[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 769 KB, 1583x2560, androids.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16215879 No.16215879 [Reply] [Original]

thoughts?

>> No.16215897

Woah, I didn't know that a graphic novel version existed

>> No.16215913

The original title sucked and "Blade Runner" is a much better name.

>> No.16215930

Very good, entry-level discussion of what it means to be human—or rather, according to the author, the ambiguity in defining humanity. I don’t necessarily agree with the assessment, but it’s a fun starting point.

>> No.16215961

>>16215913
Blade Runner is meaningless edge. Androids Dream of Electric Sheep is truer to the story, which is about the essence of what it means to be human, the question if humanity can be replicated, and the metaphysical implications of this replication. The movie also missed the mark regarding the reason for the androids behaving the way they do. Honestly, cinema should just die overall.

>> No.16215972

>>16215913
Dick's titles are long and bizzarre but I like them, they are one of his particularities in my opinion

>> No.16215979

>>16215879
Extremely dull, just like the movies

>> No.16216012

>>16215979
2049 is Goosekino

>> No.16216230

>>16215879
the movie is better

>> No.16216340

>>16215879
This book was boring as shit. The movies were way better.

>> No.16216479

>>16215913
>blade runner
A title lifted from Alan E. Nourse. Some of his stuff is actually good and doesn't diverge into retarded druggy territory

>> No.16216492

stem fag literature. i hate engineers! they get all the women and money!

>> No.16216517

>>16216492
>tfw engineer who can't get job
Why do you hate me

>> No.16216652

>>16216340
how is it boring? i read through it and was always excited to see what would happen next

>> No.16217053

Way better than the movie. But I did enjoy 2049 almost as much

>> No.16217134

Pkd writes some of the worst prose ive ever read.
He should have been an idea man for a better writer

>> No.16217796

is DADES better than ubik? i know a lot of people likedubik but i thought it was beyond retarded

>> No.16217850

found a mega on /co/ archive
https://mega.nz/#!WRV0nATL!I2OS9HZdDC19DdyVwPxoCHnr4Z9TXmYXxR4SA3-dFtk

>> No.16218005

>>16215879
Unlike the other posters, I really enjoyed this book. In this age of short attention spans, it managed to grip my attention, and I was able to read through it. Much more easily, and much more interesting than Neuromancer.

I also liked the later act of the novel, mainly because it ventured beyond the predictable detective novel into something new, and unpredictable.

>> No.16218048

>>16218005
op is asking about the comic version

>> No.16218159

>>16218048
yikes

>> No.16218212

>>16217134
nah

>> No.16218216

>>16215879
Movie was far better than the book.

>> No.16218246

>>16218048
i'm not, that was just the best result i found when i searched for images.

>> No.16218425

>>16217796
They've not much in common aside from PKDs goofy pulpy settings

>> No.16218467

>>16215913
Retard. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is a great title

>> No.16218481
File: 159 KB, 289x289, 1449489293919.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16218481

Great book. One of my favourites.
Movies are also great, both the first and 2049.

>> No.16218496

>>16218467
not him but its kinda dumb. the cliché isn't of someone dreaming of sheep but counting them in their head while awake. plus its too long.

>> No.16218661

Can someone explain the deal with Mercer to me? I get it's a part of the narrative about human nature and machines, but how does he appear physically to the characters and give them real objects? And what's the deal with Deckard paralleling his experiences at the end

>> No.16219142

>>16218496
>the cliché isn't of someone dreaming of sheep but counting them in their head while awake
what?

>> No.16219294

Blade Runner was better, the book receives too much attention for having been the source material, and so far as PKD's works go I think it's decidedly second-tier compared to stuff like Ubik and Three Stigmata.

>> No.16219726

>>16218048
>>16215879
I read the comic version ages ago and don't remember much, but from what I do remember it keeps the entire text of the book, it just has drawings.

>> No.16220010

>>16216479
>The novel The Bladerunner (also published as The Blade Runner) is a 1974 science fiction novel by Alan E. Nourse, about underground medical services and smuggling. It was the source for the name, but no major plot elements, of the 1982 film Blade Runner.

>In 1979 William S. Burroughs was commissioned to write a treatment for a possible film adaptation. This was published as Blade Runner (a movie). Burroughs acknowledged the Nourse novel as a source, and prominently set a mutated virus and right-wing politics in the year 1999.

>No film was produced from the Burroughs treatment, but Hampton Fancher, a screenwriter for a film based on Philip K. Dick's 1968 novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?), had a copy. He suggested "Blade Runner", as preferable to the earlier working titles "Android" and "Dangerous Days", for the Dick adaptation.[3] In the film, released as Blade Runner in 1982, the term is never explained, and the plot has no connection to the Nourse and Burroughs stories. Ridley Scott bought any rights to the title Blade Runner that might have arisen from either the Nourse novel or the Burroughs treatment.

Really shows how shallow and money-driven Hollywood film-making is as an "art".

>> No.16220524

>>16220010
they could have just called it Do Androids Dream or something

>> No.16220617

>>16215879
That part when Deckard acknowledges the real Mercer might have been just some actor but still believed in his teachings turned me from atheist to deist.

The whole Buster & friends vs Mercerism is essential gnostic PKDcore.

>> No.16220638

>>16215879
I'm in love with Wilbur Mercer and I'd suck his faux-religious cock.

>> No.16220751

>>16220524
That just sounds gay. Blade runner doesn't sound gay and lures you into the false belief that the movie won't be trash

>> No.16220755

>>16218005
>Much more easily, and much more interesting than Neuromancer
Most sci-fi books are better than neuromancer.

>> No.16221415

>>16219142
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counting_sheep

>> No.16221646

>>16221415
I thought it had to do with wanting one of the electronic animals that are highly valued by people in the book, as in do they dream of owning one. In the book, owning an electronic sheep is a human desire, and also it is a little funny imagining an android owning an electronic sheep, there is no 'real' life there.

>> No.16221658
File: 134 KB, 640x480, valis.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16221658

Dick is based but holy shit he has some terrible prose

>> No.16221831

>>16221646
thats in interesting take bit isn't it that the characters want to own real animals and owning a fake one is somewhat shameful? though it could still be that the title is asking "if we dream of owning real sheep, do androids dream of owning fake ones?"

>> No.16221840

>>16221831
>owning a fake one is somewhat shameful
Not really, most people have fake animals in the book.

>> No.16221902
File: 3.58 MB, 2650x4075, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep - Omnibus-013.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16221902

>>16221840

>> No.16221906

>>16221840
And they go to great lengths to pretend they're real animals, even having the mechanics pretend to be vets.

>> No.16221937
File: 1.51 MB, 2650x4075, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep - Omnibus-014 (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16221937

>>16221906
correct, i was about to upload this one but it was too big and i had to compress it. (as an aside the comic looks pretty good, like the anon said they have kept all the original text and the artwork isn't bad)

>> No.16221975

Does the title refer to something in the book itself?
Just wondering if it had some significance in the text as the title was changed for the movie adaptations

>> No.16221999

I actually preferred the book to the Blade Runner movies.

The books ending hit even harder than the first movie' ending.

>> No.16222023

>>16221975
yes, the protag owns a mechanical sheep which he bought after his real one died

>> No.16222095

>>16221937
>tfw they included none of this in the movie

>> No.16222376

>>16222095
theres a fake snake

>> No.16223696

>>16215913
Thanks you announcing to everyone how shit your taste is

>> No.16223704

>>16216230
It’s really not. The movie only has good visuals going for it. The story is bare fucking bones and leaves out everything that made the novel so compelling

>> No.16223708

>>16217134
Science fiction doesn’t need to have good prose, retard. It’s not like he’s writing poetry

>> No.16223724

>>16219294
How was the movie better? The visuals are really the only thing the movie has going for it. The story is so gimped in the movie and feels rushed missing all of the interesting and important aspects of the novel like the importance of empathy, Mercerism, mood organs, Buster Friendly, and so on. I’m convinced that anyone who thinks the movie is better, really hasn’t read the book. That or they have very shitty tase

>> No.16224862

>>16215879
I don't understand why there's so many people who don't get basic things about this book when Dick went at great lengths to tell the reader what he's getting at.

>> No.16225015

>>16221975
see >>16221646

>> No.16225110

Are all his books like that? Finished Ubik recently and thought the premise was interesting but I could barely get through the shitty writing

>> No.16225117

>>16225110
Meant for >>16221658