Topic: Scanner Darkly 10 / 10 Stars

A Scanner Darkly is getting fantastic reviews on The Dude Gave it 10/10 stars. Gonna see this one? I will be.

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.  Read entire review … hp?id=1272

Re: Scanner Darkly 10 / 10 Stars

I thought it a rather mediocre handling of a promising premise.  Over half of the reviews I saw were either negative or "routine to meh" so you and I must've been  reading different sources.