Richard LinklaterRezensionen

Pretty decent but I really thought I had bought the real novel

This film shows the essence of rock'n'roll better than any other film I know of. Black is great, of course, in a role that had to be written for him, but what makes the film work is the kids. I also credit the scriptwriters for not making the crisis point in the film worse than it had to be. I must also note that Joan Cusack, whom I have found annoying in every other role I've seen her in, is really great here. Highly highly recommended. Laugh out loud funny.

review of
Philip K. Dick & Richard Linklater's A Scanner Darkly - A Graphic Novel
by tENTATIVELY, a cONVENIENCE - July 30, 2015

A Scanner Darkly was the 1st Philip K. Dick bk I read. It wd've been recommended to me by my friend Lamar "Chip" Layfield. I'd read a fair amt of SF as a child & a teen, authors like Robert Heinlein, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Isaac Asimov, & Arthur C. Clarke. Then I decided it wasn't serious enuf literature & stopped reading it. Reading A Scanner Darkly over a decade later might've been my 1st delving into it again, giving SF a 2nd chance. I wasn't impressed.

Not much longer after that, that all changed. The 1st movie that I noticed based on A Dick bk was Ridley Scott's Blade Runner (1982). I loved it. Starting in 1984 I spent the next yr reading about a Dick bk a wk. I was hooked.

Blade Runner wasn't really the 1st of the Dick movies, there had been a 1962 tv show episode based around Dick's short story "Impostor", but Blade Runner marked the 1st of high-quality works based on Dick & I was excited about all of them. Paul Verhoeven's Total Recall (1990) was the next important milestone for me.

I'd already been familiar w/ Richard Linklater b/c of his Slacker (1991) wch interested me b/c of the subculture represented but also b/c he used the PXL-2000 camcorder wch I'd used extensively. Here's a link to a website that indexes some of them: http://idioideo.pleintekst.nl/Philosopher.html . I liked Slacker so when Linklater made a purportedly rotoscoped version of A Scanner Darkly I was intrigued.

It's somewhat vague to me now but as I recall I was disappointed by Linklater's movie. 1st, I probably wasn't impressed by the 'animation'. I was long-since familiar w/ rotoscoping, a technique in wch drawings are based around individual frames of film & then animated. In its original form, where filmmakers wd project the film using an analysis projector & draw on pieces of paper that the film was based on, there was a labor-intensiveness that cd produce very rich results. My friend Steve Estes had dome great things w/ the technique.

Knowing how labor-intensive ir was, I'd get some cynical amusement when I'd see a rotoscoped film that wd start off very ambitious & detailed & gradually dissolve into lazier & lazier drawings made more & more minimal as the filmmaker broke down under the workload.

Linklater's movie didn't strike me as 'real' rotoscoping at all. It seemed more like using computer filters to 'posterize' color than it seemed like the result of actually making drawings. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe Linklater had a whole assemble-line of cell-animators. Whatever the case, the result has a homogeneity to it that reeks of computer generalizing rather than hand-touches. I much prefer the animation/pixillation of such greats as Norman MacLaren, Robert Breer, Jan Svankmajer, Walerian Borowczyk, & Wladyslaw Starewicz, to name a few. Anything that has a highly uniform frame-to-frame registration just seems visually dull. Furthermore, it seemed to me that Linklater's A Scanner Darkly was a bit too much yet-another-aren't-stoners-funny? movie w/o really getting into the tragedy of Dick's take on the down side of drug culture.

NONETHELESS, when I saw that the movie had been made into a graphic novel & that I cd pick it up for 6 bucks I 'just had to add it to me PKD collection. THEN, it sat there & collected dust b/c why the fuck wd I want to read the graphic novel version when I'd already read the bk at least twice & quite possibly seen the movie that many times too?

As I've no doubt written elsewhere, when I was a kid I read comic bks & Mad Magazine & its spin-offs: Cracked & Sick. Then there was Famous Monsters of Filmland. By the time I was a teenager National Lampoon came along. All were picture-heavy. Comic bks were 'looked down on' b/c they seemed to be targeted to, & reinforcing of, the minimally literate. There didn't seem to be much of an appreciation for their involving 2 art-forms, they were commonly seen as failed literature w/ the art hardly even worth mentioning. They certainly weren't glorified as "Graphic Novels".

That wasn't really fair. Culture snobs objected to their hybrid nature, the text wasn't full-blown literature, the images weren't paintings in & of themselves. Now it seems that the graphic novel has become 'respectable'.. but have comics? Maybe they're still not. Whatever.

I read thru A Scanner Darkly - A Graphic Novel in a few hrs. Alas, I find myself in agreement w/ my archetypal stuffy critic above: I didn't really get the literate experience from it that Dick offers, I didn't find the art outstanding, it just seemed like the easy-reading experience, an intellectual-lite beer. Still, I have some respect for the whole process that went into its making, it's all very 'professional'. Still, wd I recommend it over the bk or the movie? Nah. I'd recommend the predictable (from my critical perspective): read the actual PKD bk, maybe check out the movie, but, nah, don't bother w/ the graphic novel, it's so stylized & diluted that it's not worth it.

This is a pretty lovely styling of Phil Dick's ragged tale; the tale itself has a tragic hilarity, dragged up as it was from Dick's own drugged up life and poured into a typewriter at warped speed driven by bennies.

Maybe only 3 stars because 1. Dick never had the time to do it right . . . but if he had, he maybe wouldn't have done it at all. This is just fate but it makes ragged prose. and 2. buffing the surface of this tragic artifact somehow obscures it. I think.

A failed rock musician impersonates a substitute teacher.

2.5/4 (Okay).

It has a lot of charm. It would have been nice if it also had jokes.

In the interest of disclosure, I have to say that I have not read the original novel or seen the film yet. However, I still liked this one. I also borrowed it from my local public library branch.

See my note on it in my blog here:

[http://gypsylibrarian.blogspot.com/2007/06/short-booknotes-on-graphic-novels-14.html]

Dopo un incontro casuale con il famoso regista Orson Welles, un liceale ottiene una piccola parte in un allestimento del Giulio Cesare. (fonte: Wikipedia)

Region 1 (NTSC)

Incluye Antes del atardecer

Boomers in high school are abusive drunks.

1/4 (Bad).

This movie has absolutely nothing to offer to someone who doesn't have unhealthy nostalgia for this very specific childhood.½

Dat is toch een goed teken, bij een film, dat je denkt dat de tijd veel sneller is gegaan dan je dacht? Ik geloofde niet dat de aftiteling al aan de beurt was, dat het al zeven kwartier later was dan aan het begin van de film.
Terwijl de film toch vooral, als in een toneelstuk, gaat over een gesprek over man-vrouwrelaties.½

Jake llega a la Universidad de Texas en su deportivo, con las ventanillas bajadas y la música a todo volumen. Quedan sólo unos días para que arranque el curso, pero piensa aprovecharlos conociendo chicas, yendo a fiestas y haciendo amigos. Secuela espiritual de Dazed and Confused, ambientada en los años 80. Los protagonistas, un grupo de jugadores de béisbol a punto de ingresar en la Universidad, son conscientes de que las obligaciones de la edad adulta son ya ineludibles. (FILMAFFINITY)

Jake llega a la Universidad de Texas en su deportivo, con las ventanillas bajadas y la música a todo volumen. Quedan sólo unos días para que arranque el curso, pero piensa aprovecharlos conociendo chicas, yendo a fiestas y haciendo amigos. Secuela espiritual de Dazed and Confused, ambientada en los años 80. Los protagonistas, un grupo de jugadores de béisbol a punto de ingresar en la Universidad, son conscientes de que las obligaciones de la edad adulta son ya ineludibles

Drug Abuse and Identity

Two strangers spend the night in Vienna.

I expected it to be better, given its reputation. They talk in a series of Indie Movie Monologues. But I can believe that these characters would talk that way, so it works. Delpy's good enough to turn this from a novel experiment into a genuinely good movie.

Concept: B
Story: C
Characters: B
Dialog: B
Pacing: B
Cinematography: C
Special effects/design: C
Acting: A
Music: B

Enjoyment: B

GPA: 2.8/4½

The Before Sunrise couple reunite nine years later.

There are a couple of great scenes near the end (and, to be fair, the way this movie works, a "couple" of scenes constitutes about a third of the movie). But the quality of the dialog and acting in some of the "now let me blather on about my Richard Linklater thoughts" scenes is so much worse, it's surprising they're made by the same people.

Concept: B
Story: C
Characters: B
Dialog: C
Pacing: C
Cinematography: C
Special effects/design: C
Acting: B
Music: B

Enjoyment: C plus

GPA: 2.4/4

The Before Sunrise couple have a fight.

Why do critics never fail to love movies about bitter people being bitter? I'm sorry, but festering resentments are just not interesting.

Concept: C
Story: D
Characters: C
Dialog: C
Pacing: C
Cinematography: C
Special effects/design: C
Acting: A
Music: C

Enjoyment: C

GPA: 2.1/4½

The childhood of a boy with divorced parents.

The gimmick works extremely well. Unfortunately, the ambitiousness is strictly limited to the approach of filming it; the script is nothing but an aimless pile of cliches. But watching these people age on screen is somehow enough to keep you captivated for the nearly-three-hour movie. Even though I didn't exactly like the movie, it made a strong impression on me. Hopefully they keep going and have a sequel 12 years from now.

Concept: A
Story: D
Characters: B
Dialog: B
Pacing: B
Cinematography: C
Special effects/design: C
Acting: B
Music: B

Enjoyment: B

GPA: 2.7/4½

Drama filmado a lo largo de 12 años (2002-2013) pero únicamente en 39 días de rodaje. Es la historia de Mason desde los seis años y durante una década poblada de cambios: mudanzas y controversias, relaciones que se tambalean, bodas, diferentes colegios, primeros amores, también desilusiones, momentos maravillosos, de miedo y de una constante mezcla de desgarro y sorpresa. Un viaje íntimo y épico por la euforia de la niñez, los sísmicos cambios de una familia moderna y el paso del tiempo.

Et fascinerende filmprosjekt!

En av grunnene til at jeg har valgt å se "Boyhood", er at den er blant dem som er nominert til årets Oscar, ikke bare i én, men i seks kategorier:
- beste film
- beste mannlige birolle (Ethan Hawke)
- beste kvinnelige birolle (Patricia Arquette)
- beste regi (Richard Linklater)
- beste originalmanus
- beste filmredigering

Fra før av har jeg omtalt de Oscar-nominerte filmene "The Imitation Game" og "American Sniper".

Filmen hadde premiere 22. august 2014 i Norge, og den går fremdeles på kino.

Regissøren av filmen, Rickard Linklater (f. 1960), har regissert 18 filmer fra sin debut i 1988. (Kilde: Wikipedia) "Before Sunset" (2004) er den eneste av hans filmer jeg har sett fra før av. Ellers preges hans filmografi mye av komedier og romantikk, ut fra hva jeg kan se.

"Boyhood" er en helt spesiell oppvekst-film. Der det vanlige er at ulike skuespillere spiller rollene som hhv. barn, ungdom og voksen, har regissøren her fulgt gutten Mason (spilt av Ellar Coltrane) fra han var fem til han er atten år.

Akkurat dette gjør filmen veldig annerledes og særegen enn hva vi er vant til i tilsvarende filmer.

Underveis skildres nokså vanlige problemstillinger som barn av i dag utsettes for. Moren Olivia (spilt av Patricia Arquette) får to barn med Mason sr. (spilt av Ethan Hawke) så altfor tidlig. Mens Mason sr. er en drømmer som ønsker å leve av musikken sin, men aldri får det riktig til, blir Olivia sittende med det fulle og hele ansvaret for barna. Til slutt faller hele samlivet deres i grus, og de blir skilt.

Mens Olivia tar seg utdannelse i voksen alder, vokser sønnen Mason jr. og datteren Samantha opp som ansvarlige små voksne. Ting andre tar som selvsagt, er ikke like selvsagt for dem. De er dessuten prisgitt morens valg - også da hun senere treffer en mann som tilsynelatende har orden på livet sitt, men som det er "noe" ved ... Akkurat hva dette "noe" er, skal de smertelig få erfare alle tre ... I mens er faren deres i periferien av deres liv, i lange perioder uten arbeid, men likevel med noe å tilføre dem.

Underveis dukker det opp mobbe-episoder, episoder med alkohol-debut, historier med jenter osv. Og den en gang så håpløse faren deres, er visst ikke fullt så håpløs likevel når det kommer til stykket ...

Det er ikke bare Mason jr. som eldes fra episode til episode i denne filmen. Det gjør nemlig alle de andre skuespillerne også. Akkurat dette er faktisk veldig fascinerende! Skuespiller-prestasjonene i filmen er gode på den nære og nærmest autentiske måten. Man får nesten følelsen av at det er en dokumentar, ikke en fiksjon, man blir presentert for. Dette skyldes ikke bare at filmen er innspilt over en elleveårs-periode, men måten den er regissert på, eller kanskje mer hvordan historien er fortalt. Olivia er dessuten en fascinerende kvinneskikkelse, der hun aldri går inn i offerrrollen, men tar grep for å forbedre barnas og sin egen situasjon de gangene dette fremstår som nødvendig. Så er spørsmålet hva som skjer med henne den dagen barna ikke trenger henne lenger ...

"Boyhood" falt virkelig i smak hos meg! Hvis jeg likevel skal sette fingeren på noe, så må det være at en spillelengde på 165 minutter - dvs. nesten tre timer - er i meste laget nesten uansett hvor god en film er. Samtidig skjønner jeg dilemmaet som skaperne av denne filmen må ha hatt underveis. Man har lagt ned utrolig mye jobb i å filme noen snutter av livet til denne familien gjennom elleve år, og står til slutt overfor valget: hva må kuttes? Jeg tror at jeg må konkludere med at filmredigeringen har vært meget vellykket og at det faktisk tar nesten tre timer å fortelle denne historien - verken mer eller mindre!

Jeg anbefaler "Boyhood" varmt!

(Fasiten etter Oscar-utdelingen den 22. februar 2015 er at Patricia Arquette vant en Oscar i kategorien beste kvinnelige bi-rolle.)

Innspilt: 2014
Originaltittel: Boyhood
Genre: Drama
Nasjonalitet: USA
Skuespillere: Ellar Coltrane (Mason Evans jr.), Patricia Arquette (Olivia Evans), Ethan Hawke (Mason Evans sr.), Lorerei Linklater (Samantha Evans) m.fl.
Spilletid: 165 min.

Céline (Julie Delpy), una estudiante francesa, y Jesse (Ethan Hawke), un joven estadounidense que viaja por Europa tras ser abandonado por su novia, se conocen en un tren con destino a París. Cuando llegan a Viena, Jesse debe bajar porque al día siguiente regresa a su país, pero logra convencer a Céline para que pase la noche con él en la ciudad. En el curso de esa noche, se conocen a fondo, discuten sobre diversas cuestiones como la vida, la muerte y el sexo. (Reseña tomada de FILMAFFINITY)

I hadn't read the original novel that the movie this graphic novel itself is based on, or seen the movie. (It is a graphic novel adaptation of an animated film adaptation of a novel.) I have read a couple of Philip K. Dick's other novels and several of his short stories before, and found them all to be rather dark, with somewhat of a "twist" near the end, and very enjoyable. This story is also dark, apropos the title, has a sort of twist at the end which I won't divulge here, and is very enjoyable.

Like many of Dick's novels it deals with reality, what is real, what isn't, and how can we really tell which is which, especially if you are under the influence of drugs. Drugs, another common theme in Dick's work, is shown here to be both harmful - the "D" in the name of the drug in the story "Substance D", stands for "Death" - but is enjoyable to the user.

The harm is that the drug splits the brain's function into the two hemispheres so that the user in effect becomes two virtual people. The main character, Bob/Fred, has been using it so long that he is both the drug dealer/user and the police informant investigating himself. The enjoyment is shown in the interaction between Bob and his two friends. Their witty dialogue and comebacks is much better under the influence of the drug than "normal".

I must find the original novel to read, and compare. I'm sure that a great deal has been omitted to make the movie and this graphic novel adaptation.

In the context of the movie - heck, even in the context of friendly text exchanges - the lines in these two movies take on extra poignancy. But I think the words need the 'human touch' as it were to truly fly. I'm not really reading when I read this book; rather I'm rehearing the lines, re-seeing the gestures, the expressions and the settings. Does that make it a successful book/text?

I'm prepared to re-evaluate the screenplays to 3 stars perhaps, but I think this is more a review of what the words mean in the context of performances by Ethan Hawke and Julie Delphy (and my memories of the film and the exchanges it stirred) rather than the book per se....½

Excellent sequel to Before Sunrise.

Калифорнийский округ Оранж находится под серьезным наблюдением правительства, многие его жители подсели на новый запрещенный наркотик Substance D, вызывающий непреодолимую паранойю. В числе наркоманов и Роберт Арктор, владелец дома в районе Анахэйм. Квартиросъемщики даже не подозревают о том, что Арктор на самом деле агент по борьбе с наркотиками под прикрытием. Цель его миссии разоблачение наркотической группировки, занимающейся производством и распространением Substance D.
В ролях: Киану Ривз , Роберт Дауни-мл. , Вуди Харрельсон , Вайнона Райдер , Рори Кохрэйн