Will we finally see Neuromancer on the screen?
I&#x27;m going to be Pollyanna and say that we might be at the cusp of a golden age of sci-fi adaptations. For decades people said that <i>Dune</i> was unfilmable and then Villeneuve went and done it and made it look easy, even conventional. (I actually have some additional thoughts on that- it could have been a little bit longer for greater exposition and characterization, and more weird.) So this should mean that any classic work of sci-fi should get some consideration. We&#x27;re at a time in the industry where both visual effects and audiences (with the mainstreaming of nerd culture) are ready for such media.<p>That&#x27;s not to say these adaptations will be <i>good</i>, but they&#x27;re certainly filmable. <i>Neuromancer</i> gets a lot of cachet, but other IPs have been attempted already. Villeneuve successfully made a good <i>Blade Runner</i> sequel. Live-action <i>Ghost in the Shell</i> happened- it was execrable and wrapped up in controversy, but it still got made and the neon-soaked setting looked decent. They made a fourth <i>Matrix</i>. Stepping away from cyberpunk, <i>Childhood&#x27;s End</i> got a miniseries. <i>The Expanse</i> got a full show.<p>So I doubt that there&#x27;s anything inherently more difficult about Gibson&#x27;s novels. If anything, the popularity of <i>Cyberpunk 2077</i> and its <i>Edgerunners</i> anime has primed the public for &#x27;80s retrofuturistic cyberpunk, so they can choose to adapt this as a period piece if they wanted to, without &quot;modernizing&quot; its futuristic conceits. No need to add smartphones.<p>Call me when they start adapting John Brunner &#x27;60s new wave sci-fi. Now <i>that</i> would be a hard sell.