MovieChat Forums > Ready Player One (2018) Discussion > why the change in setting?

why the change in setting?


I still haven't heard why Spielberg decided to not have it take place in Oklahoma. The state gets the shaft again. What, August, Osage County wasn't insult enough?

reply

Tax incentives.

reply

But, they film movies in all kinds of places without changing the ACTUAL setting off the movie

reply

That’s true. Hmmmm...yup, I don’t have any answers.

reply

[deleted]

No idea. If that be your first gripe, then brace yourself for a whole bunch of confusing and unnecessary changes from the novel.

reply

Ha! I am braced, my friend

reply

Warner Bros simply stated that it was to serve the story. Take that as you will.

General convenience I guess. Don’t find it bothersome.

reply

My guess is that it's because the part of the book that took place in Oklahoma could have taken place anywhere. As the Oklahoma setting could have been Detroit, Miami, or Memphis without changing a thing, the filmmakers (presumably, as I'm taking your word for this) are starting him in Columbus to move the story along. If the entire story takes place in Columbus, that means they don't need to include scenes of his journey from Oklahoma to Ohio.

The book even makes that clear when depicting Wade's journey from Oklahoma to Ohio, where he points out that everything looks the same. Since the movie can't contain every single detail from the book, they had to select the important parts.

reply