A Scanner Darkly
|
List Price: Our Price: $2.78 You Save: $17.19 (86%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $1.47 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of A Scanner Darkly
Movie Review: A Worthy Version of a Classic Story
Summary: 5 Stars
This is a movie you definitely want on DVD - because you'll want to watch it first with just the movie playing, and then after that with the audio soundtrack that includes director Richard Linklater, actor Keanu Reeves and most importantly the daughter of Philip K Dick. The insights that she provides into the movie and the storyline are priceless.
It's important to realize that Philip K Dick usually wrote about characters, not action sequences - and specifically, he wrote about those in society who did not "fit in" well. If you look through his stories, you'll find they often feature people who are misfits, who society overlooks or forgets. In A Scanner Darkly, the featured 'oddballs' are druggies hooked on Substance D - a drug that is never really described, but apparently causes paranoia and hallucinations.
The key here is to sit down with a glass of wine, a big bowl of popcorn and settle back for a character-driven story. This isn't a Rambo or Dirty Dozen story - it's about how people relate to each other, in many subtle ways. It's a study of interactions.
I really appreciate that this was done in a combination of real life acting and animation. It floors me that in modern times anyone might look down on this because it is a "cartoon". Is a Renoir less worthy than an Ansel Adams because a Renoir was done by hand? Animation isn't inherently kiddie. Hand drawn works can contain quite mature topics. In this case it is *ideally* suited to the story - because a main aspect of the tale is that the characters never quite know what is real and what is imagination. Are the bugs really there? Can he trust what he sees? All signs point to NO. The viewer is caught up in this same confused world. If this had been live action, then 'odd things' would have instantly stood out. But the point of a drug haze is that everything seems 'unreal' - and so odd things fit into that flow much more smoothly.
If you don't know druggies, rest assured that characters like this are quite average - and this story is in essence an autobiography of Philip K Dick's life in the 70s. He lived in a house just like this with his two brothers after his divorce. He lost his wife and two young girls. He was very paranoid that one of his house-mates was a narc, spying on their druggie activities. One of his friends did think bugs were crawling on him. At the end of the movie is Dick's actual ending to the story - a list of his friends who were damaged or slain by drugs. Included on this list are his ex-wife and himself.
So what you have in the movie are the druggies at turns being nice to each other, being very cruel to each other, mistrusting each other, and turning to each other for help. One of the druggies - Bob - is actually a narc cop code-named Fred. He's gone undercover to figure out who is supplying Substance D to the area. Unfortunately, he's gotten himself hooked during his undercover work. Even worse, part of what Substance D does is to destroy your brain - so he's developed in essence split personalities. The Bob-Druggie part forgets most of the time he IS a narc. The narc half of him, when he's in the police station, knows he's spying on this group of druggies but forgets that he is one of them. So when the narc is told to specifically spy on "Bob", he literally doesn't realize that this is him.
Here's where the movie - trying to stuff a dense book into under 2 hours - has some problems. If you haven't read the book, it's not clear at all that Narc-Fred forgets who he is when he goes undercover as Bob. It's a big twist in the book, but in the movie it seems clear to the watcher that it's the same person, and it's not made clear in the story that he's forgetting his "other half".
Other than that, the story is really pretty straightforward, plot-wise. The druggies are paranoid about the world around them and plug on with their lives. The cops are trying to figure out who the supplier is, so they bug the house and try to get that information. Like most Dick stories, there's a twist, although to be honest I thought it would be a much larger twist. Also, like most Dick stories, there's little female presence and the ending is only slightly hopeful. These aren't happy-go-lucky romances that he writes - they are dark warnings about where society is heading when it marginalizes those who don't fit in perfectly.
If you're confused about the movie, I definitely recommend reading the novel. That might be easier to grasp and give you more insight into the characters. Then go back and watch the movie again - taking it slow. Pay attention to the nuances of what they say, and how the characters relate. See how they feel society is treating them - and then take a look what society actually does with these people. Maybe they aren't quite so paranoid after all - maybe there is some resaon for how they feel.
Movie Review: One of the Most Fascinating Films of 2006
Summary: 5 Stars
"A Scanner Darkly" is, without a doubt, the most fascinating film I've seen in 2006. It is based on a novel by Philip K. Dick, the writer behind Minority Report. It wasn't until watching the film that I realized how little the previews reveal about it. The previews take advantage of its unique animation and big-name stars to sell the film, it tells very little about the story. When I started watching it, I expected a science-fiction film in the vein of Minority Report or Paycheck. Having said that, I'm going to tell you, bluntly, just what this film is. "A Scanner Darkly" is a drug movie. The only thing that separates it from other drug movies is the animation and the fact that the movie actually (sort of) has a plot. The film belongs in the same category as movies like "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" and "Spun." Not good, since the film is being put in the same category as movies like "Minority Report" and "The Matrix." Chances are; if you don't like movies like "Spun" than you won't like "A Scanner Darkly." The movie takes place in the "near future" where 20% of the nation is addicted to Substance D, a drug that produces hallucinations and split personalities. Keanu Reeves plays an Orange Country cop, working undercover, named Fred who is trying to take down Bob Arctor, a user/dealer of this drug. Problem is, Fred is Bob. His fellow officers aren't aware of this because undercover agents, when in the office, wear a special suit which scrambles their voice pattern and, most importantly, the way they look. Between speaking to his superiors and viewing hidden camera footage that is in HIS HOUSE, Fred returns to the house and becomes Bob. As Bob, he drops D with is roommates James Barris (Robert Downey Jr.) and Ernie Luckman (Woody Harrelson) at which point the men hallucinate and spew forth their half-baked conspiracy theories. The movie does have a plot, although it kind of appears in fragments. Some parts of the movie are, merely, scenes of Bob, Barris, and Ernie hallucinating and freaking out. Sometimes with Charles Freck (Rory Cochrane), who is under the impression that little green bugs are crawling all over his body. And then there's Donna Hawthorne (Winona Ryder, who looks hot even when animated), Bob's girlfriend and a cokehead, who may play a bigger part in what's going on than we're lead to believe. This movie got mixed reviews upon its release and I now see why. The critics expecting a sci-fi film found themselves disappointed. The critics that did give this a good review, most likely, saw the film with an open mind. It's biggest fans are going to be people who liked/loved the movies I mentioned above. The fact remains, however, that there's no other film like "A Scanner Darkly." The animation (which, I read, is a painstaking process that is created frame-by-frame) is a wonder to behold. I could not take my eyes off of the screen and I hope there are more movies with this animation in the future. The acting is really good and it seems like the actors were really having fun. Keanu Reeves seems more alive in this film than he does in many other films and Winona Ryder sparkles, while also showing more skin than she has in any other movie (although, I read, that her nudity was animated over her shirt). But it is Downey and Harrelson who steal the show. Their hilarious, over-the-top, campy, and (somewhat) realistic portrayals of the two drug addicts are absolutely hilarious. Richard Linklater (director of "Dazed & Confused") has a thought-provoking script and a steady hand in the directing category. The film shows true directorial brilliance. This is a movie that you're either going to love or hate. You'll either get it or you won't. I, however, think that it's one of the most interesting, fascinating, and fun to look at films of 2006.
GRADE: A-
Movie Review: so it aint a gimick after all.
Summary: 5 Stars
i remember seeing a trailer for this and was somewhat hesitant to see it in theaters (in no small part because of my distance from a theater that would show it), but this movie popped out on store shelves right around the time i was required to a solo assingment on a movie for my Cinema Class at college (which by its very nature means that it has to be an art movie, which also means that 98% of normal people would never bother seeing). picked up first as a rental and the day i turned in the paper i went back and bought it.
i take quite a bit of this movie to heart because my brother has and is going through a process to kick his addictiosn to various illegal drugs, and the fact that he now lives in the area the movie is shot in (Orange County, California).
it takes place about 7 years from now. Substance D is the new drug of choice for alot of people, and is the most destructive thing ever seen on this earth. 20% of all people are classified as addicts. Bob Arctor (played by Keanu Reeves) leads a double life, one is his regular job as an auto-mechanic and roomies with his other Substance friends, and his other is Undercover Narcotics Officer Fred, in which he must wear the Scramble suit, which projects flashes of thousands of different people around the person wearing so that thier identity is kept secret. Arctor is trying to find a major drug dealer in the OC area through his girlfriend, who also uses D and has a fear of physical contact.
at first i believed the Rotoscoping technique that was used on the movie was merely a gimmick and editing tool to get me in the theater (had there been a theater nearby that shown it, it woulda worked too). but once you start to see the movie its apparent why. one of the things that occurs to those who use and abuse Substance D is a disconnect between the hemispheres of the brain, which causes peole to see things different or not at all (in one scene the camera is on a black male doctor and his associate, than to arctor, it jumps back to where the two doctors were and the doctor is now female and the associate is different as well), which naturallly makes them question what is real or not. the rotoscoping technique does this as well, where in certain scenes and places (mostly in the background and more important scenes) the ammount of layering is coloration is increased to make it seem more realistic, and others its easily distinguishable. so you the viewer also have trouble distinguishing real from not-real. also the Scrable Suit naturaly requires rotoscoping just by the nature of how it works (common technology is nowhere close to that kind of skill had it been live action), but it also serves as a bit of a metaphor. the actors in this movie (and most movies) rely heavily on make-up and various post-production effects to "enchance" things. as BoB Arctor is hidden behind modern technology to hide thier true identity, so do the actors who are being rotoscoped, as well as several actors in movie-making as a whole. it also serves as a metaphor into how increasingly paranoid we as a people are becoming about who we let in.
Movie Review: No Kiddie Comic Book Sci-Fi
Summary: 5 Stars
No indie film from the past six months is a worthier rent than Richard Linklater's "A Scanner Darkly."
Based on Philip K. Dick's 1977 novel of the same name, this unlikely mix of sci-fi, political and existential elements has more twists to its plot than a bag of pretzels. Filmed in live action, it was painstakingly (500 hours of work per minute of film) traced over in animation to awesome results. Quietly released in July to less than 300 theaters nationwide, it deserves a second life on DVD.
While it is faithful to Dick's classic, some crucial changes are made, the most important being the alteration from a setting in 1994 to one in 2013 where Americans are monitored around the clock by their government, wear special suits to mask their identities, and are losing the War on Drugs. Much like today, the more high tech our lives become, the more freedom there is to be lost.
Bob Arctor, played by Keanu Reeves, is employed by the government to help eradicate the mercilessly addictive drug known simply as "D." However, his job requires he sample it, leading him to a double life that the drug keeps him from being fully aware of - narc by day, addict by night.
Life is no picnic for his chums, either. His friends Freck and Luckman, played by Rory Cochrane and Woody Harrelson respectively, are unrivaled in their paranoia, particularly Freck, who is so addicted he wakes up to the sensation of ravaging aphids all over his body and envisions his own assassination at the hands of the police.
He confides in Barris, played masterfully by Robert Downey Jr., whose scruples become so questionable that it underscores the helpless world these characters face. The always brilliant Winona Ryder plays Arctor's emotionally stunted girlfriend Donna who has more up her sleeve than meets the eye.
Reeves has never been an outstanding actor, still coasting on his pretty boy looks in his early forties. This does not matter. This not a character piece and it need not be. These are everyday people, particularly Arctor himself, the consummate family man until his life goes topsy turvy. The story is thus unfortunately true to life, as drug convictions happen routinely with big time traffickers scoring deals with prosecutors that end up severely punishing those lower on the totem pole instead. The 2013 world of "A Scanner Darkly" amplifies this truth to an extent that may well be just around the bend.
It is impossible to view the film and feel instantly tuned in to its capricious plot elements, but this does it no disservice.
This is no kiddie comic book sci-fi, and although it has touches of comedic and camp elements, it demands an open mind and an attentive viewing to be appreciated for its sheer relevance.
Movie Review: Brilliantly crafted, from start to finish --- A Must See!
Summary: 5 Stars
A Scanner Darkly is a brilliant film. Originally a Novel by Phillip K. Dick (Blade Runner, Total Recall, Minority Report), was adapted skillfully & results in a great movie experience -- especially due to the animation / painting over the original film.
I wont ruin the points of the movie -- I will say that the acting was superb by all, as was the script adaptation. It is not at all hard to follow, as some have said -- just don't leave for 5-10 min and leave it playing - pause it, it's really that simple.
I'll admit, when I 1st saw the Trailers, I thought "what the heck is that movie about, what the heck is that title suppose to mean, and why the heck would they animate live film - it's probably going to be a retarded attempt to cash in on new technology, while screaming - Hey, We're the 1st ones to do this form of media... the movie's terrible, but who cares, we're the 1st, so you have to see it!!" ---- BOY WAS I WRONG.
I didn't realize till after it left the theaters that it was a P.K.D. Novel, and figured, since the Producers weren't "screaming" "see it cause it's unique" -- they probably did it for a good reason (not just for show) & I should give it a chance.... and I'm here to tell you, you should too. It's NOT some Stoner movie, it's not even a "drug movie". It's a movie about what the "War On Drugs" could (and may) turn into, it's about who's right, and what's enough -- but miles away from what Minority Report was about... it's only set 7 years in the future... but is very relavent to the Political, and Societal climate of today.
Anyway - it's not often I take the time to gab about good movies (or music) -- mostly I write (and warn) against Garbage (of which there is much) -- so that should say a lot.... this is a very good movie; and I was Very skeptical even when buying it ---- but extremely glad I did. I will give 1 warning (since I've referenced his other works): This is NOT an action movie. It is a Dark Comedy / Thriller I guess is the best way to describe it. It's not something you'll want to watch over and over (like when you 1st got Total Recall or Minority Report; and other such movies) but definitely worth getting & watching periodically.
Anyone who says anything contrary to what I've said -- just has something against 1 or more of the actors, didn't pay attention to the film (or has ADD), or saw it expecting something totally different - and were just disappointed because of that... which is generally the case for about 1/2 the bad reviews most good (yet sometimes misunderstood) movies get.
Thanks, & enjoy the flick!