2nd attempt to consume, got most of the way through but couldn’t finish due to multiple.needless.interruptions! grr!

The first time I saw this movie, in the theater, I swear I got high on it. I left the theater staggering around and wondering what the hell just happened to me. My friend who saw it with me, not a PKD fan, was only in slightly better shape.

An hour later over coffee, I still felt weird and couldn’t shake the notion that the theater management had pumped something into the ventilation system. This is of course impossible. But still.

It’s one of the strangest experiences I’ve ever had.

As for the movie itself, it’s PHENOMENAL. A. Absolutely the most faithful adaptation of a Philip K. Dick novel ever. B. Gorgeous – the rotoscoping technique is also perfect for the subject matter. C. Keanu Reeves is perfectly cast, for the first time since the Bill and Ted movies. Robert Downey Jr. and Woody Harrelson also perfectly cast, as is D. Rory Cocharane who deserves a letter all his own. E. Richard Linklater found a hidden plot possiblity in the narrative (I won’t spell it out because that would be spoiling) and dropped it like an exquisitely well-placed bomb on the ending. F. Yay! They kept the bicycle scene in all its brain-twisting weirdness…

I could go all the way to Z but you get the idea.

A lot of people will tell you that there are a lot of things that go wrong with Linklater’s adaptation of this disturbing Philip K. Dick novel. The general consensus of critics seems to be that there was “too much dialogue” in the film and that the dialogue “didn’t make sense” and as a result the film wasn’t as engaging or audience-involved as it could have been.

But here’s the catch: neither the book nor the movie are dumbed-down plastic-coated easy-to-swallow modules intended for the intellect of an average twelve year old. Though based on some of the responses I’ve seen I think that some twelve year olds might get more enjoyment out of this film than some adults because children don’t demand mediocrity from their culture nearly as often in order to have a good time.

So instead of me warning you about the confusing dialogue and the really challenging (not really) plot twists as a means of deterring you from the film, let me instead tell you what to look for that will draw you to it:

-Watch Robert Downey Jr. work. His performance as a brain-addled Substance D addict is right on, and while he is obnoxious as can be, he brings a humor and energy to his character that are strangely intoxicating. I echo similar sentiments for Cochrane and Harrelson who approach their addicted characters in very different ways.
-Enjoy the rotoscoping for what it is. The film is meant to unbalance our senses and help us travel into a fictional reality that is ruled largely by drug use. Not only is it an original way to achieve the fluid surreality of an addict’s world, but it took a lot of effort and skill to make it happen.
-Try listening to the dialogue instead of waiting for it to be over to see what happens next. The dialogue happens to be the prose of a brilliant science fiction author, and chances are the film crew didn’t just include it in the film because it sounded nice. There are lots of dark, hilarious, tragic and profound things happening discreetly throughout if you just take the time to listen. Yes, I admit it does take patience.
-Use the film as a conduit for the consideration of your own culture. Dick intended the novel to be set in 1994 when he wrote it in 1977, and while we are well beyond the 90s, we still face very real drug abuse issues all the time. Much of the novel was supposedly based on Dick’s own struggles and losses during a period of addiction, but I assure you the message of this work goes so much deeper than “just say no”...

A Scanner Darkly isn’t my favorite movie, and I’m not a superfan. I watched it for the first time last night. I was just so sorely disappointed to sign on and see such pointless negative comments here because they are so empty and clearly…uninformed. So thank you “people who have consumed this”. You inspired me this morning.

I don’t know why I didn’t like this movie. It wasn’t horrible and it’s based on a Phillip K. Dick novel. A Scanner Darkly should have a lot of things going for it. But it fails to connect with viewers some how…

what the hell? i mean, i liked the whole look of the movie and everything, and sometimes the writing worked really well, but for all the time put into the visual aspect of the film, this didnt seem to have a cohesive writing vision. maybe i need to go back and watch it a couple more times. and read the book. then watch the movie again. then maybe i’ll be able to understand this movie enough to explain it to someone else. im afraid im making a mountain out of a mole hill. (for some reason, i love that expression)