Rating: 
Summary: Not the movie
Review: I'll admit I got this because I love the movie and I guess I was expecting the book to be better, they are usually are. But they were so substantially different from each other which isn't necessarily a bad thing. I liked the differences, but the novel got a little weird toward the end with some dream like sequences that I didn't understand and I usually don't care for dream scenes. If you are expecting a more in-depth version of the film you get a little of that, but they are so different that you may not like it.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting and thought-provoking
Review: I liked this book a lot. The ending threw me off a little (the visions of Mercer, Deckard's trip up the hill, etc.). And the final showdown was a little disappointing - the most gripping android chase comes in the middle of the book. But it is very interesting, and leaves you with a lot to think about. "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" has made my top ten favorite books list.
Rating: 
Summary: A very powerful and sad book.
Review: As one who has seen both the movie and read the book, I must say that, yes, the two seem outwardly different, but they both seem to be about how the plight of androids, imperfect beings who strive to become something finer, parallels our own human condition. The androids in the movie are much easier to identify with, since they aren't devoid of empathy the way they are in the book, but the book manages to convey more strongly the sense of their deformity. In the movie, the androids want to live longer, in the book, they want to learn how to empathize the way humans do. As one of them says, "I really don't like androids. Ever since I got here from Mars my life has consisted of imitating the human, doing what she would do, acting as if I had the thoughts and impulses a human would have. Imitating, as for as I'm concerned, a superior life form." All in all, the book left me feeling pretty lonely and depressed. (I mean that in a good way.)
Rating:
Summary: Ersatz andy
Review: I have yet to see Blade Runner so I can't figure how the story would work without the animal theme. This was a good story, though. It seemed like the androids were humans as we know them(generally indifferent to the plight of animals) and the humans were actually super-humans(had telepathic powers) and that was neat. The JR Isidore sub-plot was not as interesting as the main plot. The Buster Friendly - Wilbur Mercer sub-plot was cool, though, especially when Buster makes his announcement.
Rating:
Summary: Blade Runner It Is Not.
Review: I have to admit, I only picked this book up because I loved Blade Runner so much. Since this is the novel that it was based on I thought I would be in for a treat.What I found was a slow moving story, similar to the movie. Rick Deckard's life is explained a little more, and so are the other characters which is nice. I liked the character development. But the story was just so slow moving I found myself drowsing off once in a while.
Rating:
Summary: A page turner
Review: This is a great little book. If your a fan of Blade Runner, you may or may not like the book. In my opinion the movie does not do justice to this book. Now a little more about the book. A New York time reviewer said, 'PKD is a kind of pulp-fiction prophet'. This statement is no hyperbole; anyone who enjoys Kafka and like scifi must read this.
Rating:
Summary: The book IS better
Review: Most who say that movies based on books say the book is better. That is definitely the case here. I enjoyed the book so much I think it is a shame that not more was put into the movie from the book. Don't get me wrong, Blade Runner is among my favorites.
Rating:
Summary: don't expect Blade Runner....
Review: Having read DADOES? five or six times over the last twenty years, I'm fairly sure that what he's doing here is ruminating on a potential definition of humanity, and on why it is so painful to be human. For PKD, the defining characteristic of a human being is the ability to empathise. If you can't do that, then you're not human; QED. It's not a bad definition, actually; so there's a gadget that tests your ability to empathise - fail the test and you must be an android. Of course, he can't resist his favoured target of consumerism either. A theme that comes up again and again in his writing is the way technology gets used for dangerous, reckless or trivial uses, frequently simply to allow people to lead more slobbish lives. True to form, his characters here live in a world where, as well as gadgets to detect androids, you can buy gadgets to fake feelings, gadgets to enable you to subscribe to the empathy-based religion of Mercerism, and fake animals to impress the neighbours (because real ones, being rare, are therefore automatically valuable). The ultimate consumer products, however, are the "andies", whose predicament is oddly familiar. Banished from the place they originated from, any return is denied them by laser-wielding sentries. Their maker seeks to destroy them on sight for what they are and may do, based on what their predecessors have done. They are complete duplicates of ourselves, except they are stuck with a much more vindictive Creator. In fact, androids only have it on someone else's say-so that they actually are androids, as witnesses the existence of a complete parallel police department staffed entirely by androids who think they're humans hunting androids. This last is a classic PKD twist - the idea that reality is something the mind unreliably creates is one he explores in many other stories, and one found elsewhere in classic American writing. It's a mistake to assume this is prediction - what he has to say about people is true already and the sci-fi backdrop is there because it's necessary. You could not transplant this into a contemporary or historical setting and still have a sensible novel. I secretly suspect PKD of writing American Literature in the finest Edgar Allan Poe tradition, and if I had to make the case, this is the book I'd use to argue it. It isn't easy; but it's very, very good.
Rating:
Summary: Not as powerful as the movie
Review: Blade Runner is my favorite movie of all time, and picking up this book I expected alot. Dick's writing is completely contrary to Ridley Scott's film, though. Dick's style focuses on queer details about the philosophies of the future (Mercerism, obsession with animals), whereas Scott conveys the more poignant details about the fine line between replicants (andys) and humans. The most crushing difference between the two was the purpose of an android four year life span. In the book, it is simply a question of the cells dying without regenerating. In the movie, it is an engineered tool used to kill the replicant slave just as it gains the emotional capabilities to appreciate life. There are no emotional adaptations in the andys of Dick's book. The androids are so callous and loathsome that the reader doesn't care when Dekkard retires them.
Rating:
Summary: Disturbing, thoughtful
Review: I first read this novella about a month after seeing the excellant Director's Cut of Blade Runner, and was surprised, but not at all disappointed. While the philosophical questions were very deep and thoughtful, what I liked best was the portrayal of completely normal people in this lonely future society, a staple of Dick's books, as I later found out. Despite the oppressiveness of the society portrayed, the characters continue to live out their small lives. As I once said, "If a character written by Heinlein was in the middle of the LA Riots, he'd foil the rioters, (Or side with them and overthrow the government) develop a machine to help him do so, get the girl, and rich while at it. An Orson Scott Card character would figure out a way to end the riot, after much moral agonizing. A Phillip K. Dick character would go out and buy a color TV". Sounds boring, but it makes it hit very close to home.
|
