A Scanner Darkly (2006)

[Knightfall]

Check out the trailer for this movie.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/warner_independent_pictures/a_scanner_darkly.html

Synposis
Futuristic undercover agent Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) can change his face and identity. But when he ingests too much of the drug Substance D, his personality splits in two.

Genre(s)
Science Fiction, Drama, Animated

Starring
Keanu Reeves, Winona Ryder, Robert Downey Jr., Woody Harrelson, Rory Cochran

Director(s)
Richard Linklater

Writer(s)
Richard Linklater

Release Date
March 2006

 

[Cthulhu's Librarian]

I'm looking forward to A Scanner Darkly, it's an excellent novel by Philip K. Dick

 

[merztrumpet]

Good source material and interesting use of animation. Style reminds me of Linklater's Waking Life. Hopefully Keanu will pull his weight.

 

[trancejeremy]

I feel sorry for Philip K Dick. Well, besides the obvious fact that he's dead, and has missed seeing so many of his movies/stories translated to the big screen, the fact that the stars in his movies are such bad actors.


Keanu Reeves? (in this)
Ben Affleck (in Paycheck)
Tom Cruise (in Minority Report)
It's like for every new movie, they have to find an actor who is worse than in the previous one.

And how can you get lower than Keanu Reeves? (Nicholas Cage is apparently the answer...)

 

[takyris]

I'm always surprised by the amount of vehement hatred dished to Keanu. I mean, he's not my favorite actor, and I didn't even particularly like the Matrix, but he doesn't seem any worse than any other action-movie leading man.

Although I will doubly damn myself by saying that I didn't particularly mind Ben Affleck or Tom Cruise, either. Affleck may not be bad enough to transcend bad material, but he's good enough to rise to good material. As is Tom Cruise.

TranceJeremy, I don't mean to bash on you in particular -- everyone's entitled to their opinion -- but it seems like you might a) dislike brown-haired trying-to-be-serious leading men in general, b) dislike the poor writing that the actors can't rise above (although I did like Minority Report once I separated it almost completely from the short story it was based on), or c) just don't like movie adaptions of PKD.

I consider a) a legitimate opinion -- I can't stand watching deliberately immature man-boys, so even a very good deliberately immature man-boy is going to tick me off. I consider b) a legitimate opinion, since I'm against poor writing in general, although there's a difference between poor writing and departure from the original material -- as I said, I liked Minority Report, although not as an adaption of the short story. And I consider c) a legitimate opinion, since PKD's work is striking enough that getting it to work onscreen seems pretty much doomed to failure unless you re-imagine the original storyline pretty severely.

Or, of course, you could simply dislike Reeves, Cruise, and Affleck, which is a totally fine opinion as well -- but I've liked each of them in different roles they've played, so I don't agree with you that they are bad actors. Maybe not good enough to transcend a bad script, and possibly not right for some of the roles they've played, but that's true even for brilliant actors sometimes.

 

[Wombat]

I must admit to not being very fond of Keanu either -- he has always struck my as a very flat actor with no real subtlty or range -- but that is not why I think I will dislike this film.

No, for the most part I will probably not be happy with it for the same reason that I have disliked of the other attempts to put Philip K. Dick on the screen. Much like the Roger Corman versions of Edgar Allen Poe stories, the movies keep a title, bring in a couple minor elements from the story, and then build something entirely new, with little further reference to the source material.

Dick deserves better than this.