A Scanner Darkly (Richard Linklater, 2006)
- HerrSchreck
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am
- Fletch F. Fletch
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
- Location: Provo, Utah
- Andre Jurieu
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
- Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)
- godardslave
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:44 pm
- Location: Confusing and open ended = high art.
- solaris72
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:03 pm
- Location: Baltimore, MD
It's a tough one to judge; I do love me some Blade Runner something fierce, and BR is indeed awfully Phildickian. But in my opinion Scanner is better cast, funnier, somewhat sadder, more well plotted (somewhat a byproduct of Scanner being PKD's most tightly plotted novel, at least of the 7 novels of his I've read), and the characters a little more flesh and blood. It's not quite as visually stunning as BR, but it's certainly no slouch in this area (anyway, a faithful adaptation of Scanner wouldn't look like BR; Dick rightfully felt that the look of BR exactly matched the world of DADES?, but Scanner is set in a much less futuristic world; Dick writes in his Exegesis that the few futuristic flourishes could conceivably just be hallucinations in line wth his "Black Iron Prison" idea). I don't mean to underrate BR, but I did like this more. Part of it, I guess, is the fact that, like I said, it captured the way Dick's best work feels like memoirs written in the future rather than speculative science fiction, which isn't quite something I found in BR. The only other writer I've found who can write SF like that is Walter Tevis, and I was really glad to see this perspective carried over so well in a film version of Dick's work.HerrSchreck wrote:Wow! Sounds promising... You really think it's a better film than BLADE RUNNER (although not all that much of ELECTRIC SHEEP left in the adaptation, is still a P.K Dick adaptation and one of the greatest films of the 2nd half of the 20th Century, or any century for that matter)?
- hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
- Location: NYC
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
Pending seeing "Scanner", Rivette's "Paris Belongs to Us" is the most PKD-ish film I've seen (even more than "Blade Runner"). Made when PKD's stories were first gaining attention in France, one of its major characters is named Phil Kaufman -- and this character is a paranoid expatriate American author. The Dickian atmosphere in this film is positively stifling. I wishy this was on DVD (and in the full international version -- not the cut American version).
- Andre Jurieu
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
- Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)
If any New Yorkers are interested:
Film Society of Lincoln Center
A SCANNER DARKLY - Wednesday, July 5 - 7:00pm
Director Richard Linklater and actor Robert Downey, Jr. in Person!
A special advance screening of Linklater's adaptation of Phillip K. Dick's novel about drug-induced paranoia realized in animated imagery. The screening will be introduced by Linklater and followed by a discussion with him and Robert Downey, Jr. plus other surprise guests. General admission $40; members $35.
Film Society of Lincoln Center
A SCANNER DARKLY - Wednesday, July 5 - 7:00pm
Director Richard Linklater and actor Robert Downey, Jr. in Person!
A special advance screening of Linklater's adaptation of Phillip K. Dick's novel about drug-induced paranoia realized in animated imagery. The screening will be introduced by Linklater and followed by a discussion with him and Robert Downey, Jr. plus other surprise guests. General admission $40; members $35.
- Fletch F. Fletch
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
- Location: Provo, Utah
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
- bkimball
- Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 12:10 am
- Location: SLC, UT
I'm curious if anyone can report on this particular screening. What was discussed after the film? How did Linklater introduce the film?Andre Jurieu wrote:If any New Yorkers are interested:
Film Society of Lincoln Center
A SCANNER DARKLY - Wednesday, July 5 - 7:00pm
I just saw this last night and really enjoyed it. The animation worked so well that I believe the movie to be significantly enhanced by the choice to use it. Thoughts from others?
- miless
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:45 pm
I just saw it last night and I was impressed...
Linklatter has a way with dialogue, the dialogue would come out completely pretentious if by a less talented director... but here it somehow works (just like in Waking Life or Slacker)
I have to say that I am really looking forward to seeing this film again, there is a lot there to digest and I am sure that I only noticed about 55% of what is there.
quite an achievement, a Phillip K. Dick adaptation that isn't a mindless piece of crap (excluding Blade Runner, of course)
Linklatter has a way with dialogue, the dialogue would come out completely pretentious if by a less talented director... but here it somehow works (just like in Waking Life or Slacker)
I have to say that I am really looking forward to seeing this film again, there is a lot there to digest and I am sure that I only noticed about 55% of what is there.
quite an achievement, a Phillip K. Dick adaptation that isn't a mindless piece of crap (excluding Blade Runner, of course)
- zedz
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm
I'll add my voice to the choir in favour of this film. I'm no great fan of Bladerunner, so calling this the best Dick adaptation is probably meaningless in my case. What I particularly admire about the film is the way that the science fiction hook, the big name cast and the animation cleverly mask the fact that this is a very unusually structured Hollywood film. It's a science-fiction film that's character- and dialogue-driven, and the plot is heavily back-loaded. It also contains one of the most unusually constructed heroes of any American film I can think of, in that Arctor's heroism
Linklater's skill for handling dialogue - even unwieldy dialogue - is in full evidence. He's one of the few American directors completly comfortable with talk-driven films. This is also a great example of his ability to extract career-best performances from unlikely sources. This is the first Keanu film in which I don't find his performance actively bad. His natural air of dislocation obviously works for the character, but there's also a touching core of confusion and suppressed panic that he's bringing to the role. As noted above, Downey is like a new puppy thrilled to be able to show off his tricks: it's like a combined love-letter / fuck-you to the Hollywood casting fraternity.
SpoilerShow
lies precisely in his being unconsciously manipulated by external forces - a hero characterised by lack of volition.
- Fletch F. Fletch
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
- Location: Provo, Utah
a vintage interview with Dick about writing the book
- Antoine Doinel
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
- Location: Montreal, Quebec
- Contact:
I saw this tonight and I was mildly disappointed. I really thought the first two-thirds of the film could've ratcheted up the paranoia/confusion factor, which would've made the third act of the film have an even larger impact. I really wanted to feel the effects of being on D - to be as disoriented as the characters. That said, I loved the latter third of the film and for me, it really made me appreciate the whole of the film when it ended.
The rotoscoping was indeed beautiful and there were some truly startling shots. Yep, the scramble suits were amazing as well. The cast was also uniformly great - particularly Robert Downey Jr. who continues to have a renaissance in supporting roles in little seen movies.
The rotoscoping was indeed beautiful and there were some truly startling shots. Yep, the scramble suits were amazing as well. The cast was also uniformly great - particularly Robert Downey Jr. who continues to have a renaissance in supporting roles in little seen movies.
-
- Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 2:54 am
Although I live in the UK I have acquired the R1 version. This is described as 'Widescreen' on the box but played as fullscreen on my TV and when I watched a bit of it through a projector at work.
And yet one of the extras contains clips from the film that are widescreen.
So what happened?
None of the online reviews I checked mention this issue. And it seems as if the Widescreen edition is the only one available in the US.
I must admit to being a total novice about aspect ratios and other technical details but I'd appreciate it if anyone who owns the R1 disc could comment on this query.
And yet one of the extras contains clips from the film that are widescreen.
So what happened?
None of the online reviews I checked mention this issue. And it seems as if the Widescreen edition is the only one available in the US.
I must admit to being a total novice about aspect ratios and other technical details but I'd appreciate it if anyone who owns the R1 disc could comment on this query.
- lord_clyde
- Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:22 am
- Location: Ogden, UT
-
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 11:40 am
- Location: http://directcinema.blogspot.com
- Contact:
You are probably just watching it on an anamorphic display, in which case, the 16:9 enhanced, 1.85:1 widescreen aspect ratio would fill the entire space of your screen. Basically, throwing out all of the technical jargon, as a rule of thumb, any film that uses the ratios of 1.85:1 or 1.78:1, will fill the entire screen.
-
- Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 2:54 am
- hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
- Location: NYC
Re: A Scanner Darkly (Linklater, 2006)
I saw this again at MoMA last week. I haven't seen it since the year it opened, and I was surprised by how much more I like it now. Maybe I've grown more appreciative of Richard Linklater's filmmaking, but it seems like a marvelous example of his work and a wonderful marriage of his sensibility and Philip K. Dick's book. It's certainly the most moving adaptation I've seen of Philip K. Dick's work (and I say this as a fan of Blade Runner, one of my absolute favorites from the '80s). Again, age and experience probably plays a part - I don't think I had any actual contact with drug culture the first time I saw it, and this obviously deals with that from both a very personal and political perspective. Soderbergh's Traffic made bigger waves in the media because it dealt directly with U.S. policy, but Linklater's film leaves a much deeper impression in the way it tackles all aspects of drug culture and enforcement despite working within a speculative narrative. On top of that, Robert Downey, Jr. is highly entertaining - what a wonderful performance.