Slashdot Mirror
A Scanner Darkly Film Preview
Jason K writes "Hi, webmaster of PhilipKDick.com here. Thought that the Slashdot community might like to see this exclusive report that was just added to the official Philip K. Dick web site by his daughters about the 'A Scanner Darkly' film production. The film production of A Scanner Darkly is based on the classic PKD drug novel of the same name. It is directed by Richard Linklater (Slacker, Dazed and Confused, School of Rock) and stars Keanu Reeves, Winona Ryder, Robert Downey Jr. and Woody Harrelson. Linklater is using a more sophisticated version of the 'rotoscoping' animation technique that he debuted in 'Waking Life'. This is shaping up to be the most faithful adaptation of a Philip K. Dick novel or story to date." Waking Life was a little odd.
A drug novel adaptation... staring Keanu Reaves... directed by the same man who did Dazed and Confused...
Am I the only who thinks that this is overkill for the desired effect?
There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
Yes "Waking Life" was a little odd- but so is the novel "A scanner darkly". I really hope this movie will NOT look like the Matrix but instead a little weirder. I think i can count on Linklater in this regard.
and stars Keanu Reeves, Winona Ryder, Robert Downey Jr. and Woody Harrelson.
This is going to be the most untintelligible movie ever. No doubt. No question. Nobody's going to know what the hell is going on in the movie, especially not the cast.
Robert, I hope you don't take another stab at rehab. You'll just get disgruntled...
Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
I actually became more impressed with Blade Runner after reading Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep - because as much as I liked the latter, it's not terribly filmable as written. Roger Ebert's said a number of times that all a movies adapted from a book owes is to be a good movie; whether or not it's line-for-line identical is irrelevant.
"Why can't everyone just be straight with me?"
"Because we live in a bendy world, dear."
In that it was thoughtful and interesting and totally willing to have scenes as simple as an interesting person saying interesting things. Hardly the typical crapfest that slashdotters seem all too willing to gush over.
How can this not be good?
The huge movie, UBIK, is coming out next weekend. Hello? Directed by Sam Raimi? Starring Tobey Maguire? And what about the epic trilogy finale coming out next year directed by George Lucas? As the final in the VALIS trilogy, I just hope Lucas doesn't screw it up with all his digital effects. The last two have been amazing, but I'm not sure how PKD would've taken to all the effects Lucas is throwing in there.
It all started when Steven Spielberg launched his own career by filming The Man in the High Castle back in the early 80s. Of course, Ridley's Scott *strict* adherence to PKD's book for the movie, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep helped make PKD the ideal movie source.
PKD is so respected that no one in the film industry would even dare making a subpar movie. Haha - imagine if John Woo got a hold of one of his stories! Geez! I mean, we're running OUT of PKD stuff to make movies out of! You have to be bigtime to be able to film what's left of the "modern kafka" that hasn't already been filmed! Are you guys cra..
Oh, wait. Wait a minute. IMDB only shows a few crappy renditions of PKD movies! WTF!?! WTF is "BLADE RUNNER"?!?? What the hell kind of parallel universe am I in that doesn't make brilliant movies out of PKD writings!!?! And who are these men - CmdrTaco!?! Arresting me for saying too much!? Slashdot controls everything? I don't understand!?.////don't listen to the...
Winona Ryder, Robert Downey Jr. and Woody Harrelson
They actually agreed to be in a movie about drugs together? Hollywood never ceases to make me laugh. Hopefully this won't be as bad as a Tom Cruise movie.
Arrogance is Confidence which lacks integrity. -- me
A Scanner Darkly is an incredibly sad tale about drug addiction, but it is a fictional drug. Think Requiem for a Dream, but a little more subtle.
This is most likely going to be a great movie, but it will be hard to rationalize going to see such a film. The book was hard enough (emotionally) to handle. After all, I could only see Requiem for a Dream once, and that had me really low for a couple days.
Anyway, after the talk, I asked him about releasing it open source. He wasn't against it, but he wasn't interested in it, either. He mentioned that the open source development method 'worked somehow', but he just wasn't interested in becoming a project manager.
Now I see on the website they are planning some kind of release in June 2k6. Interesting!
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
Blade Runner (1982) based on "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" - A rather decent movie with not much to do with the book.
Total Recall (1990) based on "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale" - A fun movie vaguely based on the short story.
Drug-Taking and the Arts (1994) based on "A Scanner Darkly" - Alas I've not seen.
Screamers (1995) based on "Second Variety" - An enjoyable movie but nothing special.
Impostor (2002) based on short story of the same name (at last). Okay, enjoyable and starting to get near to the fiction...
Minority Report (2002) - Again, enjoyable but deviating from the book in several critical respects.
Paycheck (2003) - My favourite short story ruined by the "joe scientist" suddenly being some sort of stick wielding stunt biker.
When are Hollywood going to realise the appeal of PKD is that these are ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances?
Instead we keep getting movies aimed a dumb audience with a simple plot and an action hero.
Sigh.
[)amien
Think that is a good thing? The Minority Report and Total Recall books were ridiculously antiquated and would have made terrible movies if they hadn't been changed. In Minority Report punch cards were a major plot point.
And that travesty of one of the canons of science fiction, "I, Robot," does not count! Heh.
What about "Foundation," or the Dragonrider series, "Rama," Larry Niven, or Phillip Jose Farmer? So much rich variety is being ignored.
Fear and Loathing in Keanu and Woody's Excellant Adventure.
Congratulations for not realising that the first 'Lord of the Rings' movie _was_ a rotoscoped cartoon.
I wasn't familiar with all of PKD's work when I first read A Scanner Darkly (think I'd only read MITHC, Do Androids...) and was frankly amazed by it. It's what led me to the rest of his books. Dick was intimately familiar with drugs and refused to romanticize them. Somewhat oddly, his lacerating rationality gives ASD a large emotional heft. I doubt Partnership for a Drug-Free America will ever approve of it, but it's still a great anti-drug book (even if, like me, you believe drug use is not a "moral" issue).
I really, really hope that Philip Dick's family and the producers give this project the respect it deserves (the article suggests they might). This novel is in some ways very different from the rest of his work. For all the signature Dick themes present (layered realities, oppressive/unassailable authoritarian regime, pitch-black humor) this also reads as a painful, personal memoir. In his poignant but clear-eyed afterword, he lists friends who died or were otherwise affected by drug use. Dick himself called A Scanner Darkly his "masterpiece." It deserves more consideration than other movie translations of his novels have offered.
If this movie does well, I hope the PKD estate allows someone to do The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch.
That book was quite the head-trip, and with the right director would make an awesome film.
Once a guy stood all day shaking bugs from his hair. The doctor told him there were no bugs in his hair. After he had taken a shower for eight hours, standing under hot water hour after hour suffering the pain of the bugs, he got out and dried himself, and he still had bugs in his hair; in fact, he had bugs all over him. A month later he had bugs in his lungs.
The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
Don't worry if you're "deep enough". You're no doubt of above average intelligence, despite this being /. and all. Please excuse the folowing dissertation.
Probably, it's just that Dick doesn't float your boat. If we all liked tha same thing, what a boring world we'd have.
But I think you've hit on one of Dick's ironies. That people need a box to experience empathy. Remind you of anything?
Anyway, it's not so simple, where one can clear things up by saying whether Dick favored or disapproved Mercerism. In fact, this ambiguity is a major part of the book at the end. Is Mercerism a hoax? Or is it true, i.e., is there an underlying truth to Mercerism that will never be perceivable by the androids?
The love of animals is a central tenet of Mercerism. Yet, as happens in all religions, the expression becomes perverted. Animal ownership becomes a signifier of status, prestige, and even corporate power.
Also, I think that Dick was saying that the values behind Mercerism are central to being human, not whether or not it would be good for humanity.
Anyway, I think that Dick just isn't your cup of tea. Maybe you haven't really suffered, or maybe you've suffered, but haven't suffered enough. If this is the case, I hope you never have to, but if it happens, there are authors like PKD that are great to turn to.
PKD is definitely for the wounded and those that have been crushed. Most of his characters are damaged and flawed, and perhaps they are hard to like if you're not damaged and flawed. Mercer knows I'm plenty of both. I should start a blog or something. =)
Not all his novels are this deep, however. Some of his others, while dealing with interesting issues, are lighter and more fun.
Anyway, sorry if I was a dickhead, but, after all, I am a Dickhead.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Pardon! I've never seen it, but now that you reminded me . . .oh yeah. =)
You probably already know that Dick was huge in France before he really became popular in the U.S. I think this was because the French, especially the French intelectuals, really enjoyed the thrust of Dick. Well, whatever the reason, those French just really love Dick.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.