A Scanner Darkly

What an interesting book. So as the initial book of a new book club, the pick was A Scanner Darkly from Philip K. Dick. I believe one of my friends had read a bunch of PKD in a row, and the enlisted the rest of us to watch the movie together on the condition we read it first. Totally worked, I bought a new copy that next week and began to devour it.

The speed at which I read it helped me have a better understanding of the plot, but I think I missed the important details in phrasing and language that would have made this a masterpiece in my eyes. I find that I either become to engrossed in the plot/read it too quickly, or I savor each word. And there are only a few books that make me do both. And a handful that help neither.

In this case, the unreliable narrator, the confusing plot line, and the erratic characters all caused me to lose track of where the exact plot was going, thus I found myself lost and trying very hard to be unlost, and sort of losing the minutae.

I’m also strangely reading two books that focused on drug addict experiences at the same time. PKD uses a futuristic dystopia to explain how the drug war has evolved. Around the poverty-stricken addicts, PKD constructs an entire system in a not-too-distant future that fights a massive war over the lives of its citizens. The government monitors and plays with the lives of its citizens, while massive pharmaceutical companies hook them on drugs, then exploit the expired addicts.

(Meanwhile Jesus’ Son uses the extremities of realistic life to give a distorted poetic lens, closely examines the tears and finding fractals, repeating patterns indefinitely, forward and backward.)

I enjoyed the movie a lot. I thought the actors played characters perfectly. Woody Harrelson had this great druggie third wheel role. RDJ was a detestable, arrogant cunt. Keanu did his classic downtrodden sad-boy and world-weary act. And the trio collectively played really well off each other’s addled paranoia, reinforcing the realism of their drug highs. The animation style also suited the book really well. In the opening credits, the bugs were a perfect touch, instantly justifying the unique style. The camouflage suits as well were displayed perfectly. And the cartoon/edgy cuts, add to the feeling of it being a cartoon. This allowed them to establish a coherent style early that added to the story rather than just a gimmick.

The movie did a really good job of highlighting the main points of the book. You wouldn’t miss much. The characters were also well established and played their parts really well. The details, however, did not get the screen time. Nor did Fred/Arctor’s slow decent to crazy make as much sense. And the depth of the universe flattened on the screen though I think that might be a function of time invested; books take possibly days while movies only have a couple hours.

But the abridged story lent to more coherent plot and overall narrative. Plus the visuals added another level that was fun to see. This includes the science fiction element, like the projectors, closet, video feeds, etc. Both sort of mitigating to the lack of extended exposure

A friend was telling me that the entire movie was a project of love and I think that was well reflected in the care and attention to detail the entire movie had, especially filled with A list stars.

Overall, great book, great movie, highly recommended. 4.35 Book, 4.1 movie. Great universe and interesting story. Plus for such a unique blend of sci-fi and poverty/drug addiction. Plus for the pharmaceuticals and government allegories/critiques that rang too true. Mild minus for a very confusing plot/web of turncoats. Possibly would require me to reread closer for a deeper understanding and appreciation.