A Scanner Darkly: Review By the_tall_guy

What Does A Scanner See? Clearly or Darkly?
  • OVERALL
    4.5
    SUPERB
  • Story
  • Acting
  • Directing
  • Visuals
Recently, I found out about this author named Philip K. Dick. I've heard of him before, back sophomore year in high school, and I got really interested in this guy. He has some great novels out there, which include Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and The Man in the High Castle. After reading these stories, I found out about the 8 or 9 movies that were made which were based off of these stories. Some of them I've heard about, others that I never even knew exsisted. I just got done watching this movie, and a week ago I read the novel. So, let me get in my opinions of this movie.

The story follows a drug addict/dealer named Bob Arctor. He lives in a rundown, dirty house with two other people named Barris and Luckman. Arctor has a girlfriend named Donna, and we basically see what his life is like each day. The story also follows Fred, an undercover cop who wears a scramble suit to protect his identity. Fred is assigned to spy on Arctor through devices called scanners. What is given out at the beginning is that Fred and Arctor are the same person. Basically, Arctor has to watch himself through these scanners.

I'm not gonna give any spoilers here, because the story unfolds so well at the end that I want you to find out by yourself what happens. There are many similarities between the movie and the book, with a lot of lines taken out of the book and used as dialogue here. One scene in particular, the attempted suicide scene, uses a monologue-voiceover that is almost word-for-word in the book. Most movies that are adapted from Dick's work usually steer away from the source material and go off on their own adventure (especially the movie Next which stars Nicolas Cage). I didn't have a major problem with this movie being so close to the book, but it would have been a little nice to see something completely different than what was in the book.

The acting was good, actually. I have to give props to Robert Downey Jr.; he gives a memorable performance here. I'm not sure if he used his experience as an addict for the character, but he was the most enjoyable person to watch onscreen whenever he was onscreen. Keanu Reeves isn't as good as Downey; I thought Reeves gives sort of a one note character. What I mean by that is he doesn't give a whole lot of emotional range, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, because he is playing a stoner. Maybe he intentionally played it like that. I don't know. Woody Harrelson gives a subtle role here. He doesn't seem all too important to the story. He just there to be there, and nothing more. His role isn't so much burnt out addict; it's more like just a basic pot-head. Winona Ryder was decent here. I liked her more when she wasn't acting high. And Rory Cochrane is my second favorite actor here. He is portrayed onscreen exactly how I pictured him in the novel. He is compelling from the beginning and on.

This is the first movie that I have seen using rotoscoping. I think I didn't even know what rotoscoping was until I did research on this movie. I, personally, think that this was the best way to present the film. I think that this movie wouldn't have worked if it was live-action. I can picture some of this stuff in live-action format, and using CGI in most of the spaced-out scenes, and the way I picture it, it looks really terrible. So, props to the director for making the decision to animate this film.

Overall, this is a very confusing movie, but it's very enjoyable. It doesn't exactly follow a plot, so it could be confusing to most. I heard this movie wasn't widely acknowledged, and I think that's sad. This movie is probably better than most realize. And I also disagree with the people that say this movie is only enjoyable when you're high. I don't believe that at all. Maybe it'll make it seem more trippy, but I wouldn't know. I don't do drugs.

I think if you're interested in big-budget action movies, you will not enjoy this movie at all, and I wouldn't recommend you seeing it. So, Michael Bay fans, stay far away. But for those people who enjoy movies like Requiem For A Dream, or are Philip K. Dick fans, I do recommend you see this movie.

Do you like this review?

Comments (3)

  1. Bane. Ferguson

    @dan1 really underrated, a superb film, masterfully done, i am so psyched about this film.

    1 year agoby @Zak-FFlag

  2. Dan

    Hmmm, Philip K. Dick, huh? Might have to give it a chance.

    1 year agoby @dan1Flag

  3. Bawnian©-Dexeus

    I remember when the trailer came out. To this day I still haven't had the chance to see it :/

    1 year agoby @bawnian-dexeusFlag