Why would you want to? Cyberpunk has ran it's course and has nothing relevant to say anymore.

[Anonymous No.19172810]

>>19172362
>>Blade Runner was not a good movie.
Yes it was faggot

[Anonymous No.19172832]

>>19172768
You are actually retarded

[Anonymous No.19172898]

>>19172362
>fash shit
Ask me how I know your taint leaks.

[Anonymous No.19172939]

>>19172567
>>19172594
zoomer takes

[Anonymous No.19172960]

>>19172329
we live an ultra gay version of it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYjhHHEFyHY

[Anonymous No.19172973]

>>19172362
cyberpunk was a bad games because of bugs retard, and blade runner is one of the greatest sci/fi movies ever.

[Anonymouṡ No.19173355]

>>19172329
I have long been thinking about a story which would only work (or work best) in a cyberpunk setting. By Stephen King's test, its a good idea — I haven't written it down, but I keep coming back to it and pondering it more and adding to it.

If anyone is interested I'll post the premise. (It might just be like a dream — i.e. emotionally significant to the dreamer but meaningless to anyone else.)

[Anonymous No.19173374]

>>19172567
>it's a shit adaptation of Dick.
Dick himself thought it was great.

[Anonymous No.19173383]

>the future is already here, its just not evenly distributed yet
You niggers arguing about blade runner like that's indicative of the genre.

[Anonymous No.19173394]

cyberpunkchads let's goooo

[Anonymous No.19173406]

>>19172329
>bring back
We're living in it

[Anonymous No.19173417]

>>19172362
1 and 3 are true, 2 is false but not really "cyberpunk", just noir science fiction. so yeah i guess, let it die.

[Anonymous No.19173426]

>>19172329

Remove the trannies and faggots trying to gatekeep it like a couple of chuds.

[Anonymous No.19173437]

>>19172768
>The film is an ADAPTATION, anon
blade runner is more of an adaptation/update of frankenstein than of the crappy dick novel it takes the names from. between the whining about an adaptation not being "close" enough to a book it plainly barely cares about and all this whining about "depth" you really do come off like a total brainlet.

[Anonymous No.19173487]

>>19173437
Man, board IQ really is declining. I don't give a shit about the "faithfulness" to the material or its adaptability. My point, to the fucknugget I was replying to, was that the film's post-ego interpretations aren't particularly insightful or interesting. These themes were better explored in BR's influences, like The Long Tomorrow (see Métal hurlant). It's just a movie.

[Anonymous No.19174615]

>>19172775
>Why would you want to? Moby Dick has ran it's course and has nothing relevant to say anymore.

[Anonymous No.19174621]

>>19172329
William Gibson's Neuromancer is one of the worst books I've ever read.

[Anonymous No.19174697]

>>19174615
Moby Dick is a work that stands alone in the past. Reading it now gives you access to “what it had to say”. Cyberpunk is just a kind of rollercoaster set-dressing for YA tier garbage at this point.

[Anonymous No.19174762]

Like the other posters have already pointed out, cyberpunk has already run its course.
It has no more interesting stories to tell, every cyberpunk piece of media nowadays just uses the aesthetic to tell a rehashed story we’ve seen already.
It’s going to become as quaint as the techno optimist sci-fi serials of the 50s, a zeerusty way people of the past imagined the future was going to be.

On the subject of BR, the movie is definitely overrated by its nerdy fan base. Let’s be honest niggas, BR is basically a film noir mixed with action with a sci-fi coat of paint. The worst thing about it is it blue balls you by PRESENTING deep existentialist themes but never actually DEVELOPING them, the most philosophical the film gets is with Batty’s dying soliloquy. The most interesting part of the film was the aesthetic and the score by Vangelis, Ford was very wooden in his acting.

[Anonymous No.19174784]

>>19174762
Why does everyone bully Ford's acting; it's perfectly adequate if not a masterpiece.

[Anonymous No.19174829]

>>19174784
I get that Ridley was trying to convey how years of living in 2019’s LA would make you a hardened taciturn and he was trying to make a parallel between Deckard being cold and professional and the replicants behaving like human beings to make a point, but the effect is Ford looks bored rather than taciturn for most of the movie. Even when he forces himself on Rachel it doesn’t look convincing.

[Anonymous No.19174905]

>>19174829
What do you think about when Ford is administering the test to Rachel for the first time? I always thought he did very well there.

Romantically, I'm too autistic to have any view; it's sex, it's hard to properly do on camera with actors.

[Anonymous No.19174989]

>>19172567
>That doesn't make it a good movie (and I like the movie)
You sound insufferable, lighten up please

[Anonymous No.19174994]

>>19174621
I couldn't finish it after reading Snow Crash - I get that Snow Crash is a satire, but it made just as much "sense" as Neuromancer, and was a lot more entertaining.

[Anonymous No.19175024]

>>19174994
The thing with Neuromancer is the prose makes absolutely no sense. It's just so bad. It's not a stylistic choice, the writer just didn't have the actual skill to write.

[Anonymous No.19175026]

>>19172340
Fpbp

[Anonymous No.19175031]

>>19172348
>multiple electrical charging cables
But why?

[Anonymous No.19175310]

>>19172329
Cyberpunk at it's core is about existential horror. It's a dystopian future where technology has alienated and controlled us. Atomized us. Hyperconsumerism mixed with a culture with no morality. But many missed the point and only have a superficial understanding of it and like the cyber limbs and music.

[Anonymous No.19175460]

>>19172329
Make a video game that's so good, it gets people interested in the genre as a whole.

[Anonymous No.19175586]

>>19173374
PKD said it looked exactly how he envisioned it aeshtetically, but he had a lot of issues with the script. He didn't even live long enough to see it finished in theater

[Anonymous No.19175616]

>>19172329
Why would we need to bring back something that we're already living through?

[Anonymous No.19176269]

>>19174784
Ford acting was intentionally crap because he hated working for Ridley Scott. Similarly, in the (now long forgotten) voiceover narration, he sounds half bored and half shitfaced. Similarly, the reason why Rachel and Deckard look like they hate each other in every scene they are together is because Young and Ford actually did hate each other and could barely stand being on the same set.
To add to that, Scott also have something of George Lucas disease, where he constantly revisits BR to add stuff, generally for the worse, because he things he could improve it, somehow.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.19176276]

>>19175586
Yeah. The script writer changed it. It’s fine the way it is. Different title and everything.

[Anonymous No.19176280]

>>19172362
>fash
Don't you want your new cyber cunt delivered to you, tranny? The future is yours

[Anonymous No.19176734]

>>19172329
I think the most negative aspects of Cyberpunk have become reality - like massive corporations, increased government surveillance, commodified "gaming" and internet culture - to a point where cyberpunk is almost uncool when limited to the confines of fiction. Being highly tech-literate allows you to live the "cyberpunk experience" more than most fiction ever will.