An undercover cop in a not-too-distant future becomes involved with a dangerous new drug and begins to lose his own identity as a result.An undercover cop in a not-too-distant future becomes involved with a dangerous new drug and begins to lose his own identity as a result.An undercover cop in a not-too-distant future becomes involved with a dangerous new drug and begins to lose his own identity as a result.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 4 wins & 21 nominations total
- Waitress
- (as Natasha Valdez)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I had reasonably high hopes for this film but also the fear I have when anyone takes on material that some have called "unfilmable". Written at a time when his marriage had broken down and he himself was struggling with his drug use and split identities, Dick's material does offer much of interest as long as it can be delivered in such a way to be engaging and interesting. "Making sense" was not one of the qualities I really needed, which was just as well since narratively there isn't a lot to follow along with. Parts of it are funny, parts of it are trippy and parts of it are dramatic. However none of them really come together to produce anything of that much value. It is a shame that the ideas over identity, drugs and the morals of the war on drugs are not better played out. As it is I didn't think there was enough of interest and, with the narrative being so basic, what remained was surprisingly dull.
The use of the rotoscoping was a smart move and also serves as an interesting hook for multiplex audience (and I include myself therein, so it is not a snobbish reference) that have perhaps not seen it before. Linklater produces some good effects this way and it is hard to think of another approach working as well within the context of the material as it does. Sadly this is not enough to carry the film along, although it will be enough to satisfy some sections of the audience. The cast do the best they can within this unsuccessful mix and most of them are individually good here and there. Reeves is a natural stoner but he doesn't convince with his breakdown and confusion that well; he isn't helped by the lack of focus in the script but he can't lift it regardless. Downey Jr is very funny and convincing and wards off the boredom when he is near. Harrelson tries to follow suit but with a dumber character he just falls flat. Cochrane is more enjoyable and the animation really aids his performance. Ryder is OK but she has too much of the narrative to carry and she cannot do it.
Overall this is an OK film at best. It is sporadically interesting, funny and engaging however it cannot find any consistency of tone, pace or engagement. The material is good enough to throw up interesting ideas and themes but Linklater sadly doesn't manage to do much with them across the film. The use of animation over the film cells is really well crafted and works well to support the material it is just a shame then that the awareness and control that Linklater in this area he seems to lack in others.
I never felt particularly emotionally involved, I felt detached (very much like the characters when you think about it). The first character you encounter (Freck) was played way too stereotypically in an exaggerated cartoony kind of way. He constantly annoyed me when he was on-screen. Fortunately, the other performances were better with the standout being the always good Robert Downey Jr. Even the usually wooden Keanu Reeves worked well in his role.
Rating: Visually, Scanner Darkly would be a 8/10, story wise it would be a 6/10 so let's average it to 7 out of 10
Enter "A Scanner Darkly", aside from the Interpolative Rotoscoping that the film maker used to put the graphical images of this movie together and give it an amazing visual feel all its own, the vision and imagery conveyed by the film are as true to Dick's original as any movie has come. I left the theater feeling overwhelmed, touched, and changed, much the same way as when I'd finished the book. This is rare, and it is decidedly a beautiful thing.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaRobert Downey, Jr. wrote most of his lines down on post-it notes and scattered them around the set so he could read off them while filming a scene. The rotoscoping team simply animated over the notes to remove them from the film during post-production.
- GoofsWhile showing the monitoring equipment, Hank tells Fred that he could be anyone from Arctor's circle of friends, including Barris. This made sense in the book, however, by this time in the movie Hank has already seen Fred alongside Barris, so he could not possibly think they are the same person.
- Quotes
Fred: [voiceover] What does a scanner see? Into the head? Down into the heart? Does it see into me? Into us? Clearly or darkly? I hope it sees clearly because I can't any longer see into myself. I see only murk. I hope for everyone's sake the scanners do better, because if the scanner sees only darkly the way I do, then I'm cursed and cursed again.
- Crazy creditsThe "Phil" mentioned in the "in memoriam" list as having permanent pancreatic damage is Philip K. Dick himself.
- SoundtracksFog
Written by Thom Yorke (as Thomas Yorke), Phil Selway (as Philip Selway), Jonny Greenwood (as Jonathan Greenwood),
Colin Greenwood and Ed O'Brien (as Edward O'Brien)
Performed by Radiohead
Courtesy of Capitol Records
Under licence from EMI Film & Television Music
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Una mirada a la oscuridad
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $8,700,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $5,501,616
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $391,672
- Jul 9, 2006
- Gross worldwide
- $7,660,857
- Runtime1 hour 40 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
