Slashdot Mirror


A Scanner Darkly Sneak-Peek

An anonymous reader writes "Some images for the upcoming film 'A Scanner Darkly' have been posted on aintitcool.com. Looks like it's going to look alot like one of Richard Linklater's previous films, Waking Life."

197 comments

  1. a-ha! by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Funny


    Taaaaaaake oooooon meeeeeee
    Take! On! Me!

    Taaaaaake meeeeeee ooooooon!

    Great! I'm gonna have song in my head all day now!

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  2. wtf? why, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate to ask, what am I missing here? What's the story, why is this something special?

    1. Re:wtf? why, what? by orangesquid · · Score: 4, Informative

      Philip K. Dick is a rather famous sci-fi author responsible for Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, upon which the film Bladerunner was based.

      While the plots in some of his books don't really come together neatly in the end, he does quite well at creating vivid imagery, fascinating characters, and imagination-sparking ideas.

      A Scanner Darkly and Do Androids Dream of Electrip Sheep? are two of his more famous, and some of his best, published works.

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
    2. Re:wtf? why, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      But it's still not 'news for nerds' which is why I come to this site. What does this movie have to do with Linux and Open Source?

    3. Re:wtf? why, what? by orangesquid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      *shrug* It doesn't have to.

      Most nerds like sci-fi... Most people don't complain when Douglas Adams, Isaac Asimov, and/or Arthur C. Clarke are mentioned in stories.

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
    4. Re:wtf? why, what? by sharp-bang · · Score: 1

      At one time, appreciation of science fiction was a significant component of nerdliness. There's certainly enough Star Wars in-jokery here to illustrate that on a daily basis. Anyway, Philip K. Dick is widely considered to have been one of the greatest science fiction authors of all time, although since he died in 1982, many Slashdot readers may be too young to know that.

      --
      #!
    5. Re:wtf? why, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Actually a lot of people DO complain, its just that they are ignored. What I want from this site is news for nerds, not news for moviegoers. I want to hear about genetic algorithms in the Linux kernel, that's news for nerds. This story is clearly simple advertising for a movie which a few slashdotters might be interested in.


      There are plenty of other websites available which have movie reviews etc. This site is for Open Source and Linux. Let's try and keep it that way! The Internet has precious few resources for nerds as it is, without this hollywoodization of one of the last 'old school' nerd websites.

    6. Re:wtf? why, what? by orangesquid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The movies are pretty much all under the "Movies" category. If you have a useraccount, you can simply choose to filter these out of the frontpage.

      You don't have to venture into any stories you don't want to read, either... that's the idea behind having the short little blurbs on the front page. If something doesn't interest you, just keep scrolling :)

      I'm not trying to sound like a smart-aleck, but, I agree with the slashdot admins in that I think there should be a lot of different things here, not just science, math, and computer technology articles.

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
    7. Re:wtf? why, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody is stopping you from starting a /. clone site that only focusses on "worthy" news - in fact, there are many such tech-only oriented sites out there.

      Slashdot has always been about a mix of things. If you don't like it, then get an account and learn to filter.

    8. Re:wtf? why, what? by Squidlor · · Score: 1

      A new Phillip K. Dick movie is news for nerds.

      In fact, I can't think of a single group of people who would be anymore interested in this news. If you read through the comments at the site, you'll see that the average AICN mainstream film whore is NOT interested in this film.

      I hope they take a stab at Ubik next....

    9. Re:wtf? why, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The man's tag line is :

      America's finest emotionally disturbed science fiction author.

    10. Re:wtf? why, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There are plenty of other websites available which have movie reviews etc. This site is for Open Source and Linux.

      There are plenty of other websites available for Open Source and Linux. Slashdot is not exclusively about Open Source, and it never has been. If you're expecting it to be, you're on the wrong site.

    11. Re:wtf? why, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      why is this something special?

      Because hollywood has collective amnesia (notice all the remakes in the last decade?) and has just (re)discovered rotoscoping for animation. Big whoop. At least Philip K Dick, the author of the story that the film will hopefully be based on, writes interesting stories so if the director doesn't fuck it up it stands to be pretty interesting which is more than I can say for the borefest that was Waking Life.

    12. Re:wtf? why, what? by willwarner · · Score: 1

      Dick also wrote Minority Report, made into the recent movie Minority Report. His protagonists are usually cops. Brilliant insane technologists create new technologies like drugs and weapons, and the poor cops, like most people, are left to try and deal with it as best they can.

      Blade Runner is the best movie I've ever seen, while Minority Report is just very good. Guess which one had flashier special effects?

    13. Re:wtf? why, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Total Recall" was also based on a PKD story, "we can remember it for you wholesale", and the movie "Paycheck" was also based on his work. Paycheck was probably the least impressive of those four movies...

    14. Re:wtf? why, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you think that people are serious about this "This is not slash-dot worthy material" meme which pops up in the majority of articles, then congratulations. YHBT. YHL. HAND.

    15. Re:wtf? why, what? by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      His protagonists are usually cops. Are you sure about that? I've read all of his novels, most of his short stories, and only recall a small percentage of his protagonists being law enforcement. Mostly I just recall his characters as being more along the lines of Joe Everyman or even people society would call just plain losers. Then again, aside from a recent reread of Valis, it's been a couple years since I've gone through any of his work again.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    16. Re:wtf? why, what? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Another favorite of mine is "Flow My Tears the Policeman Said", in which the protagonist is a uber-famous celebrity, a Somebody with a capital S, who wakes up in a flop house one morning to discover that he is quite literally a nobody. He has no identification papers and no one recognizes him.

      One of the major characters is a Chief of Police.

      One of the interesting things about Dick's work that might be considered hackery, yet transcends hackery, is his recycling of various elements. The reason it is transcendant is because the plots themselves are not the most important. The subtext is.

      This is why Ridley Scott could thematically switch the roles of Decker and the androids. In DADoES, it is the androids that are void of empathy. In Bladerunner, it is Decker that is more inhuman and unfeeling than the androids. Yet Scott is able to render a film that is true to the spirit of PKD, that makes us question what it is to be human.

      Heh, the sermon is now over. What do I know? I'm covered in aphids.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    17. Re:wtf? why, what? by wavedeform · · Score: 1

      There's a Ubik screenplay that PKD wrote. I don't think it's as good as the book, but it's better than you might think.

  3. I like it...! by soliptic · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I had no idea this movie was taking this approach, I thought it was going to be standard live action.

    I've got to say, I think this could really work. Being "non-realistic" in the first place adds scope for elegantly coping with the multiple (and extremely blurred) levels of reality in the book (which, btw, is my favourite from all the Dick I have read so far).

    1. Re:I like it...! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know - I've never seen Waking Life, but I'm not really into animation as a film style... I like the Animatrix stories, but I couldn't see a full-length movie of them; I enjoyed the segment in Kill Bill that was anime, but it only worked because it was a contrast.

      I have a feeling this might be a critical success, but not a popular one :)

      "Plebs" like me are unlikely to watch it at the box office. (Even though I'm a big PKD fan).

    2. Re:I like it...! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (which, btw, is my favourite from all the Dick I have read so far)

      I'm terribly tempted to quote you out of context..

    3. Re:I like it...! by sakusha · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, I thought this was going to be regular live action too. And this book deserves to be a regular film. All the action is plain old reality, is are hardly any SF geekery except the "scramble suit" to disguise someone's identity. This film SHOULD be a live action film. That's one of the main points of this film, that it happens in a reality so close to ours, not some unimaginably unrealistic SF world. This film is about the 1970s, not the 2070s.

    4. Re:I like it...! by drix · · Score: 1

      The book is set in 1994, IIRC.

      --

      I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
    5. Re:I like it...! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the topics and feel of the book are right out of the '70s drug scene. ... or so I have heard ;)~

    6. Re:I like it...! by krymsin01 · · Score: 1

      Well, if you read PKD's introduction to the book, he says point blank that it's based on the 60s/70s acid burn out culture.

      --
      stuff
    7. Re:I like it...! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not full out animation. It's a trippy technique called rotoscope animation. Basically the film is shot live action, then each frame is projected onto a screen which artists then paint over. Becomes much easier to get absorbed into rotoscope than standard animation, and then when they pull off those little effects that can only be done in animation it has a much greater impact.

      The biggest thing about rotoscope that I've noticed allows for suspension of disbelief is motion... any motion looks far more natural than any artist could capture on their own, because there is real motion in front of the lens. That and mouth movements/facial expressions/speech really seem to blend together a lot better than in traditional animation.

      Should every movie be shot in this style? No. However a story with such surreal undertones (hell, overtones and flat out tones) as A Scanner Darkly could benefit from this technique if it's not layed on too thick. This treatment could feasibly work well for such works as Naked Lunch, the Illuminatus series and The Invisibles. Most of Neil Stephenson's work could also benefit from rotoscope, with a possible exception of Zodiac.

    8. Re:I like it...! by precogpunk · · Score: 1

      I didn't think live action (from most directors) wouldnt do the film justice either. This is the only film I'm looking forward seeing that I can currently think of. I do wonder what Terry Gilliam would've done with a project considering that he also wanted to make the film. While the PKD movies I've watched have all been entertaining they also lack what his novels contain; ideas that lead the reader to question the very fabric of reality. Much of Blade Runner was lost in translation to the big screen and the other successful PKD films have all been from short stories. From what I saw in Walking Life gives me the confidence that they can make this movie -- hell they even had a PKD reference in that film. Unfortunately, with Keanu Reeves in the lead who knows.

    9. Re:I like it...! by jsebrech · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, with Keanu Reeves in the lead who knows.

      Well, his role requires constantly acting high, so I don't think it'll be that much of a problem.

    10. Re:I like it...! by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      Animators have been using rotoscoping to get motion correct since Disney championed the technique decades ago. The problem is that it's not cheap or fast, so it's only used for "serious" works and only in those areas where natural motion is critical.

      The digital version of this is to build wireframe models and then use live humans with sensors to manipulate the models naturally. My understanding is that this is becoming very common, especially for video games.

      Personally I'm not as excited about an animated version of this story as I would be about a photo-realistic version. As an animated film it now has to compete against all of the decent anime out there that has similar themes or subject matter ("Serial Experiments Lain" comes to mind). If they can do "I, Robot" as well as they did and have it be photo-realistic (not talking story, just presentation), then they ought to be able to do the same here.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    11. Re:I like it...! by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Maybe youjust need more Dick

    12. Re:I like it...! by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Maybe they'll re-title it "Bob Arctor's Excellent Adventure".

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  4. Re:Looks Good..... by I+r+CommanderCool · · Score: 1

    /me doesnt look foward to 2005 movie going.

  5. Love the style by CypherXero · · Score: 1

    I love this style. I'm really glad to see a few select individuals in Hollywood, that are trying to break away from the cliche of most Hollywood crap. Movies like A Scanner Darkly and Sin City are examples of this.

  6. This style vs. Miyazaki by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I gotta tell you, this more "realistic" style of cartooning is much more interesting than the anime style of Miyazaki. For one, the 3 dimensional depth aspect is added through the use of very well thought out shading, so the characters seem more alive than most other cartoons.

    With the exception of Grave of the Fireflies (Hotaru no Haka), which succeeded because of the power of the story more than anything else, Miyazaki's work pales in comparison to the screenshots shown here.

    1. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by dq5+studios · · Score: 2, Informative

      You do realise "this more 'realistic' style" is just advanced rotoscoping? They film it like a normal movie then just animate on top of that. That is why it looks like there is great depth, because there actually is depth.

    2. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fyi: Grave of the Fireflies (imdb)was NOT by Miyazaki, though it was released by Studio Ghibli.

    3. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by pla · · Score: 1

      I gotta tell you, this more "realistic" style of cartooning

      "Realistic"???

      Did you actally watch "Waking Life"? The people's limbs randomly detach from their bodies and float a few inches away!

      And not durring the deliberalte surreal scenes!


      Give me huge eyes, insane hair-colors, and art that doesn't give me a seizure - I'd watch a Miyazaki rendition of "Days of our lives" before another "Waking Life" style movie!

    4. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a fucking troll. Go away.

    5. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by McDrewbie · · Score: 1

      "I gotta tell you, this more "realistic" style of cartooning is much more interesting than the anime style of Miyazaki. For one, the 3 dimensional depth aspect is added through the use of very well thought out shading, so the characters seem more alive than most other cartoons. With the exception of Grave of the Fireflies (Hotaru no Haka), which succeeded because of the power of the story more than anything else, Miyazaki's work pales in comparison to the screenshots shown here." Translation: This doesn't look as cartoony so my manhood won't be harmed if I like it. It's also why I play x-box and not gamecube. How 3 screenshots can trump the whole filmography of Miyazaki just proves this poster has no idea what he speaks of.

    6. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      It seems you don't realize that these images are rotoscoped, which means that they are drawings traced over live action footage.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    7. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 2, Insightful

      this isn't a more realistic style of cartooning, this is rotoscoping, and as such can't even be considered animation. It's a more tedious process of color correction. If you apply a brush stroke photoshop filter to a photograph, it isn't called a painting, so doing the same to a live action segment (even if it's manually traced over instead of completely automated) can't be considered animation.

      --
      Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
    8. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you'd like to define "art" for us as well, seeing as you've seen fit to define "animation".

    9. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excellent troll! You had me there for a while.

    10. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by krymsin01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wait...

      Just because the source for the work happens to be series of photographs instead of a series of sense impressions in some artists mind means that it's not animation?

      Please, that's just the fanboy mentality that calls pen & inkers "tracers." It's demeaning to the work involved in the process. In pen & ink, the artist takes a base drawing and adds furthur dimension and artistic merit by applying his or her own style.

      That's exactly what they animators (and yes, rotoscoping IS animation) are doing here, and you are doing them a diservice by belittling their work.

      If you want to attack this film, there are plenty of other avenues to go down.

      --
      stuff
    11. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by popo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Scanner Darkly isn't "animation" at all. Its a misnomer. Scanner Darkly is rotoscoped -- meaning that the scenes *are* actually filmed with a traditional camera. Then in post production, the individual frames are traced (or image-filtered) in order make the film look like hand-drawn animation.

      Rotoscoping used to be very time consuming, but now most of the rotoscoping is achieved through PC based image filters (like photoshop filters). (Here's the wiki for more info on Rotoscoping.)

      For you to compare "This style", ie: ("Rotoscoping") with the unbelievable amount of work that goes in to frame by frame hand drawn cel animation is like comparing a photocopy to a mosaic. One takes almost no work, and the other takes an enormous amount.

      --
      ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    12. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      I think the parent's line of thought is that to call something "animated" kind of implies that it wasn't animate to start with, and was made so. Since the starting material here is already animate, parent holds that it's not 'animated' in the sense that a movie constructed from a bunch of paper and some crayons (or a bunch of initially unrelated draw functions on a computer) is animated.

      If we're going to arbitrarily divide all two-dimensional entertainment into groups, it seems as good a place to put the line as any.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    13. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this more "realistic" style of cartooning is much more interestin

      If you want realism and all the limitations that go with it, choose film. But give me unrealistic animation any day, because then the writers can throw off a few shackles and write something interesting. Granted, it's not a guarantee of a good writing, but unrealistic animations have opened my mind to more crazy possibilities than film or animations that try to be realistic like film.

    14. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As many people have pointed out, this is rotoscoping. It has been around for years. And here's a clue: it doesn't work. Something about rotoscoping just doesn't work in general. Ask yourself how many rotoscoped films are considered to be classics. Remember the 1978 LOTR? A lot of the animation in that movie was rotoscoped. And you know what? It sucked. It's probably considered a cult classic. But that's just another way of saying, "a movie that generally sucks but I like it anyway."
      (Well, most of the time.)

    15. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your MOTHER'S a tracer!

    16. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Except rotoscoping has been part of the animation tool chest for years, going back to Disney's Cinderella (1950), Fantasia (1940) and earlier. So to say that roto is not animation is to exhibit extreme ignorance of animation as an art form.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    17. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Thanks for clearing that up. And all this time I thought that Cinderella (1950) and Fantasia (1940) were classics of animation.

      I'm glad we have scholars of animation like you around to dispel these myths and reveal Disney for the hoax he was.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    18. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by felix+rayman · · Score: 1

      Cinderella and Fantasia were classics of animation in precisely the way that "Chipmunk Punk" was a classic of the Punk/No Wave movement.

    19. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Another genius chimes in. Thanks for joining our discussion Professor rayman. Would you care to elaborate on your seemingly nonsensical comparison? I'm sure that with a mind as subtle as yours you can explain how a derivative novelty product that came after punk was dead (or at least after the fact of punk; one can argue endlessly about actual dates*) equates with pioneering work.

      I'm not an expert in animation by any means, but I do know enough to know when I read the spoutings of the ignorant.

      *many point to 1978, the year the Sex Pistols came to the New York, as the termination of Punk, while others place the year as late as 1982, when the O.C. Nazi movement effectively throttled the last remnants in Los Angeles.

      Oh, wait. You used the term "Punk/No Wave", which indicates you're more interested in "Stye". Nevermind. Go back to listening to your 80's nostalgia rock and watching your John Hughes movies.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    20. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Miyazaki's work pales in comparison to the screenshots shown here.

      Dude, if we followed your reasoning screenshots of Longhorn would probe it's a nice product (rolls eyes).

    21. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Anyway, flaming aside, I took the time to look up rotoscoping on wikipedia, and found that roto was first used by Max Fleischer, circa 1914.

      The article makes no mention of either Cinderella or Fantasia, instead pointing to Disney's use of roto in Snow White, (1937). So it's quite possible that I was completely wrong about the use of roto in MY ALL TIME FAVORITE MOVIES, Cinderella and Fantasia. =) (That was my way of pwntoring myself as amends.)

      Anyway, my point still stands, even if my examples were off a bit. Roto has been an animation tool from very early on.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    22. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Altima(BoB) · · Score: 1

      While I agree with you 100% that rotoscoping sucks and cannot be called "Animation," there is one classic animated film that used it a lot: Snow White. All of the human characters were rotoscoped and it's plain to see that the quality of their movement is sub-par compared to the drawn-from-scratch dwarf characters, which is why Disney himself abandoned the technique right afterwards. Of course he realized it wasn't working while the film was being made, so his animators actually spent a lot of time correcting the rotoscoping to make it fit more with the background (Rotoscoped characters tend to look like they're floating) so it's not as obvious as LOTR.

      --
      Yup...
    23. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -"Then in post production, the individual frames are traced"-

      "Your mother was a tracer!"

    24. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyway, my point still stands, even if my examples were off a bit. Roto has been an animation tool from very early on.

      And it sucked compared to *true* animation, that is, animating from scratch, without drawing over real image the whole time.

      Why do you think rotoscoping was used in Snow White but not the later works by Walt Disney? Or why everytime you watch LOTR you feel that lack of synchronization between characters and background in action scenes?

      Not only animators like Miyazaki use more expensive methods, but they get better and more imaginative results. Try forced perspective (example: ashitaka's cursed hand grabbing the sword in front on Lady Eboshi - Princess Mononoke) with rotoscoping: you can't, since you can't place a camera like that in real life.

    25. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by May+Kasahara · · Score: 1
      Yep yep ^_^

      One thing to keep in mind is that although rotoscoping wasn't used in any of the Disney features after Snow White, the animators would occasionally use live-action reference films (I know such films were shot for Cinderella, 101 Dalmatians, and Sleeping Beauty, among others).

    26. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by May+Kasahara · · Score: 1
      You're right in that rotoscoping is an animation technique, but it's also one of the most boring ones out there (I point to the late-70s Bakshi films as evidence).

      The most effective use of this technique that I've ever seen (in a feature film) is in An American Tale, where the humans were rotoscoped (perhaps to distance them from the fully-animated mice, cats, and birds). Unfortunately, not too many know how to really take advantage of this technique, and end up overdoing it.

    27. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by mink · · Score: 1

      So what everyone is saying is the people doing this are just a bunch of tracers?

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
    28. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by mink · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember some people saying the jam sessions scene in Whispers of the Heart may have been rotoscoped (for the details of the players).
      I dont think it hase been published in NA yet for us to get english credits to see. If you can check it out.
      Also Heavy Metal (first one) made a lot of use of Rotoscope, I think in that context the best examples were the ending bit when the warrior enters the bar.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
    29. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by lawpoop · · Score: 1
      Well, I wouldn't say that exactly. Even if you're strictly 'tracing', there is still a lot of artistic judgement as to where exactly to put the line, what color to use, whether to have a line or a fade, how much to change between each frame etc.

      Check out Waking Life. Different artists did each different section of the movie. There is considerable differences in styles, and for a lot of the movie artists took a lot of leeway in adding animation to the filmography.

      In short, no, it's not a bunch of tracers.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    30. Re:This style vs. Miyazaki by mink · · Score: 1

      Sorry, was making a bad Chasing Amy joke. There have been some well done uses of rotoscope and some less well executed.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  7. Re:Why do we care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Slashdot gone to the dogs now. I say, retreat to hurd-dev@gnu.org

  8. I'd just like to say... by los+furtive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I want to see a great movie, not a great special effect.

    --

    I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.

    1. Re:I'd just like to say... by MikeXpop · · Score: 1

      Seen "Waking Life"?

      Waking Life uses the same effect as this does. It's a fantastic movie, and it uses this style of animation as a tool in its storytelling.

      Go rent it/add to your netflix list. You'll thank me.

      --
      Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
    2. Re:I'd just like to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      for fucks sake read the book. its a great story

    3. Re:I'd just like to say... by SECProto · · Score: 0

      Waking Life was a brilliant movie. The visuals just helped to add to that.
      Anyways, excellent recommendation. I say they should too.

    4. Re:I'd just like to say... by felix+rayman · · Score: 1

      Why not read a great novel instead. Like say, oh, I don't know...A Scanner Darkly?

    5. Re:I'd just like to say... by zoeblade · · Score: 1

      I want to see a great movie, not a great special effect.

      If it's anything like the original book, you won't be disappointed.

    6. Re:I'd just like to say... by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      I want to see a great movie, not a great special effect.

      It's based on a book, so I figure they've got a story that holds together to start with.

      But sometimes, I go just to see special effects. Sometimes.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    7. Re:I'd just like to say... by mikewhittaker · · Score: 1

      Surely you go to see a good story, not just good visuals ?

  9. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "firmly left-wing" what does that have to do with nerds?

  10. Re:Looks Good..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    looks GREAT. cant wait to see another PKD book come to the big screen, especially in this graphic-novel-esque style

  11. What the heck, I'll feed the trolls..... by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Either you lack imagination or you're just lazy. Not trolling btw, just stickin' up for Miyazaki and for unrealistic animation in general. I've never once understood why people would go to the movies to see reality, or why they'd complain when they don't. Then again, I'm a boy, and I watch my niece play pretend that she's a mom/teenager all day and I don't understand that.

    Anyway, back on topic, what makes Miyazaki great is that it isn't real, it's better than real. When you're being real, you're limited by what's believable. When you don't bother with reality, you're only limited by consistency (i.e. stuff shouldn't come out of nowhere, and it doesn't in a Miyazaki film). It's easier, and more fun, to suspend disbelief when reality isn't smacking you in the face every couple of minutes....

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:What the heck, I'll feed the trolls..... by Prune · · Score: 1
      Gotta love your username... Radiant Silvergun is one of the best games ever!

      Yeah, you moderating bastards, mod me off-topic, see if I care!

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
  12. My Printer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The sequel, planned for next year, is titled "And My Printer Fading"

  13. You should add... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    IMHO.

    Miyazaki's films are works of art. This film is not what I would call a work of art, it is more just a realistic cel shaded movie.

    Personally I prefer the works of art because they provide such a feast for the eyes. If you really pay attention to Miyazaki's works (especially Spirited Away) you will see so much detail in many of the scenes that simply aren't captured in any other films.

  14. retro 70s sci-fi by Bootle · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I like the animation style, but animation seems to be a bit strong of a word. The technique, developed by a guy from MIT, strikes me as a cross between rotoscoping and key-frame animation. The actors are filmed and then painted over. So they have a complete reference for the shadows, etc. It's tracing, not true animation. I always pictured A Scanner Darkly the movie as looking very much like Cheech and Chong with bits of neat sci-fi tech. The book oozes its 70s setting with the cars and the guy's house and stuff. Also, the book starts off very funny, like C&C, and starts to tumble down from there. If I was filming it (thank god I'm not), Up in Smoke would have been my main visual inspiration!

    1. Re:retro 70s sci-fi by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Bob Arctor: Open up, man, it's me, Bob.
      Charles Freck: Bob's not here, man.

      If I was filming it (thank god I'm not), Up in Smoke would have been my main visual inspiration!

      Actually, I think I know what you mean. It's the blasted smog-filtered light, the haze that blankets Los Angeles in the summer, blasting off the tops of cars and the rear windows of the cars all around you as your piece-of-shit car crawls a yard at a time on the 5 past the old Firestone Tire Factory with it's images of Assyrian warriors baking in the heat under a sky only the most charitable would ever call blue. You no longer smell your perspiration dripping down from your armpits because the exhaust fumes have been filling your nose and making you giddy since you passed USC/County General Hospital. The fumes make your eyes sting and water, but all you can think about is that hit of slow death that awaits you at a non-descript pad on the outskirts of Buena Park.

      Oh, wait. That's from the script that William Gibson wrote for Cheech and Chong. Too bad it never made it out of development. =)

      But what do I know? I'm covered in aphids.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  15. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    Well, its a well known fact that most nerds are left-of-center in their politics. RMS Aka Richard Stallman is a well known communist who beleives that everything should be free. Linus (the developer of Linux) comes from Sweden, a Socialist country with free medical care and very high taxes. Theo De Raadt the original brains behind BSD also seems pretty left wing to me.


    I think there is something about the logical brains posessed by nerds that makes them realise what other less intelligent people cannot see, which is that although Capitalism is great for some, it is not the most efficient way to maximise the average person's happiness.


    So as I have shown, left-wing and nerd are almost synonymous.
    Of course you will get the odd right-wing loony, >coughcough, but on the whole, intelligence (in the computer science / nerd domain) seems highly correlated with left wing/compassionate political views.

  16. What kind is that? by mboverload · · Score: 1

    I have never seen that style used in a video before. I'm assuming its drawn or do that use an ultra-special post-processor?

    1. Re:What kind is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have never seen this effect before, I strongly suggest that you rent "Waking Life". Although Waking Life uses the same technique, it is much more abstract in it's implementation. Beyond that, the movie is SUPER PERFUNDO!

    2. Re:What kind is that? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      If you haven't pieced it together from the various posts, Linkletter uses some custom rotoscoping software created by a programmer in Austin, Tx. It was first used on a full length feature in Waking Life, Linkletter's off-beat (or beat off, according to some) and idiosyncratic meditation on the nature of reality (nobody can accuse Linkletter of being unambitious!).

      I'm not sure what capture medium was used to collect the source footage for "Scanner Darkly", but they used consumer grade DV cameras for "Waking Life".

      Part of the overall style of "Waking Life" was the various styles that each artist used to interpret the the scene he or she was working on. Each artist was given a good deal of license. This certainly worked well with the non conventional structure of the movie, which loosely followed that of Linkletter's first feature, Slacker.

      Apparently, "Scanner Darkly" will have a more consistent style through out, as it's structure will probably adhere more closely to what we normally consider narrative.

      I think Linkletter is using this technique mostly because a straight live action technique risks turning the material into just another cheesy sci-fi flic (cf Total Recall, Paycheck, and Minority Report, etc. Also, the special effects will be a lot cheaper. =)

      But what do I know? I'm covered in aphids.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  17. Hah by kaedemichi255 · · Score: 1

    When I first read the title, I thought it was for a next generation of scanners...single quotes (ie. a 'scanner darkly' sneak-peak) would've done the trick.

  18. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    No, I think it's much simpler than that. Nerds simply have more compassion than the run-of-the-mill right-winger with their, "fuck you Jack, I got mine" attitude.

  19. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Squidlor · · Score: 1

    You could make a comparable specious argument that all nerds are sci-fi fans.

    If you don't think this is news for you, then please move onto the next Arch discussion.

  20. Re:Let the suck-fest begin. by sharp-bang · · Score: 1

    I am a huge fan of Philip K. Dick's work, and the thought of Hollywood getting its mitts on any of his major works again would normally fill me with trepidation.

    But, oddly enough, I have a good feeling about this one, just as I also had a good feeling about Peter Jackson's LOTR trilogy. I thought Jackson et al worked very hard to capture a look and feel that would correspond with the private imagery of the majority of LOTR readers, and while they compromised a few major story elements, the critical and market response shows that they largely succeeded.

    The key to A Scanner Darkly, which Dick renders with Dostoyevskian brilliance, is the onset of psychosis in its principal characters due to drug abuse and addiction. As Dick himself has pointed out, the dreamlike dialog throughout the book absolutely nails the eroding states of mind of these lost souls just as it happened to a lot of his own contemporaries in the sixties and seventies, and this dialog is in turn absolutely central to the book - so much of the narrative is taken up with these burnouts freaking each other out for no apparent reason, talking about nothing into the wee hours, etc. etc., just as they do in Waking Life. So my take on this movie is that may be one of the few times that Linklater's admittedly annoying animation technique and directorial style may actually be the most appropriate way to render Dick's vision onscreen. This could actually be pretty cool.

    Now the cast, that's something else again. Woody Harrelson? Keanu Reeves? I dunno...

    --
    #!
  21. Waking Life + PKD=WOW by bigBlackSabbath · · Score: 1
    This book is amazing - absolutely one of PKD's best. It has a very creepy feel to it. The issues of identity, self, and addiction are brilliantly explored. Linklater hit a major homerun with Waking Life also explores the issues of self and identity brilliantly, using its unique rotoscoped look very effectively to enhance its exploration of these issues, making them in many ways more tangible than a simpler style of animation or a live action film could.

    This story using this technique, with Linklater at the helm is BOUND to be amazing. It sounds like peanut butter and chocolate to me....

    To top it off, I thought I read that Steven Soderberg is producing this film. While his name is attached to a lot of crappy films, he also made Schizopolis which has to be one of the greatest films ever made (also dealing with issues of self and identity). If you haven't seen it, see it - you're only hurting yourself if you don't....

    1. Re:Waking Life + PKD=WOW by Squidlor · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I've always considered this to be one of Dick's most personal books, because it deals with the paranoia and schizophrenia associated with drug use. (Dick was a methamphetamine addict.)

      Clooney and Soderbergh are producing this film, and they do have support from the PKD estate.

  22. Missing space ... by magefile · · Score: 1

    Writing "alot" makes you look "alittle" retarded, don't you think, timothy?

    1. Re:Missing space ... by Legion303 · · Score: 1

      "Almostas" retarded as someone who doesn't understand how quotation marks work.

    2. Re:Missing space ... by magefile · · Score: 1

      I know how they work ... but I'm not getting paid to post here.

    3. Re:Missing space ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the editors could, you know, "edit" the submissions for correctness once in a while?

    4. Re:Missing space ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bitching about it makes you look like you got a 12" cock up your ass.

  23. Re:wtf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You care enough to post.

    It's also interesting that you think you have so much authority you can just redefine words, Dubya.

  24. Re:Let the suck-fest begin. by ryl00 · · Score: 1

    Yeah... but Winona Ryder... reason enough to go see this one for me. Who cares if she's a shoplifter? :)

  25. Re:Let the suck-fest begin. by sharp-bang · · Score: 1

    Heh, in the book, her character was a shoplifter too.

    --
    #!
  26. Re:Let the suck-fest begin. by PurpleFloyd · · Score: 4, Informative
    A note to those who haven't read the book: spoilers present.

    While the erosion of the mind is a main theme in A Scanner Darkly, it is not the only theme presented. In fact, the psychological split between addict and police officer is arguably more important to the book.

    Dick has stated that in A Scanner Darkly, he wanted to investigate the mind of an undercover agent - one who works toward one set of goals in one persona, then works to undermine those goals as another persona. While Substance D (the drug in the book, for those who don't know) exacerbates the problem and creates two independent entities from one mind, it is arguable that anyone trying to work undercover must segregate their mind in the same fashion. While the theme of descent into madness is certainly a large part of A Scanner Darkly, as well as many of Dick's other works, it is not the only theme.

    I would imagine that it would be extremely difficult to adapt the theme of a split personality to film. While the artists could certainly provide differing character traits to each half of the split personality, it seems that it would be difficult to maintain the cognitive dissonance presented towards the end of the book, in which the two halves seem like completely different characters. It would seem that some innovative cinematography would have to come into play here; it would take a truly talented team of artists to accomplish this. I can only hope that they're up to the task.

    --

    That's it. I'm no longer part of Team Sanity.
  27. Great by TrozPoit · · Score: 0

    So someone applied a Photoshop filter to an entire film? (yes I'm kidding)

  28. Rotoshop - June 2006 by lawpoop · · Score: 3, Informative
    This snippets were rotoscoped in a program typically dupped Rotoshop ( a combination of rotoscope and photoshop ) by Bob Sabiston at Flat Black Films. You can find other examples of this type of animation. I had the pleasure of hearing him speak at the Wexner Center in Columbus, Ohio in 2001, IIRC. He's a programmer, and his preferred platform is the Mac.

    During the talk, people asked when he was going to release the program. He basic answer was he didn't want to become involed in anything that would take him away from programming -- starting a business, licensing, etc. I asked him about releasing it open source, and he said something to the effect of "I know it works, I'm just not sure how".

    In any case, I just checked on the studio's website, and it appears that the program will be released in June, 2006. You can put yourself on an email list to be notified of its release.

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
    1. Re:Rotoshop - June 2006 by sxtxixtxcxh · · Score: 1
      surfing through that site, i found this... a short animation. i haven't seen a waking life.. so i had no idea how the animation looks...

      the rotoshopping looks pretty sweet. i could actually see myself getting drawn into it more than if it were an unstylized film. kinda hypnotic.

      --
      for a minute there, i lost myself...
  29. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +1 Troll. You almost got me there, both times.

    (It was the bit about Theo being "the original brains behind BSD" that gave it away.)

  30. Read Charlie Kaufman's adaptation... by mattyohe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    http://www.beingcharliekaufman.com/scanner.pdf

    I would have prefered to see this one.

    --
    - what is the definition of simultanagnosia?! I've been meaning to look it up!
    1. Re:Read Charlie Kaufman's adaptation... by jdowland · · Score: 1

      On the face of it I prefer Kaufman's previous work to Linklater's; but I'd still have to read both scripts before I could make a judgement.

    2. Re:Read Charlie Kaufman's adaptation... by FiloEleven · · Score: 1

      Kaufman's screenplay does look good. However, without actually reading this screenplay, i think a comparison is unfair at this point. Also keep in mind that Linklater is very committed to staying true to the book, which is a real first in PKD film adaptations.

      I'm a bit more upset about the casting choices than the screenplay (wynona rider as donna? no. and neo as arctor? wtf?) but I'm hoping that I will be pleasantly surprised.

    3. Re:Read Charlie Kaufman's adaptation... by Concern · · Score: 1

      Oh my god, they had a Kaufman script and they passed on it?

      How bizarre.

      --
      Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
  31. missing Dick's point about the drug war? by willwarner · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The protagonist is a drug dealer and a narcotics agent. The IMDB summary implies this is only because he uses drugs that split his personality. The much more interesting truth, which shone through Dick's novel, is that people do switch sides all the time! Captured drug dealers really are offered immunity from punishment if they'll be DEA double-agents. And agents who realize the money to be made, and their privileged position, really do succumb to temptation and start dealing drugs. More generally, both cartels and the DEA work to preserve the current Drug War, rather than managed and taxed legalization as with alcohol since Prohibition. Hopefully the movie pushes this home, despite IMDB's summary.

    Plus, he's played by Keanu Reeves. I mean, really.

    On the plus side, if they left the EEG machine in the movie, this should spike interest in OpenEEG.

    1. Re:missing Dick's point about the drug war? by Rinikusu · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the spoiler alert, dude. I guess I don't need to read the book or see the movie now. :(

      --
      If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
    2. Re:missing Dick's point about the drug war? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Rosebud is sled, and he was on Earth the whole time. Get a clue; if the only point of the book is what happened in the last two pages before "THE END", then the book wasn't worth it in the first place.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    3. Re:missing Dick's point about the drug war? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's a ghost too.
      He is his father.
      It's old man Jones from the circus.

      I could go on for days!

      /spoiler troll

    4. Re:missing Dick's point about the drug war? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      He actually did a very good job of pointing out the deeper issues without spoiling anything. But what do I know? I'm covered in aphids.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    5. Re:missing Dick's point about the drug war? by permaculture · · Score: 1

      JACK NICHOLSON:
      My point of view, while extremely cogent,
      is unpopular.

      LOS ANGELES TIMES:
      Which is?

      JACK NICHOLSON:
      That the repressive nature of the legalities
      vis-a-vis drugs are destroying the legal
      system and corrupting the police system.

      LOS ANGELES TIMES:
      Let's talk about acting for a minute.

      --
      Environmentalism is the new Victorianism. Everyone ties on a green corset and pretends we're virtuous.
  32. Re:Let the suck-fest begin. by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

    It would seem that some innovative cinematography would have to come into play here; it would take a truly talented team of artists to accomplish this.

    No special innovation is needed, as PKD laid out the visual clues to the different personalities quite explicitly. The criminal persona looks like a normal person, while the "real" police officer is covered by an audio-visual distortion field.

    This brings up an important aspect of the book that you didn't mention: for most of the story, the reader was unaware of exactly which druggie was actually the undercover cop. And, as things develop, the cop eventually forgets this himself...

  33. The smoking dogs? by dolphin558 · · Score: 0

    I wonder if they will feature the card playing smoking dogs...

  34. trolling for politics by willwarner · · Score: 1

    I thought it was RMS as Communist that gave it away... can you really imagine him saluting at one of those big military parades?

    Still, I'd rate this troll much better than average; it gives the old "Conservatives are stupid!" banality some real subtlety and bite.

    Poindexter and ESR, an authoritarian and a libertarian respectively, would be excellent counter-examples.

  35. I love the casting. by apc · · Score: 1

    So much of the book is consumed with dialogue between burnt-out or nearly burnt-out druggies, and they seem to have cast every indie-type star who's had a public bout with rehab. Winona Ryder as Donna? Woody Harrelson as Luckman? And you've gotta love Robert Downey, Jr. as Barris. If any

    I also think that the rotoscoping should make for a really cool effect for Fred's "vague blur" suits.

    (This is my favorite PKD novel-- and I did an undergraduate thesis on the guy, and so have read, at last count, 50 of the 52 extant novels. I'll probably be one of those losers who take the day off work and show up for the premiere....)

    1. Re:I love the casting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, an expert :)

      A question for you then good sir/madam - if I was to look for the best Philip K. Dick books to read, which ones should I look at first? (say, top 5?)

      (I'm planning to re-read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, and I've already read The Simulacra, and I've just started to read A Scanner Darkly due to this story ;).

      I'm a sci-fi buff, but sadly my exposure to his books has been sorely lacking - so what would your bets be for the best written/most amazing books I could go for first?

      Thanks in advance :)

    2. Re:I love the casting. by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I had this friend who's an English/Comp Lit prof that gave a senior seminar entitled "Dick and Derrida" some years back. I heard from some of his students that it was a pretty cool class.

      Downey as Barris is brilliant casting. I can't think of a single big name actor that would be a better fit. But what do I know? I'm covered in aphids.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  36. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You apparently don't realize how much the right-wingers give to charity. Not to 501(c)3 organizations that fund NPR, but to actual charity. Greenpeace and the NAMBLA don't help people in need. The thing is they give it through churches and their God instead of government and large corporations.

  37. Shameless fanboy by adun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I enjoyed Waking Life, and I'm a certified Dick nut. A Scanner Darkly is one of the greatest pieces of "short" fiction of our century, and it's a shame that society regards Dick primarly as a scifi writer, when he was one of the most astute social commentators of our time. He just happened to be good at expressing his fears and thoughts through a captivating medium.

    For the unitiated, A Scanner Darkly is at the front of the reality-bending/drug/psychological thriller genre. Before there was Thomas Harris or Hunter S. Thompson, there was Dick. God, I have shivers already.

    1. Re:Shameless fanboy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      and I'm a certified Dick nut

      Huh huh. You said you love dick...

    2. Re:Shameless fanboy by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

      "...it's a shame that society regards Dick primarly as a scifi writer, when he was one of the most astute social commentators of our time...."


      Same thing, man.

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    3. Re:Shameless fanboy by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I'm a certified Dick nut

      The proper term is Dick Head. =)

      The cashier at Dark Carnival in Berkeley called me this circa 1988 when I brought a bunch of PKD books up to the counter.

      But what do I know? I'm covered in aphids.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    4. Re:Shameless fanboy by mink · · Score: 1
      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  38. Re:But isn't it cool when... by EvilCabbage · · Score: 1

    ...they both come together really well?

  39. I hated Waking Life by grouse · · Score: 1

    I would have walked out on it if I hadn't been on a date, who was running her fingers over my hand during the movie. When it was over, I asked her what she was doing. She told me she was spelling "I want to leave." I could have screamed. I think she did when I told her I hated it too.

    1. Re:I hated Waking Life by syynnapse · · Score: 1

      i just fell asleep.

      --

      System.out.println(syynnapse.getSig());

    2. Re:I hated Waking Life by Angostura · · Score: 1

      I think I did walk out. Either that or rock back and forwards in the foetal position keening. Never before has so much trivial shallow nonsense been package as 'really really deep'.

  40. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    intelligence (in the computer science / nerd domain) seems highly correlated with left wing/compassionate political views

    That's about the funniest thing I've read all day - I've never equated intelligence with dogmatic touchy feely bullshit.

    Nice troll, though. Very compassionate and intelligent *snort*

  41. Miyazaki's movies by vertical_98 · · Score: 1

    I have every anime (by Miyazaki) that has been released in the US. While I can't stand My neighbor Tortoro, my kids love every one. I personally really like Princess Mononoke. I didn't know realism was important in a movie, I've seen enough hollywood slop that I can't believe anyone expects realism. I agree with you that his anime is fun and enjoyable.

    Vertical

    --
    72 CD D7 52 D0 7E D8 47 44 91 D5 84 D1 59 F1 A9-This is my 128bit integer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:Miyazaki's movies by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Ahhhh... My Neiborhood Totoro... My first anime. I still think it is one of the better of Miyazaki though, silly and surreal.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  42. Don't forget Martian Time-Slip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where everyone is sitting around playing "Perky Pat" ....in a MUD...
    it was writen in 1964.
    I could go on ad nauseum.

  43. Re:For christ's sake! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ITYM "they are two words". HTH. HAND.

  44. Grave of the Fireflies is a Takahata film by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Grave of the Fireflies is a Takahata film, not a Miyazaki one :)

  45. doesn't look much like waking life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a big follower of Linklater's career, but I'm kind of disappointed with his use of professional actors. Using famous actor might pose a trap for the animators of the movie: I'm afraid they'll try to preserve the likeness of characters at all costs, so that the unforgettable psychedelic quality of Waking Life's changing animation styles might be lost. Still, we need to see the trailer to learn whether it's the direction this movie is headed in.

  46. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 1

    So if you spend your life attempting to get inside the head of a machine with roughly 1/(10^9) the power of the average human brain (in commands per time), that is physically incapable of doing other than it is told, then the left is for you!

    --
    ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
  47. man in the high castle by YetAnotherDave · · Score: 1

    I'm still waiting for 'man in the high castle' to be done as a movie.

    not as sci-fi as other PKD, just alternate-future. Good story, tho. Could translate well into movie form, I think...

  48. Difficult? It's been done. by mblase · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would imagine that it would be extremely difficult to adapt the theme of a split personality to film.

    How about "Fight Club"? Or "Me, Myself and Irene"? And those are just the first two that come to mind.... It's not as if split personalities are a new plot device where Hollywood is concerned, but it does require some uncommonly good acting and directing talent.

    1. Re:Difficult? It's been done. by Scarblac · · Score: 1

      Exactly, another obvious one is Gollum.

      --
      I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
  49. Funniest bits have to stay funny by Basehart · · Score: 1

    If I don't piss myself laughing during the bit when they're talking about putting gold in the trunk and 12 friends in the back seat of his car to stop it from fishtailing I'll be pissed (sic).

    That was one of THE funniest things I've ever read book.

    The second funniest thing I've ever read was when they're trying to figure out the gears on a 12 speed bike.

    1. Re:Funniest bits have to stay funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While it is funny in a Cheech and Chong sort of way, you may be missing the point of the scene where Bob Arctor and co. are incapable of reasoning, because they've irreparable damage to their brains, that the 10 speed one of them has bought (if I remember right) has the "correct number of gears" or speeds; they only see 5. A young boy has to point out to them that speeds 5 through 10 are accessed by the shifting lever.


      That scene in particular, as well as the scene where Bob Arctor soils himself in Donna's car, were, for me, the most effective anti-drug propaganda I've ever come across.


  50. Re:Let the suck-fest begin. by kubalaa · · Score: 1

    No, you find out that Fred is Arctor pretty much the moment he's introduced.

    --

    "If you look 'round the table and can't tell who the sucker is, it's you." -- Quiz Show

  51. Parallels to SVG by Compact+Dick · · Score: 1

    The rotoscoped screenshots' style is quite reminiscent of SVG images such as Lion (PNG) and Tiger (PNG). The strong, solid lines lend themselves to vector rendering. Perhaps the entire movie could be thus done in SVG?

    1. Re:Parallels to SVG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.

  52. Apparently you can read the book online by felix+rayman · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It looks like the text of the original the novel is online.

    The main thing to note here is that they will fuck up the movie. There is no way they can be honest to the spirit of the novel and get the movie distributed in the malls of America. Then again, the perversion of the novel will pay for a shopping trip to those malls for the heirs of PKD, who, I would assume, are happy to live in the world he predicted.

    Anyways, my favorite part of the novel is this, where one of the characters has decided to commit suicide by overdose:

    Back home again, he uncorked the wine, let it breathe, drank a few glasses of it, spent a few minutes contemplating his favorite page of _The Illustrated Picture Book of Sex_, which showed the girl on top, then placed the plastic bag of reds beside his bed, lay down with the Ayn Rand book and unfinished protest letter to Exxon, tried to think of something meaningful but could not, although he kept remembering the girl being on top, and then, with a glass of the Cabernet Sauvignon, gulped down all the reds at once. After that, the deed being done, he lay back, the Ayn Rand book and letter on his chest, and waited.
    However, he had been burned. The capsules were not barbiturates, as represented. They were some kind of kinky psychedelics, of a type he had never dropped before, probably a mixture, and new on the market. Instead of quietly suffocating, Charles Freck began to hallucinate. Well, he thought philosophically, this is the story of my life. Always ripped off. He had to face the fact--considering how many of the capsules he had swallowed--that he was in for some trip.
    The next thing he knew, a creature from between dimensions was standing beside his bed looking down at him disapprovingly.
    The creature had many eyes, all over it, ultra-modern expensive-looking clothing, and rose up eight feet high. Also, it carried an enormous scroll.
    "You're going to read me my sins," Charles Freck said.
    The creature nodded and unsealed the scroll.
    Freck said, lying helpless on his bed, "and it's going to take a hundred thousand hours."
    Fixing its many compound eyes on him, the creature from between dimensions said, "We are no longer in the mundane universe. Lower-plane categories of material existence such as 'space' and 'time' no longer apply to you. You have been elevated to the transcendent realm. Your sins will be read to you ceaselessly, in shifts, throughout eternity. The list will never end."
    Know your dealer, Charles Freck thought, and wished he could take back the last half-hour of his life.
    A thousand years later he was still lying there on his bed with the Ayn Rand book and the letter to Exxon on his chest, listening to them read his sins to him. They had gotten up to the first grade, when he was six years old.
    Ten thousand years later they had reached the sixth grade.
    The year he had discovered masturbation.

    That, my friends, is some fine fucking literature.
    1. Re:Apparently you can read the book online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be an illegal/copyright infringing source of the book then - it hasn't become public domain yet :)

      (Of course, I've heard that if you're looking for an electronic version of a book that is still under copyright you can just type the author's name or book title in Google, with .txt or .zip or .rar and you'll usually get lucky... or so I've heard)

      Public libraries would be a safer, and more legal way to view the book... and you'd be sure that what you got was official and hasn't been altered in any way by a fan with an urge to change things :)

    2. Re:Apparently you can read the book online by felix+rayman · · Score: 1

      That would be an illegal/copyright infringing source of the book

      You are making a pretty big assumption there. I have no reason to believe the person posting the text of the novel does not have legal permission to do so. If this is the case, would the correct term for your post be libel or slander or something else?

    3. Re:Apparently you can read the book online by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I flame you in another thread, but here I must humbly thank you for that link. And also for the well chosen excerpt. I think the best thing I can say here is that you, too, are covered in aphids.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    4. Re:Apparently you can read the book online by May+Kasahara · · Score: 1
      The main thing to note here is that they will fuck up the movie. There is no way they can be honest to the spirit of the novel and get the movie distributed in the malls of America.

      Well, from what I understand, Waking Life was hardly multiplex fare either...

    5. Re:Apparently you can read the book online by g0at · · Score: 1

      That, my friends, is some fine fucking literature.

      I missed the fucking part, unless you're talking about the masturbation, but that's a bit of a stretch.

      -b

    6. Re:Apparently you can read the book online by justins · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I have no reason to believe the person posting the text of the novel does not have legal permission to do so.

      It's sort of a common-sense thing. The internet being what it is a reasonable person ought to assume that the copyright is being infringed, since in 99.99% of the cases that's what is happening when you stumble across a poorly-formatted plaintext of a currently copyrighted work. A legit copy of a popular work that is legally available for free distribution will probably have been lovingly prepared by a Project Gutenberg volunteer or in rare cases by the publisher, and will look a lot better than a simple OCR rip deal.

      If you actually give a shit you can email the guy who owns this page:
      http://paulwilliams.com/pkds.html

      Not only was he the literary executor of Dick's estate, he ran the pkds which was mentioned on the title page of the book, so he's obviously got some credibility. I'm sure he'll be happy to state the obvious for you.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    7. Re:Apparently you can read the book online by Spunk · · Score: 0

      I don't know. Richard Linklater might just get it right. Waking Life was not "visually realistic" and this probably shouldn't be either.

  53. Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Do adults on slashdot not remember their childhood? The idea of a parent monitoring every single thing their child does is just not realistic. And even if it was realistic, it certainly isn't a healthy way to live. Children, especially teenagers, need a certain degree of independence.

    I don't at all mind certain things being restricted from children - pornography, or alcohol, auto licenses, violent movies. I think most people are of the same mind.

    So the question shouldn't be "why can't parents accept the responsibility," but "do video games deserve to be a restricted content?"

  54. Re:The secret to enjoying it by Bastian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I hated Waking Life, too. But then the bong made it around to me, and a few minutes later, I realized why everyone liked it so much.

    But then I tried to show it to someone else. There was no bong this time. I quickly apologized for ever suggesting the movie, and we both agreed to watch the Disney Channel because it's more mentally stimulating.

  55. Why this film will fail. by precogpunk · · Score: 1, Troll

    #5. Flat Black Films hasn't produced a movie with a plot. Waking Life was collection of random encounters; the making of which was really just a collaboration in many ways.
    #4. All of the movies made from PKD's novels have been either a flop, or stripped key plot elements. If you read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and watched Blade Runner then you'll know what I'm talking about.
    #3. The choice to use animation instead of live action means there's no reality to question. People don't question cartoons, they are merely entertained by them.
    #2. When asked about Warner Independent (who co-financed A Scanner Darkly) the Dick Estate stated they were "... A new division of WB devoted to serious films with modest budgets." Why not give it the BIG BUDGET that a film like this should have? Are studios not willing to take the risk?
    #1. Keanu Reeves -- need I say more?

    1. Re:Why this film will fail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keanu Reeves as a reason the film will fail. Yeah, there's a good point - it's not like he's been part of three of the biggest grossing films ever. Nearly every other movie he has been in has made a good profit at the box office too.

      So, I'm not really sure what your point is here? Could it be that you're just using a sad old joke without checking to see if it fits?

    2. Re:Why this film will fail. by precogpunk · · Score: 1

      I would have to say those films (Matrix 1 & 2) successed despite Reeves bad acting. I pray that Scanner will too. Most of the films he's stared in failed to make the list of Top 100 Grossing Films. The Matrix 1 and 2 only made the list due to good screen writing and directing (IMHO), and the masterpiece Home Alone beat both of those at the box office. So whats your point?

    3. Re:Why this film will fail. by mink · · Score: 1

      Most of the films any actor has been in have failed to make the top 100.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  56. Re:Let the suck-fest begin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keanu Reeves could be a perfectly fine choice. He can act well, given the right director. He's done some films that have shown quite a difference from his normal "blank slate"-type hero.

    The problem most people have with him, is that he doesn't have an "expressive" voice. People have an idea of acting that has been tainted by Friends and other sitcoms, where overacting has become the norm, and farce has replaced comedy.

    So when an actor comes along with a voice that represents most normal people (ie. we speak with a smaller pitch range than the typical Jennifer Aniston or Courtney Cox), it is seen as flat and underacted.

    Seriously, it is purely his voice that people have a problem with (well, possibly the lack of wrinkling around his eyes too, due to his Asian ancestry, as Westerners tend to get emotional cues from the eyes more often than not). A test would be to take a film of his, where he is a "normal" person rather than a superhero, and watch a bit with the sound off. Compare his visual acting to his costars, and you'll see that he performs as well as they do.

  57. Great writer - great director! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here we have one of the most interesting sci-fi writers coupled with one of the most interesting directors working today, and what do you get...

    Well lets hope it's the incredible film it might be!

    "I am very excited"

  58. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's protection money...haven't you ever noticed it's only the middle class choir boys who "get it"..

  59. Surprising... not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    timothy wrote:
    >
    > Looks like it's going to look alot like one of
    > Richard Linklater's previous films, Waking
    > Life."

    In other words it's going to be total pretentious wanker shit. Linklater should have pulled a Kurt Cobain after making Slacker.

    --Sergey

  60. Too provocative for the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the link to 'Waking Life':

    Certification: Argentina:13 / Australia:M / Canada:14A / Finland:K-7 / Germany:12 / Portugal:16 / Spain:13 / Sweden:11 / UK:15 / USA:R

    Typical, USA rates is "restricted", 17 or over without an accompanying adult. Wouldn't want to risk starting the kids thinking before they are brainwashed into thinking the George is the best thing since sliced bread, and the War on Terror might not be a good idea, and that the War in Drugs is anything but a total failure. As Gore Vidal commented, you might as well have a War on Dandruff.

    Mike

  61. Buy the book, read the book by duncangough · · Score: 1

    Now is the time - now that you have been warned. It'll be a miracle if this doesn't rubbish the book in some respect so just do yourself a favour and read A Scanner Darkly before it gets Keanu'd and you can never think of it without, uh, like, you know, dude.

    Playaholics : Online games and scoreboards

    1. Re:Buy the book, read the book by HeghmoH · · Score: 2

      Yeah, right. I read Minority Report after seeing the movie, and had no problems, because there was basically no relation beyond the title. Most of Dick's movies seem to get this treatment, so there probably isn't anything to worry about.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
  62. Wanking life. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I actually read the title as "wanking life".
    High time to move my ass and pay a visit to the mare.

  63. Exactly by grouse · · Score: 1

    I don't smoke, but I had a lot of stoner friends at the time. I felt that watching that movie was like listening to them philosophize. They all think it's interesting and "deep" under the influence, and all the sober people are bored out of their mind. Plus they would do this for free, and I had to pay $7 or something at the movie theater!

    The worst part is that I am from Austin, where Linklater lives and filmed the movie. So everyone thought the movie was cool because they knew someone in it (I knew at least two people in the movie, which did not increase my enjoyment of it in the least). Don't even get me started on the neverending hagiography of local moviemakers by the alternative weekly paper, either. They gave it 3.5 stars, which is almost their minimum for a local film (they gave that many to Spy Kids 2: The Island of Lost Dreams).

    I should really end this rant and go do something.

  64. Nietzsche vs. Linklater by grouse · · Score: 1
    Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity; those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity. For the crowd believes that if it cannot see to the bottom of something it must be profound: it is so timid and dislikes going into the water.
    -- Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science
    1. Re:Nietzsche vs. Linklater by Photon+Ghoul · · Score: 1

      Nietzsche is dead

    2. Re:Nietzsche vs. Linklater by grouse · · Score: 1

      This post is an excellent example of what he was talking about.

    3. Re:Nietzsche vs. Linklater by Photon+Ghoul · · Score: 1

      "The crowd that thinks something is so obscure as to feign profundity obviously are looking too closely."

      - Photon Ghoul, "Teh Gey Science"

  65. Why this film actually has a snowball's chance by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 3, Interesting

    #5 Irrelevant.

    #4 I argue elsewhere that Ridley Scott stayed true to PKD*, despite, or even because of the way he transposed the emotional meaning of Decker/the androids. Pretty much all the others I've seen I'd agree with you. *(I'm refering to the director's cut. The studio version was an abortion.)

    Furthermore, stripping elements is pretty much a given when adapting any novel to the screen. The key to a good adaptation seems to be knowing which elements are essential and which aren't. So, yes, there are huge amounts of material missing from Bladerunner, and I'm sure we all have our favorite bits that were left out (I especially missed the Penfield Mood Organ), but that's pretty much the way it goes, unless you're talking Elmore Leonard.

    Anyway, by this criteria, all adaptions must fail it.

    #3. This is a failing of your imagination, not mine.

    #2. A big budget movie will suffer from exactly the problems that Paycheck, Total Recall, Minority Report, etc., etc. suffer from. A big budget scanner darkly will be burdened by flashy special effects and the twisted story itself will be jettisoned in favor of some formulaic doppelganger abortion because with so much money on the line, the studio will be nervous. In the big budget version, Bob Arctor kicks his substance D addiction by the end of second act, kills the Islamic terrorist drug manufacturers that killed his best friend Jerry with invisible bio-engineered aphids in the first act and finally marries Donna, and they all live happily ever after. The only chance this project stands of succeeding on our terms is if it's a low budget prestige project that stays mostly under the radar of the execs, lawyers, and bean counters.

    #1. You've got me there. I'm pretty worried about this aspect. I can think of a hundred name actors they might have gotten. Why not Ed Norton? Why Keanu? As far as I am concerned, the three actors that would stand the best chance of totally wrecking this movie are Keanu, Matt Damon, and Ben Afleck. Shit! I think I'd rather see Jean Claude Van Damme in the role.

    Still, the rest of the cast sounds incredibly impressive, so I still hope for the best.

    --
    It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  66. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by TeknoHog · · Score: 1
    Linus (the developer of Linux) comes from Sweden, a Socialist country with free medical care and very high taxes.

    Linus is from Finland. But the facts of socialism are equally true.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  67. what about Valis? by ivano · · Score: 1
    just read it and loved it. The only way I could describe it to people (even PKD fans) was to imagine if Kurt Vonnegut took his weight in mushrooms and wrote a book about God, the universe and everything.

    Maybe they could do a film, within a film sort fo thing.

    Ciao

  68. But get the quotes in the right place by gzunk · · Score: 1

    It's 'A Scanner Darkly', not a 'Scanner Darkly'.

  69. MOD troll PARENT DOWN, sheesh! by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    4: Interresting? That's it! The moderation system is broken.

    I gotta tell you, this more "realistic" style of cartooning is much more interesting than the anime style of Miyazaki. For one, the 3 dimensional depth aspect is added through the use of very well thought out shading, so the characters seem more alive than most other cartoons.
    Miyazaki's work pales in comparison to the screenshots shown here.


    It's ROTOSCOPY! Those "drawings" are traced over filmed images. And from the looks of it, it's vector based, making it very easy to automate the in-betweening.

    Why would you even bring up Miyazaki? Why not bring up Disney's Snow White? That also used a lot of rotoscopy for Snow White herself, but blended in with traditional animation.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

    1. Re:MOD troll PARENT DOWN, sheesh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Snow White...
      To my understanding snow white wasnt rotoscoped at all, though they did film footage for reference and tried to be too accurate with it to achieve sympathy, which has been obviously abandoned. Although I could be smoking the blue crack about that point.

      Filming footage, Rotoscoping, and Reference
      Filming footage for reference is a common practice in animation, although these days its normally the animator himself who is filmed doing the action rather than an actor, so he gets just what he wants. Reference differs from rotoscoping in that rotoscoping is tracing the character on top of the live footage (WB's "Anastasia" being the most recent widespread example), where referencing is watching the movements on a tv monitor and just REFERENCING it for the animation instead of directly tracing. For certain type of motions, such as elaborate dances, this brings a beauty to it which otherwise might be lost. Look at the hula sequence in "Lilo & Stitch". Reference. Another advantage of reference, though it takes more time, is that your not limited by the angle your footage was filmed at. Again, in L&S go to the extras on the dvd and you'll see places where the animated hula footage differs from the filmed reference footage.

      Vectorizing
      Waking Life and Scanner Darkly are more filtered than anything else. They have spiffy software that vectorizes the filmed footage, which they then disconnect and exaggerate to try to enhance some point or another. It's not animation, as animation is to bring to life, it's merely lots of automated vectoring.

      My 2c
      And now I for my two cents. I found Waking Life to be pretentious and filled with the flavor of pseudo-philosophy found in indy coffee bars where people sing badly, display bad art as "masterpieces", and pretend like they're being profound. It was long and boring, took me multiple sittings to get through, and the random wierdness and stupid vector images made it fall completely in the uncanny valley. I have no interest in seeing this after looking up data about it as it seems to be more of the same. i'm not wasting my time on it.

      My apologies for posting anon. This is the first post I've made in /. and probably my last for a while.

  70. the OTHER way around!!!! by Scrameustache · · Score: 2
    Now is the time - now that you have been warned. It'll be a miracle if this doesn't rubbish the book in some respect so just do yourself a favour and read A Scanner Darkly before it gets Keanu'd and you can never think of it without, uh, like, you know, dude.

    GAH!!! NO! no, no NO!

    No! When a story you are interrested in is coming up soon on the big screen and you have not yet read the book, do NOT read it now. The book is always better than the movie. So the only logical thing to do is to watch the movie first, enjoy it, and THEN read the book and enjoy it MORE.

    That way you get
    1. Movie, good.
    2. Book: Better!
    . If you do it the other way, you get
    1. Book: Good.
    2. Movie: Bad!


    Why would you willingly subject yourself to not liking the movie? The book will still be there, as good as ever, after you've had a chance to enjoy the movie. If you rush out and read the book before, you ruin your chances of liking the movie.

    My way makes you happy twice, your way makes you happy once, sad/mad once. Think about it, isn't the world bad enough as it is? Don't make it harder for yourself.
    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  71. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, you're wrong. According to ESR, hackers are more recently moderate-to-neoconservative. The only safe generalization is that hackers tend to be rather anti-authoritarian; thus, both paleoconservatism and 'hard' leftism are rare.

    Hacker politics, by ESR

  72. Re:Thanks to the link from the post below... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BARRIS: (_Standing in the middle of the living room with a great big new shiny bike, very pleased_) Look what I got for twenty dollars.
    FRECK: What is it?
    BARRIS: A bike, a ten-speed racing bike, virtually brand new. I saw it in the neighbor's yard and asked about it and they had four of them so I made an offer of twenty dollars cash and they sold it to me. Colored people. They even hoisted it over the fence for me.
    LUCKMAN: I didn't know you could get a ten-speed nearly new for twenty dollars. It's amazing what you can get for twenty dollars.
    DONNA: It resembles the one the chick across the street from me had that got ripped off about a month ago. They probably ripped it off, those black guys.
    ARCTOR: Sure they did, if they've got four. And selling it that cheap.
    DONNA: You ought to give it back to the chick across the street from me, if it's hers. Anyhow you should let her look at it to see if it's hers.
    BARRIS: It's a man's bike. So it can't be.
    FRECK: Why do you say it's ten speeds when it's only got seven gears?
    BARRIS: (_Astonished_) What?
    FRECK: (_Going over to bike and pointing_) Look, five gears here, two gears here at the other end of the chain. Five and two . . .
    . . . makes seven. So it's only a seven-speed bike.
    LUCKMAN: Yeah, but even a seven-speed racing bike is worth twenty dollars. He still got a good buy.
    BARRIS: (_Nettled_) Those colored people told me it was ten speeds. It's a rip-off.
    (_Everyone gathers to examine bike. They count the gears again and again_.)
    FRECK: Now I count eight. Six in front, two in back. That makes eight.
    ARCTOR: (_Logically_) But it should be ten. There are no seven- on eight-speed bikes. Not that I ever heard of. What do you suppose happened to the missing gears?
    BARRIS: Those colored guys must have been working on it, taking it apart with improper tools and no technical knowledge, and when they reassembled it they left three gears lying on the floor of their garage. They're probably still lying there.
    LUCKMAN: Then we should go ask for the missing gears back.
    BARRIS: (_Pondering angrily_) But that's where the rip-off is: they'll probably offer to sell them to me, not give them to me as they should. I wonder what else they've damaged. (_Inspects entire bike_)
    LUCKMAN: If we all go together they'll give them to us; you can bet on it, man. We'll all go, right? (_Looks around for agreement_)
    DONNA: Are you positive thene're only seven gears?
    FRECK: Eight.
    DONNA: Seven, eight. Anyhow, I mean, before you go over there, ask somebody. I mean, it doesn't look to me like they've done anything to it like taking it apart. Before you go over there and lay heavy shit on them, find out. Can you dig it?
    ARCTOR: She's right.
    LUCKMAN: Who should we ask? Who do we know that's an authority on racing bikes?
    FRECK: Let's ask the first person we see. Let's wheel it out the door and when some freak comes along we'll ask him. That way we'll get a disheartened viewpoint.
    (_They collectively wheel bike out front, right off encounter young black man parking his car. They point to the seven-- eight?--gears questioningly and ask how many there are, although they can see--except for Charles Freck--that there are only seven: five at one end of the chain, two at the other. Five and two add up to seven. They can ascertain it with their own eyes. What's going on?_)
    YOUNG BLACK MAN: (_Calmly_) What you have to do is multiply the number of gears in front by the number in the near. It is not an adding but a multiplying, because, you see, the chain leaps across from gear to gear, and in terms of gear ratios you obtain five (_He indicates the five gears_.) times one of the two in front (_He points to that_.), which give you one times five, which is five, and then when you shift with this lever on the handle-bar (_He demonstrates_.) the chain jumps to the other one of the two

  73. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is true, almost immediately after the tragedy, Bush sent in an oil exploration team.

  74. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's all very well, but I'm a geek trying to get laid. Does ESR have anything to say on that subject? He seems like the kind of person whose opinion really matters.

  75. no, the OTHER OTHER way around!!! by shumway · · Score: 1

    In my opinion, it's really important to read the book first. That way, you create your own interpretation of the characters, settings, etc. Once you've seen the movie, regardless of how good or bad it is, there's no way to completely forget the actors' faces and voices, and your imagination is no longer completely your own. So I prefer to read a book with just me and the words, and not think things like, "Oh, this is the scene where Julia Roberts gets mauled by that badger".

    --
    1. Re:no, the OTHER OTHER way around!!! by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      no way to completely forget the actors' faces and voices, and your imagination is no longer completely your own.

      My imagination stays my own no matter what.
      To each his own I guess.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  76. Re:In what way is this 'news for nerds'? by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    left-wing and nerd are almost synonymous

    Probably true, at least until some of those nerds actually start running (rather than working for, and complaining about) a company of any consequence.

    Capitalism is great for some, it is not the most efficient way to maximise the average person's happiness

    Shall we compare the average happiness in, say, the U.S., to the average (Vodka-soaked, line-standing, dead-by-50) happiness in the Soviet Union during the peak of their most glorious communistness? Or Cuba! Now there's a paradise of personal happiness! Especially since, if you're not happy, and say so, you get killed, thus increasing the rate of happiness among the survivors.

    No, I think that most nerds remain highly sheltered from the workings of large groups of people, of ventures that actually produce the quality of life on the scale we have it in western hemisphere. Countries like Finland, or Sweden, are still basically capitalist countries, but with a very highly taxed population that gets a lot of it right back from the government in the form of services they can no longer personally afford to buy (because of the taxes). But the actual wealth in those countries is produced through good old fashioned capitalism: risk, innovation, reward.

    The insular in-the-basement (or in-the-server-room) life of the nerd can make this stuff not so obvious. Further, the generally higher native intelligence among the nerd set means that they have a hard time imagining people that would rather just be thugs or parasites, and thus cannot imagine why people wouldn't all just work in a some idyllic global-village-like cooperative way. But the truth is that most people are not as inventive or dilligent as most nerds, and would much rather that the nerds of the world produced things for the rest of the world. In practice, that's pretty much how it works anyway, but at least most quality nerds can still make a real living even as much of their productivity is skimmed off the top for others' use.

    It's the same cloistering effect of colleges. As soon as those folks get out of there and face the need to compete, to produce something materially useful - it's a shock in practice, and a shock philosophically. But, nerds are secretly smart enough to see that coming, and remain in Sci-Fi watching, slashdot yammering, Half-Life playing mode as a self defense mechanism. And, because the larger economy (partly fueled by the work those nerds' managers have them doing!) is so productive, we all have a decent standard of living regardless. The nerds that embrace both their nerdness and capitalism become very successful, and are then hated here on slashdot for leaving the nerd ghetto.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.