I'm the other way around. I loved the atmosphere and the slow pace when I first saw it. But ever since I read the book I can't enjoy it the same way. I feel it just doesn't do it justice.
I love the movie. And I enjoyed the book many years later. But they are completely different. The book has an atmosphere of 1950 dry, dusty, empty suburbia and deals a lot with the status of owning real pets and what real really means.
The movie is literary much darker and takes place in a claustrophobic decaying chaos of a enormous city. I has the slow pace of a 1940th film noir and while the theme of what real really entails is central, it just one part in the whole vision.
I'm another way around: I read the book then watch the movie not long after. I slept.
And everytime I try to watch it I get bored quick.
I think I would have much more apreciate it, the atmosphere et all, if I hadn't read the book before. And I realy regret it because I know it's a good movie.
The book has a level emotional depth of that is not matched in the film. The first dialogue between Deckhart and his wife (yes he is married in the book) is really clever and meta. I was extremely disappointed by the film (I first saw it 2 years ago) and it feels very dated and has that 80s men-women cringe-portrayal. I agree, read the book it is awesome!
I watched it the other day, along with its recent 2049 sequel, and felt much teh same thing about its portrayal of women. Really ... dated. There is so much stuff that is emotionally more intelligent these dayson Netflix or Amazon.
I still enjoyed both films but that aspect of them (both) really sucked.
He's one of my favorite authors. While he wrote a lot of great science fiction my favorite of his works is "The Man in the High Castle". It's quite different. No space travel or aliens. It follows a few different characters in an alternate history world where the axis won WW2.
