Scanner Darkly

[adam]

I'm being cryogenically frozen until this movie comes out. Seriously, this is going to be awesome. I think the chances of me not liking this are approaching nil.

I used to be wary of Keenu, but holy crap was he awesome in Thumbsucker. That movie is worth renting for his character alone.

[stimpee]

So that people know what the hell Adam is talking about, i'll tell you some vital information. Its a film of the Philip K Dick novel directed by Richard Linklater (Before Sunrise/ Dazed & Confused).

Plot summary:
"A Scanner Darkly" is set in suburban Orange County, California in the future. It imagines a paranoid world in which it seems two of every 10 Americans has been hired by the government to spy on the other 8 -- in the name of national security and drug enforcement. When one reluctant government recruit (Reeves) is ordered to start spying on his friends, he is launched on a journey into the absurd, where outsourced government contractors largely define the social construct, where identities and loyalties are impossible to decode, and where not even his girlfriend can be trusted. The film highlights the inconsistencies and ironic consequences of the war on drugs.

In the future, there is a new drug called "Substance D", or simply, "Death". Bob Arctor is a dealer of this new drug, and he himself is also addicted to it. Fred is an undercover cop who wears a "scramble Suit" (which constantly re-animates the user's appearance and voice) all the time so people don't know his true identity. Fred, one day, is assigned to spy on Bob using "Scanners", and eventually destroy Bob's drug ring. However, one side effect of Substance D is the formation of multiple personalities, and because of the occurring circumstances, Bob and Fred don't realize that they are actually the same person, and that Fred is basically hunting-down himself.

Trailer at Apple (http://www.apple.com/trailers/warner_independent_pictures/a_scanner_darkly.html).

[the mongoose]

can't wait....:):)

[grady]

pictures (http://www.philipkdick.com/films_scanner-061204.html) from the production.

[b.miller]

i know someone who worked on this show.... word is very very good. the few scenes I've seen are awesome. the animation is not nearly as out there as Waking Life, much tighter and more consistent... but still cool

[joethelion]

that looks really really cool

I should probably read the book before I see the movie, shouldn't I?

I heard on the atease page (radiohead fan site) that the film was basically done, and tested well - save for the soundtrack. Radiohead were approached for the film, and although it seemed likely that they were going to do it... it didn't pan out

I'm kinda glad that RH aren't involved - as they would probably detract from the film itself and you'd get a lot of people there 'just for radiohead' know what I mean?

[adam]

yeah i agree with that sentiment

i think radiohead would be distracting

[grady]

It could be interesting if it were say a member or two from Radiohead scoring the film, similar to what Johnny Greenwood did for the film Body Song.

[adam]

Not that I don't think they'd do a good job, it's just they have such a strong identity on their own...I wouldn't want it overtop of everything else. Conclusion: I don't know what I'm talking about.

[Drix]

Oh, didn't even know they were doing a movie of it. After reading Do androids.. i got totally hooked on his books, but haven't been able to find this one yet. Will try to order it now. The trailer looks good!

[adam]

Aren't you short a few Xs?

[b.miller]

saw this tonight. It's pretty damn badass. more later (as in Sunday)

click for initial notes (http://mymovie.medialife.org/?action=movieDetails&movieID=705)

WARNING: extreme gloating in that link. You may be crushed by the excessive name-dropping.

[GforGroove]

tomorrow!!! ahhhhhhhh

i.can't.wait...............

[adam]

got to wait until the fourteenth for vancouver, but that's all right because i have some friends' wedding and rehearsal dinner this weekend so i couldn't go anyway....

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

impatiently strumming fingers on heavy wooden table

[grady]

Stupid second tier city release! Argh...it's only tuesday. Tomorrow never comes until it's too late.

You hear that Pig Vommit, er....Paul Giamatti did the audio book version of A Scanner Darkly for the movie release tie in?

I'm curious to hear Paul Giamatti do some reading of Philip K. Dick before he graces the screen in M.Night Shamalamadingdong's overly bloated The Lady in Water. (At least the mad drunk Chris Doyle shot this film so it should be visually pleasing to the eyes.)

[b.miller]

I'll be seeing this again this weekend I think. I know I posted up there that it was badass but my feelings on it since March have been steadily declining into mediocrity. I still think certain visual aspects of the movie are amazing but the more I've thought about it the more problems I have that I hope they've fixed... It's playing here but I'm waiting for my favorite theater to get it.

I'm not seeing Lady in the Water though unless someone tells me it's fantastic. I don't care how pretty it is :)

[grady]

I'll be seeing this again this weekend I think. I know I posted up there that it was badass but my feelings on it since March have been steadily declining into mediocrity. I still think certain visual aspects of the movie are amazing but the more I've thought about it the more problems I have that I hope they've fixed... It's playing here but I'm waiting for my favorite theater to get it.
A good friend of mine expressed similar sediments, mainly that he doesn't understand the need for so much visual 'no handism'. (no handism being a ref to something that is flashy for the sake of being flashy and showing off, like saying, "Look ma, no hands," as you balance yourself perfectly while riding a bike with no hands in front of your parents.)

His whole point was, whats the point of the rotoscoping animation? How much will it bring to the film as an animated piece, where as if it were shot conventionally, or even on digital, with normal visual effects integrated?

I can see his point and understand that the use of the advancing rotoscoping technique being able to serve what purpose exactly?

You've seen it B.miller? Would you kind of agree with these sediments, already preconceived in the viewers mind before even seeing the film?

I'm not seeing Lady in the Water though unless someone tells me it's fantastic. I don't care how pretty it is:)
Roger, roger. I find the Cinematographer aspect somewhat harder to stomach, than say the actor factor. You know, you see said film because said actor/actress is in it, despite how horrible it may. The same appliest to crew members.

Dante Spinotti A.S.C., may have shot one of my favorite films, The Insider for Michael Mann in addition to three other films for Mann (Manhunter, The Last of the Mohicans, and Heat) over the course of 13 years. Despite this admiration for Spinotti's work, I still cannot bring myself to see the Brett FUCKING Ratner piece of shit that is The Family Guy or After the Sunset or even X3:The Last Stand.

However, I did thoroughly enjoy both LA Confidential and Wonder Boys which Dante Spinotti served as the DP on for director Curtis Hanson.

I could rationalize seeing the Psycho remake on multitude of factors, ranging from the Cinematographer factor to the director-is-from-my-home-town-I've-met-him-before factor. One factor being Christopher Doyle had shot the film for Gus Van Sant and I was aware of Doyle because of Wong Kar Wai's films I'd seen at that point in my life.

However, Doyle has only shot three films now in the US, or rather for US based directors with M. Night Shamamlamadingdong being one of them.

In the end I'm gonna have to see just The Lady in Water only so I can rag on Shamalamadingdong some more, and justified in my complaints as I've actually seen the film. I would like to be surprised by the film, but somehow, I just don't see that happening.

[b.miller]

actually I found the animation extremely suitable to this particular story... My main problems that have been springing up are mostly with the script... Granted i saw a pretty early cut back in March and apparently the script is a lot better than what I saw but... it's like it was missing several pieces, mostly of character, so you have this pretty confusing plot thing and you're always distracted by the visuals anyway but I never felt like I got to know any of the characters... which is odd for a Linklater movie. I dunno, maybe it was tweaked to the point of cohesion but it kind of fell apart for me the longer i went after seeing it.

I think they decided to animate the film though just for the scramble suits alone. The style of animation is actually much more realistic and consistent compared to Waking Life... and the scramble suits are done as well as they possibly could be I think. It's by far my favorite aspect of the film... and fits the story perfectly and the movie perfectly... Just wish it was a little more... and i say this very carefully.. overt in its meaning. I haven't read the story but I hear that the drug stuff is pretty front and center... and it's really as much about the drugs as it is about the paranoia and dark future and blah blah blah... The drugs aren't completely out of the picture in the movie but they are definitely not dwelled upon much either.

As an interesting side-note... I heard that Charlie Kaufman's script had this set in the future but it was circa-70s future... would've been really interesting I think, but can see why Linklater opted for a more contemporary timeless feel since there's already so much going on with the animation.

[GforGroove]

WOW! that was a badass film.
i will talk A LOT later about it because i have so much questions :)// but yeah.. super punk rock. One more for Linklater.

It was subtance D or T??? that was tight for me!!

Grady: you didn't felt that those roto things moving and floating were pretty damn trippy.. i was like oo oh !! substancce d/t works!!

[GforGroove]

WOW! that was a badass film.
i will talk A LOT later about it because i have so much questions :)// but yeah.. super punk rock. One more for Linklater.

It was subtance D or T??? that was tight for me!!

Grady: you didn't felt that those roto things moving and floating were pretty damn trippy.. i was like oo oh !! substancce d/t works!! i'm with brian, makes total sense with the script the rotoscoping .. and keanu is hot even rotoed. hehe

[grady]

Grady: you didn't felt that those roto things moving and floating were pretty damn trippy.. i was like oo oh !! substancce d/t works!! i'm with brian, makes total sense with the script the rotoscoping .. and keanu is hot even rotoed. hehe

No, I haven't seen it yet, but my friend was wondering if the rotoscoping was really needed. If it should have been done with conventional effects instead.

[b.miller]

so I saw it again... as far as I remember it's basically the exact same movie that I saw back in march, but with different end credits and snippets of Radiohead/Thom Yorke songs...

and it's as good as I initially thought it was! Happy to report that all of my doubts that came with time were almost unfounded. I still have a few minor irks with it but for the most part the movie plays pretty well I think.

I still love the animation btw, especially the scrambler suits...

[Tania]

I saw this today, and really enjoyed the music. It was interesting..and strange and cool. And Keanu wasnt that bad either, heh.

[adam]

http://homepage.mac.com/merussell/iblog/B835531044/C1592678312/E20060701140745/index.html

[negative1]

keanu still can't act. does he still
think he's in the matrix?

the scramble suits were pretty lame,
as they could easily be defeated if
someone tried to cut it off, or shoot
them...

what's with winona ryder in it?
she's very out of place..to commercial..

i really liked the woody harrelson character,
and also the robert downey characters..
they stole the movie...great dialogue, and
interaction...

oh richard, enough with the rotoscoping,
waking life was much better....you don't need
to do it again...

i agree, this movie didn't need to be animated..

later
-1

[Scott Warner]

I thought it was the mixed bag. I enjoyed the rotoscoping and the high level idea but I was basically falling asleep during the middle portions. They could have chopped out the mid section of this film completely.

[adam]

I don't understand any on -1's complaints. Like, "The scramble suits were lame because they could be defeated." What? When did you see him with a scramble suit on around anyone who would want to "cut it off"? The scramble suits were to protect the identities of undercover cops...they didn't wear them while on the job.

And, yeah, I guess it didn't need to be animated in the sense that nothing needs to be animated. But I think it benefited from it. It was pretty, and different. I don't object to either of those. You guys sound a little bit like people arguing that painting became obsolete with the invention of photography. I do not understand that attitude.

Waking Life was a completely different film. The animation was looser, and it had different animators doing each scene. Yes, they could have not animated the bulk of it, but they would have still had to animate the various hallucinations, scramble suits, etc. Oh noes they rotoscoped it. So? Wouldn't doing it with traditional computer animation have been much more commonplace?

"Oh richard, enough with the rotoscoping." If you don't like rotoscoping, that's fine, but, man, that sounds patronizing.

Does Keanu think he's still in the matrix? Winona is "too commercial"? What do these comments even mean? Seriously.

Personally, I felt it would have benefited by losing the humour, but it's definitely in the book, too.

[mmm skyscraper]

Is it possible to rotoscope older films? It might help Episode I.

I wonder if other PKD books will be made into films now.

[GforGroove]

You are all wrong :p

I guess that the bonus of this screenplay and story is that you could either do it with traditional 35mm film or....... approach it in a more creative way -that actually makes sense with the story- like rotoscoping.. I'm going to be the only one i know that makes the controversy but im used to! he.. BUT really, Linklater always try to push either the technique, either the script in different ways and i think he is always right in the way he produce the films.

I don't know.. but imagine all this bugs at the beggining just in horrible super realistic 3d... i don't know this aestetic makes perfect sense for me.. if you are talking about hallucinatory states of mind.. they were leaving reality and becoming druggies.. they were high no? and this image is totally high.

i say, Rotoscope makes perfect sense. And well im up for films that does not look as the films we always look at.. so yeah, let's animate everything we can.

By the way.. i forgot to tell it.. But you didn't loved and laugh when Keanu says: "Do i look like gay?" hehe...:D

[Scott Warner]

I don't know.. but imagine all this bugs at the beggining just in horrible super realistic 3d... i don't know this aestetic makes perfect sense for me.. if you are talking about hallucinatory states of mind.. they were leaving reality and becoming druggies.. they were high no? and this image is totally high.

i say, Rotoscope makes perfect sense. And well im up for films that does not look as the films we always look at.. so yeah, let's animate everything we can.
Yeah, I think they nailed the visual presentation of the film. The bug example is one of the best ones for illustrating where using the rotoscope technique made things much better than any other method.

[Yannick]

blah :cool: zzzzzzzzzz

[EuroZeroZero]

For you non believers, here is the first 24 minutes of the movie...courtesy of our friends at ign...

http://media.filmforce.ign.com/media/670/670907/vid_1577113.html