dickhead interweb

i'd meant to set down just about anything and everything i can think of to say on A Scanner Darkly (the film) but what i'm optimistically assuming is the effect of the Taiwan quake combined with Holiday Interweb Congestion but may in fact be the best i can hope for of an interweb connection from now on now that i've given up access to the trusty (not so) ol' office broadband has put me out of the proper mood.

so instead, i will simply say that the local movie market sucks for not having allowed this masterpiece a chance in theaters; it sucks worse because the decision was probably the 'right one' to make in light of the potential marketability of this movie hereabouts.

that said, i *am* glad they got it out on dvd so quickly. i've seen the movie twice now, once without the commentary track and once with, and plan on seeing it at least one more time within the forseeable future. Richard Linklater has made an absolutely brilliant adaptation, possibly the best film adaptation of any literary work yet, bringing to life all the important bits, i.e.: the ones a reader is most likely to remember or want to remember or want to see brought to life after reading the book; the ones a reader is most likely not to remember but should be reminded of; and the ones a reader is most likely to have missed entirely during the reading but ought not to have for a thorough understanding of the story and the author's intentions for the story. Mr Linklater *does* take liberties with the adaptation, but the most startling, significant, potentially deal-breaking liberty he takes with the narrative actually *fits* into the original text despite being nowhere to be found in it.

if there is anything about the film that ought to have Philip K. Dick tossing and turning anxiously in his grave, it may well be that Linklater's adaptation has rendered actually reading the original book unnecessary. of course geeks like me know how utterly preposterous a supposition that is to make, but there is no higher praise i can think of for such a work as Mr Linklater has done for Mr Dick's book.

despite my disclaimer, i see i've managed to put down quite a bit of a ramble; still, that isn't everything: there's still a lot to say on the film, not least of which are some notes on the performances, and some things on the dvd itself: particularly on the commantary track provided by Mr Linklater, Jonathan Lethem, the lovely Isa Dick Hackett, and *gasp* (or more appropriately: *whoa*) Keanu Reeves...

but i think i'll hang it up for now and say this has to be my fave film for 2006. of course, it's probably best not to trust me on that just yet; i've only just seen it, after all, and so it's the film that is foremost on my mind at the moment. so (echoing Paul's review of the Itchyworms' Noontime Show): get yourself a copy and see for yourself.

*

whoops, hang on, there *is* one other thing i should probably mention: i read the book before i saw the movie, and at some point early in my first viewing, i began to wonder whether there was any point to watching the film after reading the book; the movie is just so *faithful* to the book, it didn't seem to offer anything new (even considering the beautiful rotoscoping, sharp dialogue and brilliant performances). at that point i thought it might not be amiss to either watch the film or read the book, and not both. i think i would have enjoyed the movie more if i had not known what a character was about to say or do...and then Mr Linklater threw me off with the simplest twist (the aforementioned liberty)...and, in retrospect, Mr Linklater *did* leave a few things out to create a tighter, more feature-length-film-appropriate narrative--things that feel like they really don't have a place in the movie but are nontheless integral to the *original* text...so now, yeah, i *would* recommend reading the book and seeing the movie...i just can't decide in which order it should be done.