Review of A Scanner Darkly (2006) by David P — 28 Apr 2010

There have been several film adaptations of the writings of Philip K. Dick. They are often easily identified with several common elements or themes which include (but aren't limited to) the sometimes dubious authority of law enforcement and the intangible nature of self-awareness, memories and experience where it relates to drug abuse and/or mental instability.

Now I've seen "Blade Runner" and I've also read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" which the film is based upon and I can say with conviction that if Ridley Scott hadn't adapted elements from the book to make them more suitable to the medium of film I believe it would have been a tremendous failure.

I believe "A Scanner Darkly" attempts to be more faithful to the original source material and suffers as a result. That's not to say that there isn't a lot of interesting things to ponder in this picture, I just believe that the audience spends more time trying to puzzle out what's the heck's going on versus dwelling on the thematic impact buried underneath all the cryptic.

All the other successful adaptations of Dick's works like "Minority Report" still gives the audience some heavy concept to grapple with but also a few opportunities to process what we've seen so far and continue to adapt to the changing landscape.

"A Scanner Darkly" has little or no such moments of reprieve. The film posits another dystopian future, this time awash with a highly addictive psychotropic drug called "Substance D".

In reaction to this, the government has installed a nigh-omniscient surveillance channel and established a complicated web of informants and undercover agents. One such agent is Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) who's been tasked to infiltrate the drug culture to root out suppliers and pushers.

He finds himself living with two tweak-y addicts James Barris (Robert Downey Jr.) and Ernie Luckman (Woody Harrelson) and eventually slips into their world of addiction. Added to this are several parallel story layers and subplots involving Bob's law enforcement identity, the usage of identity-blocking "scramble suits", a suspect friend who's trying to turn informant, his asexual relationship with a seemingly incongruous cocaine addict named Donna Hawthorne (Winona Ryder) and a deeper plunge into addiction which begins with euphoria but descends into terrible hallucinations, lapses in reasoning, and acute paranoia.

This eventually leads to a twist resolution as the nefarious reason behind Bob's assignment comes to light, begging the question if the ends justify the means. My issue with the film is that in order to give you even this disjointed plot summary I had to do some research.

I really have no problem with some guesswork in trying to determine exactly what I'm watching, especially considering how lazy modern audiences are in their desire to have everything spelled out for them.

Having said that, even at the start of the film I was constantly making assumptions that should have been implicit. I understand that director Richard Linklater wanted to keep the story a bit ethereal to drive home the feelings of disorientation, but I felt constantly distracted just trying to get my bearings right from the start.

Some of these distractions range from the minor (really, just how practical would these "scramble suits" be in drug enforcement except just as a way to justify the twist ending) to the "What the eff?" moments like when Arctor is diagnosed by police scientists as mentally damaged yet he's sent right back to active duty.

It's all eventually explained but mysteries like this should make the experience compulsively watchable instead of frustrating. "A Scanner Darkly" often unspools like the cinematic equivalent of a game of keep away.

I also believe Linklater opted for animation to realize the trippy, drug-related sequences but I'm reminded of some anime films in which the palette itself is considerably more compelling than the "lost in translation" storyline.

Despite the film's central issues, the performances are stellar. Even rotoscoped, Robert Downey Jr. is pure genius here. Not only does he infuse the already-great dialogue with a ton of subtleties his physical effort is just as expressive.

Animated or not, this is a fine addition to his on-screen accomplishments and the humor he's able to inject into such a dark piece makes it worth watching alone. Woody Harrelson's Ernie is pure Gonzo, meant to be a mid-stage "Substance D" user falling somewhere between Barris and another borderline psychotic hanger-on named Charles Freck (Rory Cochrane).

Even Reeves, who I've given a hard time to in the past, acquits himself quite nicely as our unfortunate protagonist. All of the housemates are collectively the most comedically dysfunctional group I've seen on film in recent memory since they're all completely paranoid, trying to narc and/or spy on each other yet they seem uniformly allied against external forces.

Now, I know the motivations of the film-makers were sound but I really believe that what worked nicely for Phillip K.Dick on the printed page just didn't translate to compelling cinema. Perhaps one day I'll revisit the film and it will flow a bit better in hindsight.

Until then I have to call "A Scanner Darkly" a committed and complex little effort, diluted by a noble but ill-gauged decision to be slavishly devoted to the original novel. Tilt: up.