When I first read Neuromancer I wanted it to be adapted into a film. I think the reason was a common one: when you love a book you want there to be some validation of your affection from the rest of the world. A bunch of people deciding to make a movie feels like validation, especially if it goes on to be wildly successful.

Over the years and many successive readings my feelings have changed. In some ways, a screen adaptation make less sense with every passing year. As Gibson himself points out, sci-fi works are always a commentary about the time in which they are written, not the future time in which they seem to take place and there's a lot of the 1980's in Neuromancer, from punk-rock counterculture to the Cold Way, from payphones to the technological ascendancy of Japan, and I'm not sure how much it would feel like the novel if all that stuff is taken out or changed. Also, presumably because it's been in production hell for so long it's already been kinda strip-mined by other works. There's a lot of Neuromancer in The Matrix as well as echoes of it in a bunch of lesser films from the 90's (e.g. Lawnmower Man, Hackers, Ghost in the Shell), to say nothing of Cyberpunk 2077.

Lastly, films like Lawnmower Man and Johnny Mnemonic have shown us that attempts to cinematically depict cyberspace can end up looking laughably ridiculous. I observe that there is essentially no depiction of it in the series trailer/preview. I wonder if they'll try to side-step its depiction as much as possible.

I'll probably end up watching it, if for no other reason than to see how they approach all of the above but I've largely given up on hoping it will capture the mood and feeling of the novel. It's even possible that it ends up falling into the "very good but very different" category of things like The Haunting of Hill House, Foundation, The Shining etc. I'd settle for that.