Netflix this week sent me A Scanner Darkly. I only knew about this movie because a conscientious member of the Imagination of Fantasy group (request membership!) put it on a "look forward to" list, but there is not an ounce of true fantasy about it, except of the science fiction type. Truth be told, I had nearly zero expectations going into this film and, therefore, should have been a blank canvas, receptive to what I was going to see. The trouble? This movie turned me off quickly and never got me back.
The film is based on a Philip K. Dick novel. Big brother is everywhere, and substance abuse and addiction are rampant. Bob Arctor (Keanu Reeves) is a narcotics informant who wears a special suit to disguise his identity from even his superiors. He is ordered to spy on friends (including Winona Ryder, Robert Downey, Jr, and Woody Harrelson)- and himself - as they are suspected to be suppliers of the hottest new black market drug, Substance D. Yet, Bob is, himself, addicted to the stuff, which has a side effect of producing split personalities in users. Thus, Bob has to sort out what is real and what is addiction-related while dealing with his friends and would-be superiors. Oh, and the film uses an animation technique called "rotoscoping" to make it especially mindbending.
I did not like this movie. I almost hated this movie, but I think I stopped squarely at dislike, because I had this notion that the novel on which the movie is based is probably a great read and a good thriller to sink one's teeth into. It is also a highly original and intelligent story that explores several philosophical and sociological themes as it relates to addiction, so I probably should have read the book first. That's where my praise stops, however.
First, let's talk about the animation. The idea of using it is creative and original and probably would have lent itself well to the plot execution if it had not been so distracting. Seriously, I was disconnected from moment one, trying to orient my vision to this technique and become accustomed to it. Maybe that was the point, but I found it annoying, and I was immediately bored - immediately! I lost all interest in the film within a very short space of time and felt it might have been a different movie if the live-action versions of the actors were used instead.
It didn't help that the acting was atrocious. Every single actor was simply not good, and maybe I shouldn't be surprised by that, but Keanu and Winona and Woody and Robert have had occasions of good performances. None of them offered such performances this time around. The dialogue was awkward anyway, but the execution of it was just weak and sometimes cringeworthy, furthering the disconnect.
I also have this notion that the adaptation was probably bad, just because I think some great themes and ideas got lost in all of the rotoscoping and stilted spazzing of actors trying to look like they are addicted to something. The twists at the end had zero impact on me because I was just so over it. And the score sounded like a combination of the score from Requiem for a Dream and The Fountain, so someone might have been a little too influenced by previous auteurs. Which explains why the Netflix queue led me to this film next.
All in all, I pretty much stopped caring about this movie within the first half hour. Others might have found it a mind-blowing experience, but after watching Darren Aronofsky's expertly crafted films dealing with similar subjects (Requiem, Pi), this is but a shadow of that potential genius. I rate this film a harsh but sincerely felt 4 (for "nice idea, didn't pull it off one bit"). This is in the bad half of my rating scale, as we're below mediocre now. I have no love for this movie, so there is major failing on the test. This movie's ambition simply got buried and destroyed in its execution.