Foursome Joins Reeves in A Scanner Darkly
Source: Variety
Winona Ryder, Robert Downey Jr., Woody Harrelson and Rory Cochran will join Keanu Reeves in A Scanner Darkly, the Warner Independent Pictures drama that Richard Linklater will direct from his scripted adaptation of the Philip K. Dick novel.
Variety says the actors will film the scenes as if this were a traditional live action undertaking, but then Linklater will turn the footage into animation, much as he did with Waking Life.
The story concerns an undercover drug officer (Reeves) in the future who becomes addicted and develops a split personality.
I wonder if there's any particular reasoning behind its being animated?
Quote from: The Silver BulletI wonder if there's any particular reasoning behind its being animated?
hav u read the book?
there are parts in it which would benefit from the freedom animation allows. the suit/mask that the dude wears that distorts his image and voice would hav to be CGI'd anyway if it were live action. not to mention the transcendent moments, the weird morphing moments, other spoilerful things too.
i'm really liking link's approach.
Quote from: Pubrick
i'm really liking link's approach.
me too, i'm really excited for this
Does anyone else find it a little strange that filmmakers have decided the man of the future will be in the model of Keanu Reeves?
Johnny Mnemonic
Matrix
now this
:!:
you forgot bill and ted
Erik Davis consults on A Scanner Darkly!
Boing Boing pal Erik Davis sends us this exclusive bit of insider insight into the Hollywood adaptation of Philip K. Dick's surreal SF novel "A Scanner Darkly":
"This spring, I had the opportunity to read and consult on Richard Linklater's screenplay for Philip K. Dick's A Scanner Darkly, which is set to start filming this July. As I love many of Linklater's films, this was a great honor, although much less funny than the New Yorker's description of me as a "Dick expert." Expert or no, I can tell you that I have every reason to believe that Linklater's film will be what Dickheads everywhere have been waiting for: the first "real" "authentic" PKD movie. While the film updates the historical vibe from paranoid 70s to paranoid 00s, the script is dark and tart, funny and faithful. Nearly all the dialogue is drawn from the novel, and the few changes sharpen Dick's themes rather than squelch them. Linklater has kept the story dark, and haunted by rumors of God.
As has been reported, Keanu Reaves will play Bob Arctor, the Orange County narc who goes schizo after being assigned to spy on himself. Linklater has been planning this project for years; it was Reaves' interest in the story that finally got the ball rolling. As has been already noted, Winona Ryder, Robert Downey Jr., Woody Harrelson, and Rory Cochrane round out the cast, though it also needs to be mentioned that these are some of the most famous druggies in Hollywood. Actually, I don't know anything about Rory's personal habits, but he sure spouted convincing cannabinoid bon mots in Dazed & Confused.
During my time at Linklater's pine-forested getaway pad outside of Austin, which features a pagoda, a huge stone tower, and many pinball machines, I got to meet the genius team whose digital rotoscoping helped make Waking Life one of the few masterpieces of the new millennium. These are definitely the guys you want to bring Bob Arctor's scramble suit to life."
This was Charlie Kaufmans project but they decided to let Linklater do a version instead.
My second Linklater post of the morning concerns these pics (http://www.philipkdick.com/films_scanner-061204.html) from the set of A Scanner Darkly, notable mainly for the affirmation that all the characters look perfect, including Reeves, who seems to be in 'The Gift' mode.
Quote from: Ghostboythe characters look perfect, including Reeves, who seems to be in 'The Gift' mode.
you're so right. everyone looks great, namely winona, and reeves is totally in "Gift" mode
nah i think his patchy facial hair looks good for a junkie like arctor, they're gonna be drawn over anyway, a shame cos winona is looking damn fine.
Linklater's Roto-Vision "animation" sucks. I suppose he thinks he really came up something big when he first decided to use it. Little does he know that its been around for about 100 years...And even back then it sucked.
Way to screw up a potentially very cool movie, Rich!
Quote from: The Disco KidLinklater's Roto-Vision "animation" sucks.
Nope.
Quote from: The Disco KidI suppose he thinks he really came up something big when he first decided to use it.
Nope.
Quote from: The Disco KidLittle does he know that its been around for about 100 years...And even back then it sucked.
Nope.
Quote from: The Disco KidWay to screw up a potentially very cool movie, Rich!
Nah.
Quote from: matt35mmQuote from: The Disco KidLinklater's Roto-Vision "animation" sucks.
Nope.
Quote from: The Disco KidI suppose he thinks he really came up something big when he first decided to use it.
Nope.
Quote from: The Disco KidLittle does he know that its been around for about 100 years...And even back then it sucked.
Nope.
Quote from: The Disco KidWay to screw up a potentially very cool movie, Rich!
Nah.
Yep.
This looks really really cool--but for one thing: Reeves. Why? They could have picked somebody for the lead that can actually act!
Reeves is the man.
I'd go as far as 'Reeves is a man', definitely not the man.
Rotoscoped Reeves will convince you.
Quote from: meatballRotoscoped Reeves in a Linklater film adaptation of a Dick novel will convince you.
:-D
reeves is a poor mans christain bale..........................
equilibrium is actaully a neat film...................
i like seeing the great rory cochran.........slater.......... 8)
Quote from: NEON MERCURYreeves is a poor mans christain bale..........................
That's like comparing meatballs with sausage, just because they're both used in pastas.
Richard Linklater On A Scanner Darkly
Wednesday, June 30, 2004
by Edward Douglas
Richard Linklater has been doing the rounds for his latest movie, Before Sunset, a sequel to his 1995 indie favorite Before Sunrise, that opens in major cities this weekend. While in town, he talked to Coming Soon about his latest passion, his animated adaptation of Philip K. Dick's A Scanner Darkly, starring Keanu Reeves:
CS!: What is this movie about?
Linklater: "It's kind of a drug movie. It's set in the near future in the middle of a drug epidemic. It's going to be animated. I just shot the live action portion, but ultimately, it's an animated film using a similar rotoscoping process that I used in Waking Life. It's the same software, but it's been updated. [Animator] Bob Sabiston continues to work on it, so the animation is at an interesting place. It will have a different look that I think will work with the story well. I've been wanting to do another animated film, so I'm glad I got the chance."
CS!: What made you want to do this movie? Were you a big science fiction fan?
Linklater: "I was as a teenager, but I let it go a long time ago. I can't say that I am in a typical sense, but I do like Phillip K. Dick and I've read quite a bit of his stuff. A Scanner Darkly is one of my favorites of his, because it seemed the most personal. I was lucky enough to get an option on it a few years ago, so I just wrote an adaptation of it and thought it would be an interesting animated movie. It's not really that science fiction either. To me, it has one science fiction element, but beyond that, it's pretty realistic. I love that about Dick's stuff: paranoia plus a generation equal reality. It's like we're living in his science fiction as we speak, so it seemed really timely to me."
CS!: Many of Phillip K. Dick's stories have been turned into action films. What is going to be your take on this one?
LInklater: "A lot of Phillip K. Dick's stories and novels have always been adapted, but usually, they are taking some cool idea and making it work in some genre like an action film, and that can work. I like that novel so much that I wanted to do that story and I want to be very faithful and tell the whole story. What drives me crazy is that I think Phil K. Dick is hilarious. He's a really funny writer. I laugh when I read the books or I chuckle, and I wanted to make a movie like that. It's really darkly funny. I'm kind of making a comedy, but it's a weird comedy. Who knows how I pull it off, but I approached it like that. I hung out with his daughters a lot, and they liked my approach to it. They liked that someone was actually doing the story, not just plucking an idea and running with it. This is the story. This is that book. It feels pretty good. Keanu is great as Bob Barker, the lead character. He's an interesting guy. His thinking is such that I thought he would be perfect."
from the Spike Lee thread....
Richard Linklater's A Scanner Darkly, the Philip K. Dick adaptation that Warner Independent Pictures will release next September.
I just read Charlie Kaufman's script for this. How the hell did he let them take it away? It's the fucking funniest thing in the word! His Barris just might be the best character ever to say "Hey Bob, you want some dog shit? To chew on?"
Downey would be out of this world as Kaufman's Barris. I just hope Linklater's is slightly in the same vein, because it is priceless, man. Oh, I really wish Kaufman was still doing this. And who the fuck hired Keannu Reeves? Woody Harrelson ain't half bad, though.
I got a WI press release that said this will be released on September 16th...
...but more interestingly, AICN has a few hi-res stills from the film online. (http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=19085)
And the trailer will be attached to Constantine, they say.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimage%2Fasd3.jpg&hash=04fee31d1a85e683898e9579107ddc1f2310e8a8)
edit: DOUBLE NEWS POST
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimage%2Fasd1.jpg&hash=8c772753bdd41bf6b8bc77767644854a6aad8f9d) (http://aintitcool.com/image/bigasd1.jpg)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimage%2Fasd2.jpg&hash=45ddefa1e239bf06fb0ae755432bfc4b1db97eba) (http://aintitcool.com/image/bigasd2.jpg)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimage%2Fasd3.jpg&hash=04fee31d1a85e683898e9579107ddc1f2310e8a8) (http://aintitcool.com/image/bigasd3.jpg)
http://aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=19085
this is the best idea. now Link can do ANYTHING and it'll be visually the same level of reality as everything else so your eyes'll have no choice but to accept it!
I hated Waking Life, but this looks fucking KICKASS.
Yeah, it does look pretty cool and innovative, but who is the market for this movie?
I don't think it will do well, box office-wise. Let's hope Linklater's budget was small.
Quote from: PwaybloeYeah, it does look pretty cool and innovative, but who is the market for this movie?
I don't think it will do well, box office-wise. Let's hope Linklater's budget was small.
'cause, damn, that's exactly the right attitude to have! :yabbse-thumbup:
who wouldn't be interested in seeing this?
these stills are underwhelming
Quote from: Gamblor not so gone.I hated Waking Life, but this looks fucking KICKASS.
me too! :yabbse-thumbup: :yabbse-thumbup: :yabbse-thumbup:
Quote from: picolaswho wouldn't be interested in seeing this?
Ha ha!
Ok, let's get serious for a second...
This is the only movie I can think of that will actually look like a moving comic book. Unless I'm forgetting a movie that looks like pages of a comic book coming to life, this may be a first. It looks great to me.
Quote from: matt35mmThis is the only movie I can think of that will actually look like a moving comic book. It looks great to me.
scanner darkly isn't a comic book, thus this technique seems like a novelty act to me
Quote from: cowboykurtisQuote from: matt35mmThis is the only movie I can think of that will actually look like a moving comic book. It looks great to me.
scanner darkly isn't a comic book, thus this technique seems like a novelty act to me
I don't see the need for it to originate from a comic book to have the movie look like a comic book. And I don't see it as a novelty act, but rather a stylistic choice that will enhance the movie. There are certain things that work best in animation, and this looks like it'll have those things.
As a Waking Life fan, I'd say that the decision to rotoscope the movie wasn't a novelty thing at all. That movie wouldn't really work in live action and especially on DV. The animation is part of what makes it all work (for me, anyway). So I think that Linklater is going to take advantage of the things that one can only do in animation. I trust the mofo.
Quote from: PubrickQuote from: The Silver BulletI wonder if there's any particular reasoning behind its being animated?
hav u read the book?
there are parts in it which would benefit from the freedom animation allows. the suit/mask that the dude wears that distorts his image and voice would hav to be CGI'd anyway if it were live action. not to mention the transcendent moments, the weird morphing moments, other spoilerful things too.
i'm really liking link's approach.
Quote from: SleuthQuote from: PubrickQuote from: The Silver BulletI wonder if there's any particular reasoning behind its being animated?
hav u read the book?
there are parts in it which would benefit from the freedom animation allows. the suit/mask that the dude wears that distorts his image and voice would hav to be CGI'd anyway if it were live action. not to mention the transcendent moments, the weird morphing moments, other spoilerful things too.
i'm really liking link's approach.
i think parts will, but to do the whole film animated/rotoscoped is a shame in my book
why?
I think you just like to be grumpy sometimes.
Quote from: RegularKaratewhy?
I think you just like to be grumpy sometimes.
sometimes
?
http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2005-01-21/screens_string_all.html
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.austinchronicle.com%2Fissues%2Fdispatch%2F2005-01-21%2Fscreens_string7-1.jpg&hash=3507111a044072ba77c3fbaac04cc31b3d0cbdeb) (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.austinchronicle.com%2Fissues%2Fdispatch%2F2005-01-21%2Fscreens_string8-1.jpg&hash=f3aebed53ac5e97ec2d7eb463f592e3e21c8f7d7)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.austinchronicle.com%2Fissues%2Fdispatch%2F2005-01-21%2Fscreens_string9-1.jpg&hash=56ff6d7f6e01847f3861e58a2b535f86f2b975a5) (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.austinchronicle.com%2Fissues%2Fdispatch%2F2005-01-21%2Fscreens_string5-1.jpg&hash=3723c5a005092182597ae5530ceffe893a8cd6b6)
downey looks great. he better still have that line from the kaufman script, "hey bob, want some dog shit? to chew on?"
A Reason Dial-Up Sucks (http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2665143?htv=12&htv=12)
damn, when did ifilm get all bogged down with ads and corporatized? I havent been there for awhile, but it sucks now. I wont even watch that trailer, ill just wait for mac to post a link to a standalone quicktime version, fuck ifilm and fuck my beliefs.
it looks fucking awesome...i saw the trailer at constantine.
our avatars look cool together.
Quote from: Stefendamn, when did ifilm get all bogged down with ads and corporatized? I havent been there for awhile, but it sucks now. I wont even watch that trailer, ill just wait for mac to post a link to a standalone quicktime version, fuck ifilm and fuck my beliefs.
it happened around 2 years ago i think. anyway i had no problem watching the trailer, just skipped past one ad.
yep, life is awesome.
Mmmmm, that trailer was fantastic.
Quote from: Stefenill just wait for mac to post a link to a standalone quicktime version
Go
here. (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1340354&sdm=web&qtw=480&qth=300)
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Stefenill just wait for mac to post a link to a standalone quicktime version
Go here. (http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1340354&sdm=web&qtw=480&qth=300)
Thanks, MAC. Wow this looks really cool.
Undoubtedly. It's instantly clear how much better this will work as an animated film - the suits, in particular, are completely believable in this context (one only has to imagine the same effect in live action CGI to see how much better this route is). It's gonna be brilliant.
Quote from: GhostboyIt's gonna be brilliant.
i hope so. it looks GREAT.
Omifuckingawd.
Omi... omifuckinGAWD!
MY! GOD!
No yeah this looks awesome.
Quote from: matt35mmNo yeah this looks awesome.
yeah, no
I really like the look of the suits, but having read the book, I don't like the look of this trailer. Too many scenes that look like they're trying to spell shit out for you. That shouldn't be done with this.
I have some hope... I'm just a little scared after seeing the trailer (though the scrambles look awesome.)
SPOILERS (I think)
also, the trailer contains spoilers (I think)
Quote from: RegularKarateSPOILERS (I think)
also, the trailer contains spoilers (I think)
spoikerthe trailer starts halfway through the book. if the movie starts that way, with that plot, it will suck. but i think it's just another spoilerful trailer that hammers on the climax and ignores the premise. (are these really spoilers?)
Quote from: RegularKarateQuote from: matt35mmNo yeah this looks awesome.
yeah, no
I really like the look of the suits, but having read the book, I don't like the look of this trailer. Too many scenes that look like they're trying to spell shit out for you. That shouldn't be done with this.
I have some hope... I'm just a little scared after seeing the trailer (though the scrambles look awesome.)
But remember, this is a trailer. Just because THIS seems to spell things out, doesn't mean that the movie will. I don't think that Linklater is scared of confusing people who don't get it.
Trailers often contain spoilers and seem to spell everything out. Sideways, for instance, hasn't really been truthfully advertised--the commercials make it look like a silly comedy with a simple-minded story about two crazy idiot buddies on a rampage through wine-country. Basically Dumb & Dumber Go To Napa Valley. But... well, just remember that trailers are misleading. All we can really tell from this trailer is that the movie will LOOK cool.
That was the most amazing.....I don't know what to say. Linklater has won me over. I hope now everyone will see how Waking Life was just a horrible, necessary step to reach this...fucking genius. It looks just too fucking good to be true.
This looks great..
oh, u think so?
Quote from: Pubrickoh, u think so?
Yes I do.
:yabbse-thumbup:
Quote from: Gamblor Ain'tWorthADollarI hope now everyone will see how Waking Life was just a horrible, necessary step to reach this...fucking genius.
As good as I think A Scanner Darkly looks, I don't think it will be nearly as great as Waking Life.
SPOILER
The trailer does indeed seem to be made up footage mostly drawn from the last third of the book (the interview with the psychologists, in particular), but all sources say that the movies is incredibly faithful to the book. Thus, this is likely a case of climax-centered marketing. Which is fine, because it'll draw more crowds, and movies like this need to make money.
I really didn't like Waking Life very much, but I liked the animation. This animation doesn't look as good to me though. It's like I can see the DV through the animation and it doesn't necessarily fit that well over it.
Now that I think of it, if it would have only been animated in a few scenes, I think it might be cooler.
We'll see though... it's just a trailer.
SPOILERS
When I say it contains spoilers, I'm referring to the fact that Donna is seen at the end in what I can only assume is the second to last scene, giving away the only thing to really give away in the story. Not a big deal though.
Hmmm. I just talked to a friend of mine who's got a friend working on the film, and apparently it's probably gonna be pushed back to first quarter of next year. So in all likelihood, Bad News Bears is going to come out first.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latinoreview.com%2Ffilms_2005%2Fshowest%2Fscannerdarkly.jpg&hash=6672be2722bbc4633f34fd6ab0927dad558abca2)
You have to copy:
http://www.latinoreview.com/films_2005/showest/scannerdarkly.jpg
and paste it into your browser bar thingy. You can't link it.
Anyway, I like the poster. And it totally sucks if it's true that this will be pushed back.
(https://xixax.com/files/picolas/kean.jpg)
Nice poster, but it's still another bighead.
no mention of richard linklater in the poster at all...
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.philipkdick.com%2Fimages%2Ffilms_scanner-keanu-woody.jpg&hash=0781532f3c725a3bee043f330c9422902305a6ae)
welcome to the first page, aka 10 months ago..
Quote from: Ghostboythese pics (http://www.philipkdick.com/films_scanner-061204.html)
So this is 2006 now! Boo. This was the only interesting movie on my horizon for this year.
Quote from: ®edlumSo this is 2006 now! Boo. This was the only interesting movie on my horizon for this year.
Word on the street from those here who have seen it is that it's boring and needs some serious fixin'.
Also, more word on the street suggests that Bob Sabiston (developer of the Waking Life software) and his team quit.
NO!
Why???? What is going on with this world? I need this movie to be good, I just need it!
Comic-Con 2005: Philip K. Dick's A Scanner Darkly Panel
New details drop about the new Richard Linklater pic.
Comic-Con attendees got their first exclusive look at Philip K. Dick's A Scanner Darkly here in San Diego. More of the story unspooled today in an extended trailer created specifically for the Con and a three-minute clip starring Woody Harrelson, Wynona Ryder, Keanu Reeves, and a frenetic Robert Downey Jr. A Scanner Darkly is a Richard Linklater animated film using "interpolated rotoscoping," a technique where animators overlay existing live-action content. It's Linklater's second foray into the technique, having first dipped in for Waking Life.
The film is looking fantastic. In the three-minute sequence, Robert Downey Jr.'s character has just purchased what could be a stolen bike and goes home to ruminate on his purchase with his friends. What follows is the kind of staccato dialog that Linklater excels at. The animation is a step beyond that of Waking Life, with considerably more detail in facial expressions and movement, a conscious effort on the part of the animators.
Producers Tommy Pallotta and Lead Animators Sterling Allen, Evan Cagle, Nick Derrington, Christopher Jennings, and a Philip K. Dick "android" took questions from the audience. Things IGN has learned:
Filming was completed last year
Tentative release date of March 2006, but there is "another Keanu film" out around that same time. As for the release date constantly shifting, Pallotta says he believes that was because the studio initially set the date without checking in with them to see how long it was going to take to complete.
The actors worked for scale and so the entire production costs did not exceed $8 million dollar budget.
http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=20725
The character posters show at this link are fantastic. Winona looks especially beautiful in this film.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcoolnews.com%2Fimages%2Fcomiccon2005%2FScannerRyder.jpg&hash=3610fbe56d90375ef03a6652089ec08846f52c53)
QuoteTotal budget, including animation and actor's salaries on A SCANNER DARKLY is $8 million.
:yabbse-thumbup: :yabbse-thumbup:
Yeah. No frills production. I read a report of someone who commented on how shabby the raw DV footage looked. No hair and makeup for the actors etc. I would expect that all the pieces of featured technology in the film were just basic props for guiding the animators on placement.
Wino Forever.
Quote from: aint it cool-"We have boobies and frontal" was said by one of the animators in regards to the rating of the movie. This was greeted by much applause.
Quote from: Ultrahip Lobster SupperWino Forever.
Quote from: cronopio:yabbse-thumbup: :yabbse-thumbup:
Anyone have $11,000 to splurge with?
http://www01.charityfolks.com/cfauctions/auction_bid.asp?AuctionID=1156&catname=The%20American%20Red%20Cross%20Disaster%20Relief%20Auction
Man is this going to be great. I was siked by the trailer. But I hadn't read the book yet. Now that I have this is easily my most looked forward to movie. Ryder seems like the perfect Donna, and Robert Downy Jr. as Barris is just incredible. I don't mind Keanu that much, but I think someone like say, Sam Rockwell, could be an amazing Arctor. Everythings pointing to greatness.
The following is a quote from today's Green Cine Daily blog:
"And finally for now, I'm going to be ridiculously irresponsible (but you know, life is short) and pass along an unsubstantiated rumor: Radiohead may be this close to signing on to do a new score for Richard Linklater's A Scanner Darkly. Even if that turns out not to be true, in some parallel universe, that film is screening and it sounds lovely."
Does anyone else have info on this rumor? Sounds like a stretch.
Quote from: Sunrise on December 11, 2005, 06:10:51 PM
The following is a quote from today's Green Cine Daily blog:
"And finally for now, I'm going to be ridiculously irresponsible (but you know, life is short) and pass along an unsubstantiated rumor: Radiohead may be this close to signing on to do a new score for Richard Linklater's A Scanner Darkly. Even if that turns out not to be true, in some parallel universe, that film is screening and it sounds lovely."
Does anyone else have info on this rumor? Sounds like a stretch.
They've always expressed interest to do a score. It's also too trendy for me to believe automatically.
(This off www.ateaseweb.com) Can't wait for this film. More info below..
According to MoviesOnline.ca, Radiohead have been approached for doing the score for the Scanner Darkly film:
The movie is doing very well in test screenings, but the #1 complaint audiences have is with the score. So I can only tell you this anonymously, but the producers have approached RADIOHEAD about doing a new score for the film and it looks like everything is going to go through.
So in addition to an awesome animated Phillip K. Dick film, we will have a brand new Radiohead score to look forward to. as far as I know, this is the first time Radiohead has ever done a score for the film. While this is still a "rumor" at this time, I would give it a 99% accuracy rating at this point.
Quote from: Myxo on December 14, 2005, 07:15:20 AM
the producers have approached RADIOHEAD about doing a new score for the film and it looks like everything is going to go through.
I just peed a little.
:yabbse-sad:
As reported earlier, Radiohead were asked to do the score of the animated Phillip K. Dick film 'A Scanner Darkly'. However, an official source says Radiohead were indeed approached to record the music for Richard Linklater's film, but the band are not doing it, because Radiohead are recording their new album.
I'd bet against it.
edit: and I'd be a winner if I was 30 seconds quicker.
I just died a little.
pee just went back in my wiener a little...
But, we know, however, that the fact that they ASKED Radiohead to do the score means that this will be a badass movie. So Radiohead couldn't do it, but we know now that Linklater is looking specifically for "badassness."
I'm sure whoever does the music will be badass.
That would have been awesome, though.
Quote from: matt35mm on December 14, 2005, 09:06:34 PM
I'm sure whoever does the music will be badass.
It's Golden Arm Trio. (http://www.goldenarmtrio.net/)
badass.
EARLY REVIEW OF A SCANNER DARKLY (from a test screening with temp music)
http://www.moviesonline.ca/movie_review_detail.php?id=1272
By "The Dude"
So, I come home right after seeing Kong, and I'm checking the email, when what do I see but an invitation to an early screening of Richard Linklater's A Scanner Darkly. Hells yes, I am going. I am an unabashed Richard Linklater fan, and I was curious as hell to see how he'd adapt Philip K Dick's futuristic tale of drugs and the men responsible for maintaining the law with these drugs. I knew Linklater was doing it in the same animated rotoscoping form he used with Waking Life, which intrigued me even more. I could not wait to see this movie, and a chance to see it, even if it's not completely finished yet, was something I would not pass up on.
And I'm glad I didn't. A Scanner Darkly delivers. At least, it delivered up to my expectations. They may be very high expectations, though, I realize. It is a dense movie, that is not going to be easy to understand in one viewing. Even I'm not 100% sure about what happened. (Not as bad as with Syriana, though).
Here's the basic story: In the near future (eight years or so, if I remember correctly), in Orange County, California, there is a substance that is sweeping the area called Substance D. Undercover narcotics agent FRED is trying to infiltrate the confidence of a dealer named Bob Arctor. Bob Arctor is a dealer as well as a user of the D. He lives in a crazy home, sharing space with users Barris (Robert Downey Jr) and Luckman (Woody Harrelson). He casually dates coke whore Donna (Winona Ryder), and is occasionally visited by Freck (Rory Cochrane), who is so deep into the use of D, he constatnly sees aphids that aren't there, as well as other things. Oh, and Arctor is so heavy into the D himself, that he doesn't realize that he's also Fred, the agent pursuing him.
That's not really giving anything away. If you pick up a copy of the book, it tells you that right on the back. Fred's brain has split into two battling hemispheres that are constantly playing tricks on him. He's not exactly sure what is real, and what we witness is his degradation through this world. Paranoia sets in, big time. I won;t tell you where the story ends up, but it is definitely not what you'd expect. Thankfully, it's also not a mindless ending, or an ending that's changed to entice masses, like most of Dick's work.
Now, the film looks gorgeous. As I mentioned, it's the rotoscope process used in Waking Life, where the action was shot with the live actors on digital video, and then animators painstakingly draw over every frame into this crazy stylized hyper real world. Some found that to be irritating in Waking Life, but I enjoyed it. It was something new and exciting visually. A Scanner Darkly ups the ante, because the animation remains, for the most part, consistent, as opposed to different styles throughout Waking Life. The important thing is, it looks great. An important plot device is a suit that constantly changes it's appearances, so as if to blend into a crowd with hundreds of different parts flashing. I can't describe it, and if this movie were done live action, it would look impossibly fake. But here, it works with the environments, and it's awesome to see.
The scanner referred to in the title are the surveillance devices installed to spy on citizens. the same scanner Fred uses to watch Bob Arctor and his insane friends' ramblings and paranoid delusions. These scenes are highly animated, from both visual look, and from the actors within.
The acting works perfectly, by the way. Keanu does confused well. But he looks badass, and is quite fitting. Downey and Harrelson steal the show with incredibly animated characters. Who never shut up. There's a scene where Downey creates a silencer for his pistol that has to be seen. He's really good in this. Reminds me of Brad Pitt in 12 Monkeys. (More on that later). And he and Harrelson act off each other wonderfully. Winona Ryder is good as well. (Funny to note how all these actors have been associated with drugs and trouble making throughout their careers, and here they all are turning in outstanding work). And Rory Cochrane, who you might remember from Linklater's Dazed and Confused as the stoner Slater ("check ya later"), is awesome as Freck. He's far too gone to make any kind of sense, who are usually the people who make the most amount of sense at the end. But he has this fantastic scene where, well, I'm not gonna say how he got there, but i will tell you it ends with a thousand eyed alien reading a list of his sins. It's gotta be seen to be believed. But he pulls it off well.
Linklater has worked wonders. You can tell he really wanted to tell this story in a visual way. And the ending of the big is kind of hard to pull off, but he managed to do it. Kudos. But there's never a doubt in my mind that he's in charge, and showing u what we need to see. It's very exciting filmmaking.
Since it was a test screening, I realize that it might change when it's released theatrically. I hope it doesn't. (Although, I would like to hear a new Radiohead score, if that rumor turns out to be true. The temp score had some good Radiohead Kid A and beyond songs scattered throughout, and that worked nicely, but an all new score would kick an obscene amount of ass). It's a tough movie to understand, and I definitely want to see it again, but I feel that general audiences would probably not appreciate it all too much. I realize that sounds kind of elitist, but I have a feeling that most people won't like it. I am not one of those people, and I loved this movie.
I actually ran into Linklater after the screening. This was kind of a trip for me (as I was still disoriented after the movie), but I managed to get myself together, shake his hand, and express what a fan I am, and how cool it was to meet him. We spoke a little about the movie, and he seemed kind of nervous about the test screening process. I agreed with him, and felt that marketing this will be a very hard sell. And it will be a hard sell, but I know this movie has a fair amount of movie lovers looking forward to it. I tell you, it's worth it. In hindsight, I should have asked him if I could buy him a beer after the whole studio process was done with, but I barely held it together as is. If he reads this, Mr. Linklater, I'm a huge fan, I loved the movie, and if you're ever back in town, I'll buy you that beer.
(Also, in hindsight, I should have asked him about the Radiohead score rumor, but still, it was an honor to meet one of my heroes/role models).
On the sheet of paper they made me fill out after viewing the movie, it asked "does this movie remind you of any other movies?" I totally drew a blank while responding, but I had some time to think about it, and I came up with two. 12 Monkeys and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. I realize they're both Terry Gilliam films, and this movie is as close to Gilliam as Linklater will get. It has that aura of paranoia, wrapped around drugs, filled with crazy performances, topped with damn fine visuals. They're same in tone, mostly. If you like interesting films, then I can't recommend this movie enough. When it comes out in March, I suggest you go see it opening weekend, or the very first chance you get. Unique, challenging, and a feast for the eyes, this is a movie for your brain.
http://pdl.warnerbros.com/wip/us/med/scanner_darkly/scanner_darkly_a_tlr2_qt_700.mov
That review and that trailer have me officially: :multi:
wow.
I was under the impression that this film was being released in March, and I don't know if anything was posted about it, but it's been pushed back again. These are the current release dates:
July 7, 2006 (NY, LA, SF, Seattle, Boston; wider release: July 14; moderate release: July 28)
Bummer.
If any movie that I'm looking forward to should be released on Bestille Day it should Marie-Antoinette and not A Scanner Darkly. Just sayin.
July 7 it is...and this is a nice article on the production and reasons for the delays. Sounds like things got pretty heated during the animation process.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.03/scanner.html?pg=1&topic=scanner&topic_set=
NYCC '06: A Scanner Darkly--the First 30 Minutes
Comic-Con attendees are treated to a sneak peek at the upcoming Philip K. Dick adaptation.
Go to enough comic book conventions and you are likely to see a cool sneak peek or two. The surprise of today's New York Comic-Con came from Warner Independent Pictures, who decided to showcase the first thirty minutes of the futuristic A Scanner Darkly to a crowd of lucky show-goers.
Audiences recently got a better idea of what the Richard Linklater film is about when the long form trailer hit the Internet a few weeks back, but the extended viewing we got at the con afforded us a closer look at the amazing interpolated rotoscope animation style and shed light on more of the story elements.
For those who have not yet heard of the project, A Scanner Darkly is based on the sci-fi novel by Hollywood favorite Philip K. Dick, whose works have been adapted into Minority Report, Blade Runner and Total Recall. This is perhaps the most faithful of a Dick story yet, and its rights were acquired at a discount because the filmmakers promised to remain true to the tale's original intent.
Set seven years in the future, the government is losing the war on drugs, and a quarter of the population has fallen prey to a drug known as Substance D. "Either you're on it, or you haven't tried it," remarks Robert Downey Jr.'s character early in the film.
The story tracks an undercover cop and his relationship with his friends, several of whom are mixed up in the mire of drugs. Every relationship and transaction is tracked by the government with advanced surveillance equipment, and only a single powerful corporation goes unchecked. That is the basic outline of what goes on… If you want to fully preserve the sanctity of the viewing experience, you may want to stop reading here, as we are about to delve deeper into the first 30 minutes, and as such, MILD SPOILERS FOLLOW.
In the thirty minutes we saw, the most overwhelming feeling the movie creates is a sense of crushing paranoia. The animation oozes and slinks around, casting an eerie sheen on the proceedings. The film opens with a crazy-making drug sequence where one of the (allegedly) addicted characters claws at his body, feeling he is being attacked by giant aphids. That scene sets the tone for the claustrophobic and desperate film, but what ices the sense of paranoia is the technology known as a "scramble suit," a sort of camouflage which cycles through millions of random body parts, completely obscuring its wearer. The film invites us inside the suit, where we see the world from the perspective of the main character, played by sci-fi vet Keanu Reeves.
Upping the paranoia ante further is the Big Brother approach to "scanning." The society portrayed employs an almost 1:1 ratio of watchers to citizens, and complete surveillance of everyone's movements. One sequence shows the central network of tracking systems as they hone in on multiple targets, finally settling on their intended victim, who is merely walking down the street. The information collection is apparent in every scene, with distorted views, record light indicators, security camera angles and recorded audio effects tipping off the spying. The ultimate payoff of this attention to the omnipresent nature of civilian surveillance is a sense of repression and dread.
These science-fiction elements really lend themselves to the animated style, which is created by a program that is a proprietary blend of Flash and Illustrator. Linklater used almost the same technology to make his philosophical ponder-fest Waking Life. Tweaks have been made to the software, including a warp function to provide depth of field, lending Darkly much more dimension than Waking Life enjoyed.
From the first glimpse, the performances seem solid and nuanced, and it's easy to see why actors would want to be associated with this production. Robert Downey Jr. especially stands out as a neurotic, shifty and hilarious schemer. Overall, the film is much funnier than it comes across in the trailer, and the paranoia is played as much for laughs as thrills.
If the rest of the film is as intriguing and affecting as the first thirty minutes, audiences should be in for a mind-blowing head-trip into the future.
i think i might be seeing this tonight
This will be quick because I'm on my way to my next volunteer shift, but I saw this yesterday.
They told us that it wasn't totally finished, but it seems that the only two things that aren't finished are the soundmix and score.
I'm a huge fan of the book so I have to say that this movie was a little disapointing, but I really want to see it again. The problem that I had with it was that a lot of it the scenes were just kind of bland reenactments from the book with more updated dialogue (so they say "dude" instead of "man") so it ended up kind of dragging in spots. On the other hand some of the scenes were really great.
The animation: for the most part, the animation added a real dreamlike quality to it, but a lot of the time, it looked like the animated bits were kind of transparent, like I could see through to the video... this might just because the tracking and the colors were so accurate, but it kind of took me out of it.
I thought it was interesting that the temp score had a lot of radiohead. There was a song during the end credits that I didn't recognize... I think it was saying "it's fucked up... it's fucked up"... anyone know of an rh song that repeats that a few times?
okay, gotta go
i was impressed. i haven't read the book so there were a few (a lot actually) times where i was confused but at least there was something perdy to look at. woody harrelson and robert downey jr. were hilarious, the radiohead was nice and i have such a desire to read the book now. i can't wait to see it again...
'A Scanner Darkly'
Richard Linklater is drawn to the story, not fitting a genre.
Source: Los Angeles Times
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.calendarlive.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2006-05%2F23248081.jpg&hash=4336785e2737b62c34fd39b72ba160e7f2ef2ba5)
Richard LINKLATER doesn't consider himself an auteur because he doesn't know "what the standard is. The truth is everyone has a feeling out there who is making personal films and who isn't. I think it is one of those [terms that is] completely undefinable."
Since the release of his well-received first theatrical film, 1991's plotless comedy "Slacker," the Austin-based filmmaker has tackled the western genre ("The Newton Boys"), romantic dramas ("Before Sunrise" and "Before Sunset"), an experimental drama ("Tape") and even animation ("Waking Life"). Linklater has also made two excursions into the major studio world — directing the 2003 hit comedy "School of Rock" and the poorly received 2005 remake of "The Bad News Bears."
"Some people are kind of genre busters," he says. "I never thought of myself like that. There are certain stories you want to tell. When I was doing 'Before Sunrise' I never thought, 'I am in the genre of romantic comedy.' I was more like 'I am telling the story of these two people.' It is never genre first."
Linklater's latest film, "A Scanner Darkly," slated to open July 7, is a surreal psychological thriller. Based on the Philip K. Dick novel, "Scanner" is set in Anaheim in the not-so-distant future where an increasing number of the population is addicted to a drug called Substance D.
Keanu Reeves plays an undercover cop assigned to spy on his Substance D-abusing friends. Just as with "Waking Life," the movie was filmed as a live-action feature and then animated through a time-consuming but relatively inexpensive rotoscoping technique — each frame of the live-action film is traced over and painted in to give it the look of a graphic novel. (The movie cost a reported $8 million to make.)
"I always saw the movie [animated]," says Linklater, 45. "I thought the effect of this animation put the viewer in the right head space to take in this movie."
Linklater wrote the script years ago but had delays getting it off the ground. "There was the thinking that 'Adults don't go to animated movies and we should do it live action.' " The problem with that, Linklater said, is that the subject matter doesn't warrant the $20 million to $30 million that a live-action movie would probably cost.
"It is a low-budget counterculture film," he said.
Scanner Darkly Trailer Remix Contest
Finally, a Help Us Advertise Our Movie contest that doesn't totally suck!
RES, Microsoft, Warner Brothers, and Jumpcut are co-sponsoring a contest to remix the trailer of Richard Linklater's A Scanner Darkly, due in theaters (finally) July 7. The remix site offers the current trailer for download, and asks entrants to create a variation that runs between one and three minutes, using both the downloaded footage and any new footage created specifically for the contest. What makes it cool, however, are the prizes. Instead of the "We might use your poster in a few small towns if we really like it and you'll feel important" rewards that tend to come with these fan-participation contests, the winner of this one gets some pretty awesome stuff: In addition to a trip to the US premiere (including airfare and hotel, thanks very much), the lucky remixer also takes home "a Microsoft Windows 64-bit powered professional video editing workstation with Adobe Production Studio Premium." There are also some runner-up prizes on offer, as well as an audience award for a trailer chosen by website visitors.
If you're interested, go download the goods: http://scanner.res.com/
All entries must be uploaded by June 7.
Dammit, why not a G5 or something?
Quote from: Gamblour le flambeur on May 14, 2006, 11:19:31 AM
Dammit, why not a G5 or something?
QuoteRES, Microsoft, Warner Brothers, and Jumpcut are co-sponsoring a contest
edit: I feel like a bastard for doing a reply quote quote. Sorry Gamblour.
haha no worries, that was a good point. but still....damn microsoft. Considering that I remember on the Waking Life dvd, the guy is using an Apple to rotoscope that film, Linklater has sold his soul to the almighty ollar!
'A Scanner Darkly' Presents Drug State
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.movies1.yimg.com%2Fentertainment.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fent%2Fap%2F20060525%2Fxle103_film_cannes_a_scanner_darkly.sff.jpg&hash=362df54236d4d4437a10c8e446194cb4eaf4952e)
Richard Linklater, you've landed lookers such as Keanu Reeves, Winona Ryder and Robert Downey Jr. in your science fiction fantasy. What are you going to do now?
Paint over their pretty faces to make digital cartoon characters out of them, then put the actors through a hazy narcotic nightmare in which they ramble about in manic paranoia.
"A Scanner Darkly," which premiered Thursday at the Cannes Film Festival, is the bleak underbelly of director Linklater's teen-party romp "Dazed and Confused." Adapted from the novel by sci-fi master Philip K. Dick, who based the story partly on his own drug abuse, "A Scanner Darkly" is a talky, twisted hodgepodge of sobering ideas centered on people who are anything but sober.
Linklater ("School of Rock," "Slacker") created the film the same way he made his 2001 philosophical ramble "Waking Life," shooting the actors in live action then painting over them with shimmery digital animation.
The faces of Reeves, Ryder, Downey and co-star Woody Harrelson remain recognizable, yet the animation makes them appear as though they're wandering through a living, breathing comic book.
"I had one question for Mr. Linklater, and that was: If I chew up the scenery, can you just animate it back in later?" Downey joked.
Linklater said overlaying animation on the actors was simply a creative choice, the same as deciding whether to shoot in color or black and white.
"It felt like this was the best way to tell this particular story," Linklater said. "I think it looks cool, too. Kind of a graphic novel come to life."
"A Scanner Darkly" is set seven years in the future, when a new drug called Substance D has arrived on the scene and gradually turns its users from suspicion to fear to paranoia regarding everyone around them.
Reeves plays an undercover cop assigned to spy on the activities of his circle of associates, including Ryder, Downey, Harrelson and "Dazed and Confused" co-star Rory Cochrane.
Abusing Substance D to maintain his cover, Reeves' character loses himself in a schizoid personality disorder, a crisis that plays out externally in the cloak he and other undercover operatives wear to conceal their identities from one another by projecting ever-changing features on their faces.
The film is Linklater's second to screen at this year's Cannes festival, which ends Sunday. Linklater's consumer satire "Fast Food Nation" played in the festival's main competition, while "A Scanner Darkly" was in a secondary competition.
"A Scanner Darkly" debuts in U.S. theaters July 7, and "Fast Food Nation" opens next fall.
The reality-bending fiction of Dick, who died in 1982, has been frequently turned into films, including "Blade Runner," based on his novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", and the short-story adaptations "Minority Report," "Total Recall" (from a tale titled "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale") and "Paycheck."
Jesus Christ, Linklater's turning into Stallone.
And his arm is very tiny.
I just got back from seeing this, and I think I agree completely with RK. It's intermittently brilliant, but it's got quite a bit of lag time. I think the main problem is that Linklater focuses on the comedy a bit too much, and not enough on the paranoid schizophrenic part (by the time Bob Arctor's narration starts coming in in the last third, it's a welcome dose of subjectivity). While Robert Downey jr. and Woody Harrelson are both hilarious, they steal way too much of the film, and Keanu sorta just disappears into the background in their scenes together.
I didn't have a problem with the animation; and while I think the movie is worth seeing regardless, those who are on the fence should go just to see the scramble suits. They're amazing - the effect in the trailers were incomplete, and I was blown away by how well they worked.
The Golden Arm Trio score was really nice, too.
Quote from: Ghostboy on June 13, 2006, 04:45:37 PM
The Golden Arm Trio score was really nice, too.
The main reason I want to see it again. I got no golden arm trio.
saw this tonite and i'll agree with ghostboy and rk. it was good, but it was like spending 2 hours over at your druggy friends house and it just wouldnt let up. (maybe that makes it a success?) i liked it though. keanu and robert downey jr. were there, introduced the film and sat down and watched it with us which was surreal. ethan hawke showed up too to watch the film, there were funny hellos to keanu and downey which feeds directly into the 'all famous people must know each other' myth. linklater was on a delayed flight so he arrived at the end for the Q&A and he seems like a very cool guy, so i think i will try to cut him some more slack in the future. :oops: got my Before Sunset and Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey signed so thats pretty awesome.
there is some lag time at the beginning (or somewhere around there) of the last third of the film that prevents me from going completely nuts over this movie. what a great film!
Totally great. It really captures the spirit of the book. I loved all of the stuff with the three male leads. The 18 speed conversation was great. The only things I can think of that would make it any better would be more time with Arctor and way more time at new path. That lasted only like a second. A def. must see. Now someone bring on Valis.
Quote from: killafilm on July 07, 2006, 03:14:40 PM
It really captures the spirit of the book.
if you had someone who didn't understand the book rewrite it.
I've never read any Philip K. Dick because no other film really made me want to, so I cannot give any comment on the spirit of the book, which I will read.
Although at times difficult to sit through (or perhaps because of it), this is my favorite movie so far this year. I will have to see it at least once more before I can fully say why, apart from my fascination with the way it made me feel. It struck a particular chord--a complex one--with me. I think that this is the kind of film where a lot of people will come out saying what they would have changed about it and how it could be done better, but it was that specific recipe of rough edges and frustrating demands and weight that spilled out once in a while from a structure and style that could hardly contain it that really worked for me. All the things that made my head ache, and even some of the mundane-ness of it all that will keep most people from saying that it was wholly mindblowing, I felt was apt... and suspect was deliberate.
I also suspect that I'll be thinking about this film for days, and will have to see it again soon. Even just thinking about it a little more while writing this, I'm coming to appreciate it more. I think it's an important film for all that it is and isn't. Again, I'll need to see it again before I can detail why. This little review has been all from my initial gut-feeling. I wholly recommend it, though, of course.
Good review Matt. This is one of the best of the year. I haven't read any Dick novels either, and I was a little confused about the plot, but i don't feel like you need to get all the plot points to enjoy a movie. and this movie is pretty great. it will undoubtedly garner cult-classic status with the college crowd, but this one actually deserves it. Its hard for me to explain what I liked about it until I see it again, but, like you said, there's this tiny part in me that just knows this one will stick with me for a while. its a drug movie, yes, but its so much more. every performance is wonderful, but i didnt love the movie for its performances. right now i just remember certain moments or sequences and perfectly surreal images: the whole sequence with Freck and the radio, the closing moments, the skanner darkly monologue. there's a lot going on in this movie and i'm currently only able to scratch at the surface.
expect a more formal review once i get to watch it again, i just felt compelled to second matt's enthusiasm.
Quote from: matt35mm on July 07, 2006, 07:35:35 PM
I've never read any Philip K. Dick because no other film really made me want to
A) why does a film have to make you want to?
B) Blade Runner?
I saw this again tonight and liked it quite a bit more.
I still think that it doesn't quite capture the book that well, but it clicked a little bit better.
Quote from: JG on July 07, 2006, 10:38:07 PM
Good review Matt.
really? after reading his and your review i feel like i've stumbled upon someone's therapy session transcripts.
i don't know why, i don't know why, it made me feel.. let's work through it together, go on, Rhonda, is there something you'd like to say to your husband? wonderful, now instead of blaming him why don't we try again and use more "I" words. i think we've made a lot of progress today, let's schedule another session for next week--- oh fiddlesticks she has her stupid birthday that day sorry doc she's got me by the balls you see. that's perfectly fine, now let's try again, remember what i said - and you don't hav to call me doc i'm a psychologist not a psychiatrist. okay,
I feel that
MY wife's birthday is stupid, and that makes
ME feel angry,
I don't know why. Rhonda do you have anything to say to that? i want a divorce, i don't know why.
haha you are an odd man, pubrick.
you'll understand a little better when u see the movie. i hope.
Quote from: JG on July 08, 2006, 12:44:12 AM
haha pubrick is such an odd man.
one would understand a little better when one sees the movie. one would hope.
Quote from: RegularKarate on July 07, 2006, 11:11:53 PM
Quote from: matt35mm on July 07, 2006, 07:35:35 PM
I've never read any Philip K. Dick because no other film really made me want to
A) why does a film have to make you want to?
B) Blade Runner?
A) It just didn't help when I didn't like most of the movies that were based on his books, even though I kept hearing that he was never properly adapted and was actually good and prophetic and all of that. He just never became high on my list of interests. When there's so many things one should see and read and hear and do, there's nothing wrong with letting a movie remind or inspire you to get on that.
B) I don't care if no one else feels this way, but I didn't really like Blade Runner. I'll give it another shot someday, I'm sure, but I can definitely say that the movie didn't make me feel like reading the story.
Quote from: Pubrick on July 08, 2006, 12:36:53 AM
Quote from: JG on July 07, 2006, 10:38:07 PM
Good review Matt.
really? after reading his and your review i feel like i've stumbled upon someone's therapy session transcripts.
I did specify that it was a gut reaction that I felt I should note before I watched it again to make a secondary, more precise-with-words review. With most movies, you generally know how you should feel after you've seen it. I'm not ashamed to note that this movie made me not know. I wanted to note it here because I knew that I planned on seeing it again soon, and doing a lot of thinking about it. My opinion could sway back and forth wildly on this one, and I could come back a week from now saying that, oh, actually it's just an interesting if not substantial experiment. But I would probably give it high marks just for making me genuinely sway back and forth and having it linger in my mind. So as for why not just wait until then and write one better review--because I wanted each to be its own reference point for that moment.
So, yes, as to a therapist, I told you what I felt. Later, armed with time to think and a second viewing, I will more clearly elaborate. Or you can just take it as a clue that this movie is successful at stirring you up and scrambling your brains so that you could only review it with indistinct mush, which is probably a good sign for this particular movie. I can't review it with a Worked, Didn't, Winner format. Sorry.
Richard Linklater director of A Scanner Darkly
By Daniel Robert Epstein
Over the past 15 years Richard Linklater has turned into one of the great American film auteurs. His last few years have been his most exciting artistically and financially. School of Rock was his biggest hit and he followed that up with Before Sunset for which he was nominated for an Academy Award. Now comes his adaptation of Philip K. Dick's novel A Scanner Darkly which utilizes the computer rotoscoping he first experimented with in Waking Life. A Scanner Darkly stars Keanu Reeves as Bob Arctor, a man so far undercover within a group of junkies addicted to Substance D that he no longer knows what is real and what isn't. It also reteams him with his Dazed and Confused co-star Rory Cochrane. I got a chance to talk with Linklater about maneuvering with the Hollywood studio system, why rotoscoping works and the amazing Criterion Collection Director Approved DVD version of Dazed and Confused.
Daniel Robert Epstein: Many of the scenes in A Scanner Darkly reminded me of my friends and I sitting around getting high. We would turn to the person we knew the least and go, "You know what, you're a narc."
Richard Linklater: [laughs] This book was a little autobiographical for Philip K. Dick because at one point his family moved out and these guys moved in. It was sort of an open door policy. The people he loved were coming by and he was the host of his house. He was witty, smart and he told long stories. There were a lot of people around and he grew suspicious, especially at this time in history, that there were people around who were undercover.
DRE: In the respect of people just randomly coming by and crashing in his house, sounds like it could be autobiographical for you as well.
RL: That was me in the 80's. We all have that point in our lives. We left the front door open so people could just come in any time.
DRE: Was that in your mind when you were making this movie?
RL: It was probably in my mind as I approached the novel as something I could make into a movie. I think before you take something like that on you better feel that it is yours. There were a lot of elements that made me think, "This is the Philip K. Dick novel that I could make a movie out of." There's probably a lot of his books I couldn't, but I felt I knew these people. I knew this worked and I felt that I had a handle on it.
DRE: When you watched a scene in a movie before you guys rotoscoped how did that differ from when you watched a scene once you added the animation?
RL: The scenes without animation seemed very literal. Film is a pretty blunt instrument. This whole story exists in an altered state of being and consciousness. It definitely now has a lack of reality. In my mind, it didn't work near as well live action, there are a lot of elements that would have stood out.
DRE: Is there a future for rotoscoping besides commercials and what you do?
RL: I think people will always try to tell stories in ways that they think work for the story. It's an interesting time for animation. If there's anything going on I think it's the home computer animation. Not the Pixar version because that's pretty far out of reach for everybody but more along the lines of indie animation. Adult animation is a marginalized world which is not taken too seriously in the same way that Philip K. Dick's sci-fi writing was maybe not taken too serious. In it's day there was a sophisticated type of person who would look down their nose at it. That same person would look at the animation and not see what it is trying to do.
DRE: Philip K. Dick's work seems just as relevant now as it ever did.
RL: Yeah I think so. I think time has been nothing but great for him. His books were so far ahead of their time and in his day he was categorized into the sci-fi ghetto but time has caught up and I think people now see him for what he was, a great novelist with a lot of really stunning ideas, a lot of depth, passionately wonderful characters and just a great view of the world. Back then what he thought would have been called conspiracy or crackpot thinking. But a lot of it has proved pretty prescient. That's why this book felt very contemporary to me.
DRE: For the most part your non studio films have a very slow pace. Does it just take a slower pace to tell a more mature story?
RL: I think a lot of it has to do with the story that unfolds via the characters rather than plot driven. If you get caught up too much in a big plot, you tend to have to move faster and have more going on. This story is paced leisurely. But if you just think about it, it does take place over just a few days initially. But it just doesn't have a really hurried pace. All the nice little plot twists and turns are set in a hanging out type atmosphere.
DRE: It almost seems like you could pick up with this group of characters at any time in their lives and do another whole movie about them.
RL: [laughs] That goes for a lot of characters but of course it would be a different movie. To see guys the age of Woody Harrelson, Robert Downey Jr., Rory Cochrane, Winona Ryder, you think that there's been a life previous to this. We see it with Bob Arctor's character with his wife and kid with a straight existence. That's probably true of the other guys too but they've reconvened in a different familial situation.
DRE: Could this be Rory's character from Dazed and Confused all grown up and on a new drug?
RL: [laughs] He should have stuck with just the marijuana.
DRE: How was it working with Rory again?
RL: Wonderful. The thing about working with actors, you just want to work with them again when the part is right. I've would love to do it again with so many people in this movie. I was very lucky. It's a wonderful cast.
DRE: For the DVD of A Scanner Darkly will we get to see scenes before they were rotoscoped?
RL: I hope so. I think there'll be a number of features like that. It won't show the entire movie in live action but maybe there will be some deleted scenes.
DRE: It is so rare that any director has more than one DVD turned into a Criterion Collection DVD. You have Slacker and Dazed and Confused just came out. How was it working on the Criterion Dazed and Confused?
RL: Criterion is great to work with. I really trust them and I just give it over and what you get back is fantastic. It feels good to have a resting place for your movie, because you can't get any better than Criterion. It's there for the fans. There's a lot of additional material. After over ten years, it feels like the final resting place.
DRE: Years ago I read that when you were shooting Dazed and Confused you were surprised that Universal Pictures wanted you to shoot out of sequence. But now it seems that you've really settled into doing studio films alongside indie films.
RL: Yeah I'm in a pretty good relationship with everybody I'm working with. It's important to understand what you're doing at any time. As long as everyone agrees on what the movie is and what it isn't then you won't have problems later on. I've been very lucky because I've never had bad creative experiences. You hear these things where they put the movie away and re-shoot endings and everybody hates everybody but I've never had that experience. Every movie I've finished is the movie I wanted to make, pure and simple.
DRE: That's pretty amazing that you've had no bad experiences because you've had some films which haven't been loved by critics or audiences.
RL: A lot of it is timing though and who doesn't have that at some point. But it's how you react to that. All you can do is bring you're A game every time and do your best but sometimes the culture seems ready to embrace what you're doing and sometimes it doesn't. Overall I've been lucky so I can't complain.
DRE: Are hamburgers the substitute for Substance D in Fast Food Nation?
RL: [laughs] In a way. In an addicting not very good for you, way.
DRE: Do you feel like there's parallels between Fast Food Nation and A Scanner Darkly?
RL: Not that much really. I think just the fact that they're coming out near each other begs the question. Fast Food Nation is very much of the real world today. It has things like labor issues so it exists in its own weird world. I personally don't see many similarities. On some levels people can see the social critique elements of both movies but that's not what it is to me.
DRE: Are you writing anything completely original right now?
RL: I've got a couple things I'm working on. I guess this is my era of interesting and challenging adaptations. I'm writing a college comedy thing. I don't know when I'll shoot it but it is something that I've been thinking about for a while.
DRE: Would that be a bigger studio film?
RL: I think it would be good for the studio label.
eh. i didn't really like it. now, it may be that i had a couple of beers (not many) throughout the course of the movie, but i just couldn't get into it. i kept getting distracted by the animation and i just really wanted to cut through to the actors. i felt like the animation was antagonistic to the storytelling. and it's not that the movie went over my head. i understood everything that was going on, i just could not relate to anything that was happening b/c of the "dreamlike" quality the animation gave the film. while the rotoscoping technique worked very well in waking life, as that movie was supposed to be a dream, in scanner darkly, i feel like you were supposed to, at least remotely, connect to the characters and understand who they were and what the drug was doing to them. the animation completely detached me from their struggle. i thought the downey jr. and woody harrelson gave hilarious performances, but the performances were ultimately rendered flat by the showy animation technique. not to mention, linklater just got good looking actors that everybody associates with drug abuse anyway (keanu was very "whoa" in this movie). overall, an interesting movie that displays some clever writing (i've never read any of dick's stuff, but this film felt especially literary and captured that sci-fi novel feel), but it felt like linklater took a fairly well made independent movie and spent a few million dollars to rotoscope it and make it trippy b/c stoners really liked it the last time he did that. i wish i'd seen prairie home companion or wassup rockers instead.
needless to say (but i'm going to anyway), i completely disagree.
the notion of "connecting" with a film or its characters is completely subjective--you identify with something/someone or you don't. i don't see how the animation can have anything to do with your ability to connect, especially since many of the decisions made while making the film, both on linklater and the actors' parts, were made knowing that it would be animated later. the implication that the decision to use the rotoscoping technique was arbitrary suggets to me and you didn't "get the film" as you said you did. it seems to me that you aren't meeting the film on its own terms and instead trying to force some sort of preconceived criteria of things the film should do. as for the mention of Waking Life, i think the rotoscoping works better in A Scanner Darkly. linklater's casting decisions can seem a bit obvious but isn't part of good casting finding the perfect actors for that particular role? with robert downey jr, he not only gets a talented actor whose own set of abilities lend themselves COMPLETELY to the character but also has a cultural icon with a colored past that has to do with drugs--i think it gives immediacy to the film, though that's not what you think about when you watch him give his fantastic performance. keanu worked well, too... i've come to appreciate directors who know how to take actors with limited ability and use them to their fullest (ie hou hsiao hsien and shu qi). while there could have been a better performance for the bob arctor character, there certainly isn't anyone who looks the part more than keanu. i also loved the contrast of aesthetics and content. a movie that, to oversimplify it, is against drugs that IS a drug movie (a GLORIOUS one at that). amazing, isn't it?!
at any rate, i thought A Scanner Darkly was hypnotic and compelling, and the most thoroughly entertaining film i've seen in a very long time. but what do i know.
Quote from: samsong on July 11, 2006, 06:42:37 PM
there certainly isn't anyone who looks the part more than keanu.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F8%2F85%2FPhilipDick.jpg&hash=27503a8a47b03a35a46e2c829b87d94f0feedd7e)
?
taz, do you always watch movies drunk?
Quote from: samsong on July 11, 2006, 06:42:37 PM
the notion of "connecting" with a film or its characters is completely subjective--you identify with something/someone or you don't. i don't see how the animation can have anything to do with your ability to connect especially since many of the decisions made while making the film, both on linklater and the actors' parts, were made knowing that it would be animated later. the implication that the decision to use the rotoscoping technique was arbitrary suggets to me and you didn't "get the film" as you said you did. it seems to me that you aren't meeting the film on its own terms and instead trying to force some sort of preconceived criteria of things the film should do.
i don't see how you can tell me that connecting with a character is subjective, but b/c i couldn't connect to THESE characters, i'm just "not getting it." yes, linklater and everybody else knows the cultural implications of animation. popularly, animation is reserved for childish or crude humor. what he was trying to do was break that barrier, but he didn't do it effectively enough or i would have been completely immersed in what was going on. now, i never suggested that i "got the film," all i said was that i understood what was going on in the movie and the plotline never lost me. i did my best to meet the film on it's own terms, as i didn't really have any expectations going into this thing. all i knew was that linklater was doing another rotoscope movie, only this time keanu was in it.
Quote from: samsong on July 11, 2006, 06:42:37 PM
at any rate, i thought A Scanner Darkly was hypnotic and compelling, and the most thoroughly entertaining film i've seen in a very long time. but what do i know.
ok, a valid point, this is your opinion. but why do you feel the need to invalidate yourself with a smug comment like "but what do i know?" nothing against you, i don't really know you well enough to rip on you, but i just hate when people do that. you have an opinion. that's great. that's better than most people. the fun in arguing is in making people believe that your opinion is the best. that comment is just so blah. i want to not believe you and hate this movie even more because of that comment!
Quote from: pete on July 12, 2006, 04:02:33 AM
taz, do you always watch movies drunk?
that all depends on the night, the mood, and the movie, but i wasn't drunk for this movie, i was drinking. however, the ironic thing about this movie is that it's an anti-drug movie that really made me wish i was high or tripping. i'm just saying...
EDIT: yeah, right after i posted that my roommate came into my room and acting all weird. i'm like, what's up? he's like, oh, nothing, i took some shrooms an hour ago. he saw the movie with me. i guess it wasn't that effective.
This is the best drug movie I've seen in years and woody Harrelson is completely hilarious.
and Black Swan plays over the credits?
this is hard for me to believe because i've read small bits of the book and it seems so dark and crazy and Black Swan is so poppy.
the film is basically a comedy. the song fits pretty well over the end credits.
Quote from: bigideas on July 13, 2006, 10:15:10 PM
this is hard for me to believe because i've read small bits of the book and it seems so dark and crazy and Black Swan is so poppy.
it's hard for me to believe because black swan is the worst track on the album.
Quote from: modage on July 13, 2006, 10:16:06 PM
the film is basically a comedy. the song fits pretty well over the end credits.
actually that makes it easier to believe.
i wouldn't limit the movie to a comedy. at all.
consider the source...
no i wouldnt limit it either. but at the screening i saw the film at reeves and downey jr. introduced the film as basically a comedy and told us not to be afraid to laugh.
Quote from: samsong on July 14, 2006, 12:14:42 AM
consider the source...
yeah, you're right. they're only the actors in the film.
http://media.filmforce.ign.com/media/670/670907/vids_1.html
talk about missing the point. but that's okay.
the first 24 minutes were much better than i thought they might be. except the scramble suit is surprisingly annoying.
Quote from: modage on July 16, 2006, 10:20:13 AM
http://media.filmforce.ign.com/media/670/670907/vids_1.html
if there's anything goatse taught us, it's that you should always specify what is contained in a link when you post one.
A Scanner Comic-type Interview
Mike Russell is a man with a plan - and that plan means doing something really friggin' groovy with his interviews, and his latest one with Richard linklater for "A Scanner Darkly" is fittingly done in comic strip form.
http://homepage.mac.com/merussell/iblog/B835531044/C1162162177/E20060717001411/index.html
A Scanner Darkly? More like "A Sleeper Quickly."
That's actually what Joel Siegel said when he stormed out...
I was completely unprepared for the sadness and despair I felt throughout this film...and especially the second half. Spoilers--By the time Arctor has passed the point of no return, I was thoroughly depressed--End Spoilers.
Many comments on this thread focus on the film's comedic aspects, yet the audience I saw this with chuckled only a few times (at Downey and Harrelson). I attribute some of that to the fact the numbers were minimal, but really it was an audience, to its credit, that couldn't be tricked into a laugh. I found the score and the soundtrack primarily indicative of the general feelings I had watching Scanner. While not what I expected when the lights went down, it is highly recommended.
RK, i agree with ya. who do you think wouldve made a better job with this film? (would cronenebrg have been too obvious?)
Quote from: Depraved, Inc. on July 31, 2006, 11:26:29 PM
RK, i agree with ya. who do you think wouldve made a better job with this film? (would cronenebrg have been too obvious?)
Obvious isn't always bad.
I think that Linklater could have done a great job with this if he had gone another direction.
Also, some combonation of Kaufman and Linklater's script would have been cool.
I agree that it's a comedy. For me, Keanu Reeves's moping didn't arouse sympathy... it just made me impatient for the Robert Downey Jr. scenes. I never really felt that he was in serious trouble. Maybe I was too focused on the visuals. Which brings me to my big question. What was with the live action constantly creeping in? Were they just lazy (I know that the animation is a lot of work) or were they trying to say something, or a combination of the two?
It was a so-so experience for me. The ideas in this film were interesting, but its yet another film that showcases those ideas on the outskirts of a plot that dominates the entire film. The ending of the movie invited me to think about those ideas. I wish the film challenged me the entire way through.
It is a comedy and I wished I laughed more. Downey was playing himself and could only be enjoyed with good dialogue (which wasn't often). Harrelson, funnier at playing himself than Downey is, had a muted role that made me wish he had more to do.
The reason I'm not completely pissing on this film is because of one scene. The suicide attempt by the character Freck is comic genius. I wish more comedies were as high minded as just that one scene was. I found myself only smiling because I was stunned at how well written and executed it was.