Weblog since 2004 on books, films, art and travel.
Subscribe to the RSS feed.

a scanner darkly

Faithfully adaptated from Philip K. Dick's novel, Richard Linklater's animated 'A Scanner Darkly' is a grim tale of drug-fueled paranoia. As with most P.K. Dick novels, the story is cloaked as science fiction to extrapolate trends in contemporary society and raise philosophical issues, in this case centered around identity and the loss thereof. To illustrate, the title refers to 1 Corinthians 13:

When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
A Scanner Darkly - 1

'A Scanner Darkly' portrays a near-future totalitarian society where large numbers of people are addicted to a drug called Substance D (D for Death). Undercover police detective Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) has been living among addicts for so long he has gotten addicted himself. Sharing a house with his equally addicted friends Barris (Robert Downey Jr.) and Luckman (Woody Harrelson), Arctor leads a slacker's existence with Donna (Winona Ryder), a local dealer, providing the only spark in his life. Mostly Arctor and his friends just sit around, have meandering, inane conversations and vent their paranoia in complex schemes.

Arctor is known to his superiors as Agent Fred and reports to them anonymously, in a so-called scramble suit which hides his identity by projecting a continuously changing appearance. When Agent Fred is ordered to spy on Arctor, i.e. on himself, and cameras are installed in the house where he lives, the schizophrenic effects of Substance D become apparent. Instead of realizing the absurdity of the situation, Fred starts observing Arctor as if he was another person.

A Scanner Darkly - 2

This is only the start of an increasingly confused and paranoid series of events - which need not be revealed here - ultimately leading to the uncovering of a vast conspiracy. By then the cynical question is whether Arctor has enough braincells left to act upon his discovery. Along the way, though, Arctor has moments of clarity where he muses on his fate:

What does a scanner see? I mean, really see? Into the head? Down into the heart? Does a passive infrared scanner (...) see into me - into us - clearly or darkly? I hope it does (...) see clearly, because I can't any longer these days see into myself. I see only murk. Murk outside; murk inside. I hope, for everyone's sake, the scanners do better. Because if the scanner sees only darkly, the way I myself do, then we are cursed, cursed again and like we have been continually, and we'll wind up dead this way, knowing very little and getting that little fragment wrong too.
A Scanner Darkly - 3

However, compared to the novel, which was based on P.K. Dick's own experiences in '60s California drug culture, the film doesn't quite have the same vicious sting to it, for two reasons. One, Reeves in the lead role is just too zombie-like, and even with the occasional voice-over doesn't convey enough of his inner conflict. Reason two is form. Using the same rotoscoping animation technique Linklater pioneered in 'Waking Life' (filming real actors and 'painting' them over to produce a realistic style of animation) seems like a great idea to visualize Dick's weird futurisms and hallucinations (especially the scramble suits), but ends up being a little too cute and polished for its subject matter.

Verdict: recommended as an introduction to the novel, but for a more visceral experience go back to 'Naked Lunch'.

More info on the book and film at PhilipKDick.com.

Recommended:

the seventh sally

Died yesterday, Stanisław Lem , the Polish science-fiction writer best known for his book ' Solaris ' and its film adaptations by Tarkovsky and Soderbergh , was really a philosopher in sci-fi disguise. Take his short story 'The Sev… Read the full post »

two comments

Oh, I don't think form is the problem. The book has a more gothic atmospere, but you can't blame animation for that. Strangely enough because of the wonderful animations the story appeared to be very real. And like you said: it suits the protagonist's twisted sense of reality.

I agree on your Keanu Reeves evaluation. I think he's pretty boring, especially when compared to the rest of the cast. So thank god he was animated!

bas , 07-09-’07 10:02

Yo Bas - maybe it does boil down to the flat protagonist. The animation certainly looks real, and it fits the subject matter, but the film just never really got to me the way the book did.

It's also occurred to me that a lot of the book's drama might be too 'wordy' for film. Solving that with a voice-over doesn't really work on an emotional level - which brings us back to Keanu Reeves' lack of involvement...

bv (URL), 07-09-’07 19:48

Leave a comment

(optional field)
(optional field)

To prevent automated commentspam you need to answer this question...
Remember personal info?
Notify
Hide email
Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.