I love this debate on the animation, it's very odd, since the way the movie is presented accentuates the ambiguity of the material, in a similar way that Substance D (and others) manipulate how perception is resolved. So maybe this does appeal more towards a stoner attitude as THX states, or this reinforces people's desire to not see experimental film. It's just funny that after watching 24 minutes of the movie (at a really phriggin small size) and C3PX says he wants to see the rest but won't because of a preconceived notion. This animation looks different on the big screen. The reason they did put out these 24 mintues is to alleviate some of the concern the animation might have on people. In it's existing presentation is might be a pretty good movie.
Do movies have to be enjoyable to watch? I would say no, especially when it's about content which affects people. Often in negative ways. Might as well challenge the audience. Now to what degree you go to do this is up to the director for most of you'se this one seems to have gone to far. Speak your mind with your dollar.
THX: Cinematically i'm not sure what issue you forcusing on which was lacking from this presentation. It's not a blade runner-esc future we're talking about. These are basic schlubs on the burbs doing they're thing.
As for the story, it's more of less dead on. 7/8th of the book is about watching these guys stoner around as Bob slowly realizes his split-ness. Then the last 1/8th is about the expanded Rehibilitation issue and exploitation in one of these facilities. Now i agree with you that the rehibilitation aspect was simplified to just New Path, and how one company seems to be the cause and solution. The book was more vague on this. Another criticism i had of the movies is that the splitness of Bob/Fred just didn't have moments where things progressed from one to the other. Maybe some scene where Bob walks down the street and as he moves from his house to the vide/watch house, you get a sense of him becoming Fred. The Donna/other lady sexscene is that scene i guess, just didn't work for me, even though that's how it is in the book.
---Spoiler Warning Reminder---
I haven't read Blade Runner's precursor, but wasn't that a short story? So it needed filling out if it was to become a feature film. This was a novel which had he material in it. If anything much of what was cut was stoner stuff. One of the major ones being the Celphoscope (sp?), which would have added some irony to his future video watching. If you've got any ideas on how the movie could have expanded i'm interested in that debate. One way to take it would have been to expand the after effects of Bob/Fred/Bruce's flower. Was B/F/B really a husk of a human or someone up against incalculable odds, who eventually overcomes. That's a hollywood ending if there ever was one. and i would stay away from something like that.
Of the decisions, the one tv movie decision i could point out would be the Donna becomes Hank moment. I didn't like that one, it's like the smallness of the SW universe after ESB, everyone's related... Personally i'm fascinated by the passages in the book which are the Barris's implications of Bob/Donna's other activities. Are they real, what we're they attempting to accomplish. But that's EU territory, i haven't figured out a way to incorporate that material into something larger without changing the focus of the story.
Anyway this movie is a good examination of the implications of drug culture. If you don't want to see, i recommend reading it. And that's one of the primary issues involved in using this animation, the subject matter is drugs, you can't have any serious discussion on drugs in a movie, you're stuck with that R rating, plus throw in some sex and you've solidified teh R. So in many ways your audience is slashed so why not challenge the audience in visuals as well as topic, adult audiences tend to be more open minded. Where's Barris to watch me get a hand cramp and be quiet...
none