What do you think?
Rate this book
Ubik: The Screenplay: The Only Screenplay from Philip K. Dick – A Literary Sci-Fi Nightmare of Perception
“An accident has occurred. Joe Chip and his colleagues—all but one of them—have narrowly escaped an explosion at a moon base. Or is it the other way round? Did Joe and the others die, and did the one fatality, Glen Runciter, actually survive? . . . From the stuff of space opera, Dick spins a deeply unsettling existential horror story, a nightmare you’ll never be sure you’ve woken up from.”—Lev Grossman, Time
In 1974, Philip K. Dick was commissioned to write a screenplay based on his novel Ubik . The film was eventually scrapped, but the screenplay was saved and later published in 1985. Featuring scenes that are not in the book and a surreal playfulness—the style of the writing goes back in time just like the technology in the book’s dreamworld—this screenplay is the only one Dick wrote and features his signature mix of paranoia, humor, and big-idea philosophy.
In 1974, Philip K. Dick was commissioned to write a screenplay based on his novel Ubik . The film was eventually scrapped, but the screenplay was saved and later published in 1985. Featuring scenes that are not in the book and a surreal playfulness—the style of the writing goes back in time just like the technology in the book’s dreamworld—this screenplay is the only one Dick wrote and features his signature mix of paranoia, humor, and big-idea philosophy.
192 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1985
54 people are currently reading
353 people want to read
About the author
Philip K. Dick
2,010 books22.5k followersPhilip Kindred Dick was a prolific American science fiction author whose work has had a lasting impact on literature, cinema, and popular culture. Known for his imaginative narratives and profound philosophical themes, Dick explored the nature of reality, the boundaries of human identity, and the impact of technology and authoritarianism on society. His stories often blurred the line between the real and the artificial, challenging readers to question their perceptions and beliefs.
Raised in California, Dick began writing professionally in the early 1950s, publishing short stories in various science fiction magazines. He quickly developed a distinctive voice within the genre, marked by a fusion of science fiction concepts with deep existential and psychological inquiry. Over his career, he authored 44 novels and more than 100 short stories, many of which have become classics in the field.
Recurring themes in Dick's work include alternate realities, simulations, corporate and government control, mental illness, and the nature of consciousness. His protagonists are frequently everyday individuals—often paranoid, uncertain, or troubled—caught in surreal and often dangerous circumstances that force them to question their environment and themselves. Works such as Ubik, The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch, and A Scanner Darkly reflect his fascination with perception and altered states of consciousness, often drawing from his own experiences with mental health struggles and drug use.
One of Dick’s most influential novels is Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, which served as the basis for Ridley Scott’s iconic film Blade Runner. The novel deals with the distinction between humans and artificial beings and asks profound questions about empathy, identity, and what it means to be alive. Other adaptations of his work include Total Recall, Minority Report, A Scanner Darkly, and The Man in the High Castle, each reflecting key elements of his storytelling—uncertain realities, oppressive systems, and the search for truth. These adaptations have introduced his complex ideas to audiences well beyond the traditional readership of science fiction.
In the 1970s, Dick underwent a series of visionary and mystical experiences that had a significant influence on his later writings. He described receiving profound knowledge from an external, possibly divine, source and documented these events extensively in what became known as The Exegesis, a massive and often fragmented journal. These experiences inspired his later novels, most notably the VALIS trilogy, which mixes autobiography, theology, and metaphysics in a narrative that defies conventional structure and genre boundaries.
Throughout his life, Dick faced financial instability, health issues, and periods of personal turmoil, yet he remained a dedicated and relentless writer. Despite limited commercial success during his lifetime, his reputation grew steadily, and he came to be regarded as one of the most original voices in speculative fiction. His work has been celebrated for its ability to fuse philosophical depth with gripping storytelling and has influenced not only science fiction writers but also philosophers, filmmakers, and futurists.
Dick’s legacy continues to thrive in both literary and cinematic spheres. The themes he explored remain urgently relevant in the modern world, particularly as technology increasingly intersects with human identity and governance. The Philip K. Dick Award, named in his honor, is presented annually to distinguished works of science fiction published in paperback original form in the United States. His writings have also inspired television series, academic studies, and countless homages across media.
Through his vivid imagination and unflinching inquiry into the nature of existence, Philip K. Dick redefined what science fiction could achieve. His work continues to challenge and inspire, offering timeless insights into the human condition a
Raised in California, Dick began writing professionally in the early 1950s, publishing short stories in various science fiction magazines. He quickly developed a distinctive voice within the genre, marked by a fusion of science fiction concepts with deep existential and psychological inquiry. Over his career, he authored 44 novels and more than 100 short stories, many of which have become classics in the field.
Recurring themes in Dick's work include alternate realities, simulations, corporate and government control, mental illness, and the nature of consciousness. His protagonists are frequently everyday individuals—often paranoid, uncertain, or troubled—caught in surreal and often dangerous circumstances that force them to question their environment and themselves. Works such as Ubik, The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch, and A Scanner Darkly reflect his fascination with perception and altered states of consciousness, often drawing from his own experiences with mental health struggles and drug use.
One of Dick’s most influential novels is Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, which served as the basis for Ridley Scott’s iconic film Blade Runner. The novel deals with the distinction between humans and artificial beings and asks profound questions about empathy, identity, and what it means to be alive. Other adaptations of his work include Total Recall, Minority Report, A Scanner Darkly, and The Man in the High Castle, each reflecting key elements of his storytelling—uncertain realities, oppressive systems, and the search for truth. These adaptations have introduced his complex ideas to audiences well beyond the traditional readership of science fiction.
In the 1970s, Dick underwent a series of visionary and mystical experiences that had a significant influence on his later writings. He described receiving profound knowledge from an external, possibly divine, source and documented these events extensively in what became known as The Exegesis, a massive and often fragmented journal. These experiences inspired his later novels, most notably the VALIS trilogy, which mixes autobiography, theology, and metaphysics in a narrative that defies conventional structure and genre boundaries.
Throughout his life, Dick faced financial instability, health issues, and periods of personal turmoil, yet he remained a dedicated and relentless writer. Despite limited commercial success during his lifetime, his reputation grew steadily, and he came to be regarded as one of the most original voices in speculative fiction. His work has been celebrated for its ability to fuse philosophical depth with gripping storytelling and has influenced not only science fiction writers but also philosophers, filmmakers, and futurists.
Dick’s legacy continues to thrive in both literary and cinematic spheres. The themes he explored remain urgently relevant in the modern world, particularly as technology increasingly intersects with human identity and governance. The Philip K. Dick Award, named in his honor, is presented annually to distinguished works of science fiction published in paperback original form in the United States. His writings have also inspired television series, academic studies, and countless homages across media.
Through his vivid imagination and unflinching inquiry into the nature of existence, Philip K. Dick redefined what science fiction could achieve. His work continues to challenge and inspire, offering timeless insights into the human condition a
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews
May 26, 2023
Un genio Dick 🖤
"Forse è davvero così. Forse si rinasce di nuovo, come dice Il libro tibetano dei Morti. È vero sul serio, Cristo, lo spero proprio. Perché in questo caso potremo incontrarci ancora tutti quanti. In un’altra parte della foresta, come in Winnie-the-Pooh, dove un bambino e il suo orsacchiotto giocheranno per sempre. Una categoria, pensò, imperitura. Come tutti noi. Finiremo tutti quanti insieme a Pooh, in un nuovo luogo più chiaro e duraturo."
"Io sono Ubik. Prima che l'universo fosse, io ero. Ho creato i soli. Ho creato i mondi. Ho creato le forme di vita e i luoghi che esse abitano; io le muovo nel luogo che più mi aggrada. Vanno dove dico io, fanno ciò che io comando. Io sono il verbo e il mio nome non è mai pronunciato, il nome che nessuno conosce. Mi chiamano Ubik, ma non è il mio nome. Io sono e sarò in eterno."
"Forse è davvero così. Forse si rinasce di nuovo, come dice Il libro tibetano dei Morti. È vero sul serio, Cristo, lo spero proprio. Perché in questo caso potremo incontrarci ancora tutti quanti. In un’altra parte della foresta, come in Winnie-the-Pooh, dove un bambino e il suo orsacchiotto giocheranno per sempre. Una categoria, pensò, imperitura. Come tutti noi. Finiremo tutti quanti insieme a Pooh, in un nuovo luogo più chiaro e duraturo."
"Io sono Ubik. Prima che l'universo fosse, io ero. Ho creato i soli. Ho creato i mondi. Ho creato le forme di vita e i luoghi che esse abitano; io le muovo nel luogo che più mi aggrada. Vanno dove dico io, fanno ciò che io comando. Io sono il verbo e il mio nome non è mai pronunciato, il nome che nessuno conosce. Mi chiamano Ubik, ma non è il mio nome. Io sono e sarò in eterno."
July 18, 2022
I don't think it's fair to compare this to the novel due to the fact the ultimate vision behind this never saw the light of day but this would've been a good movie, especially considering how "bonkers" the plot is for lack of a better word. The whole thing felt really fast, especially the first act which is what I didn't like so much about the original. Combine that with an ending that was somehow even more 'what the fuck' and this is really worth checking out if you are so interested.
Maybe it was because of what I was listening in the background but this also just felt far more tense, and the feel of the last 70 pages was pretty offputting in a really good way. The only thing I can think of that really didn't have to be there was a scene that was just an excuse for boobies but ig that's where this book shows it's age.
Maybe it was because of what I was listening in the background but this also just felt far more tense, and the feel of the last 70 pages was pretty offputting in a really good way. The only thing I can think of that really didn't have to be there was a scene that was just an excuse for boobies but ig that's where this book shows it's age.
October 9, 2016
Dieses Screenplay war Philip K. Dicks erstes und einziges Screenplay. Ich habe einmal ein Interview mit Ray Bradbury gehört, in dem er erzählte, dass seine erste Bühnenfassung von Fahrenheit 451 ganz schrecklich war, weil er einfach nur das Buch umgesetzt hat und die Dialoge übernommen hat.
Das ist genau das, was Philip K. Dick in diesem Screenplay macht. Er hat das Buch genommen, die Dialoge von Inquitformeln befreit und in Theaterform gebracht. Die Beschreibungen des Narrators als Regieanweisungen umgeformt und noch ein wenig Kameraführung hinzugefügt.
Alles ist da, wie man sich daran aus dem Roman erinnert. Es gibt 3 neue Szenen oder so, besonders am Schluss, das war es dann aber auch schon.
Ich weiß nicht, ob das als Film wirklich funktionieren würde. Es liest sich gut, flüssig, recht schnell, es spielt sich tatsächlich ein Film im Kopf ab, es wirkt aber ein wenig altbacken, irgendwie wie ein billiger B-Movie. Ob das daran liegt, dass das Screenplay aus den 1980er Jahren ist oder die Handlung sich einfach arg sklavisch an den Roman hält, kann ich nicht sagen.
Ich konnte dem Screenplay gut folgen, weil ich das Buch kenne. Aber ich weiß nicht, ob die Motivationen und dergleichen so, wie das Screenplay jetzt ist, wirklich rüberkommen würden. Irgendetwas schwer fassbares fehlt.
Da das aber auch mein erste Screenplay ist, das ich gelesen habe, kann ich nicht sagen, wo genau das Problem ist, ich habe keine wirklich positive Vergleichsmöglichkeit.
Vielleicht waren es einfach die zu langen Regieanweisungen, die explizit beschreiben, wie der Charakter drauf ist, das war wie ein normaler authoritative Narrator. Dafür gibt es kaum Kamara- oder Schnittanweisungen.
Fazit: Ja, man kann das Screenplay sicherlich mal lesen, aber es gibt keine wirklich allzu großen neuen Erkenntnisse im Vergleich zum Buch. Ja, das Ende hat noch einen leicht neuen Twist, der bringt es aber auch nicht wirklich und die Müsliszene, naja, nett. Lest lieber den Roman, obwohl... Das Screenplay hat schon mehr Tempo und schneidet subjektiv doch ein bischen besser ab, als der Roman.
Das ist genau das, was Philip K. Dick in diesem Screenplay macht. Er hat das Buch genommen, die Dialoge von Inquitformeln befreit und in Theaterform gebracht. Die Beschreibungen des Narrators als Regieanweisungen umgeformt und noch ein wenig Kameraführung hinzugefügt.
Alles ist da, wie man sich daran aus dem Roman erinnert. Es gibt 3 neue Szenen oder so, besonders am Schluss, das war es dann aber auch schon.
Ich weiß nicht, ob das als Film wirklich funktionieren würde. Es liest sich gut, flüssig, recht schnell, es spielt sich tatsächlich ein Film im Kopf ab, es wirkt aber ein wenig altbacken, irgendwie wie ein billiger B-Movie. Ob das daran liegt, dass das Screenplay aus den 1980er Jahren ist oder die Handlung sich einfach arg sklavisch an den Roman hält, kann ich nicht sagen.
Ich konnte dem Screenplay gut folgen, weil ich das Buch kenne. Aber ich weiß nicht, ob die Motivationen und dergleichen so, wie das Screenplay jetzt ist, wirklich rüberkommen würden. Irgendetwas schwer fassbares fehlt.
Da das aber auch mein erste Screenplay ist, das ich gelesen habe, kann ich nicht sagen, wo genau das Problem ist, ich habe keine wirklich positive Vergleichsmöglichkeit.
Vielleicht waren es einfach die zu langen Regieanweisungen, die explizit beschreiben, wie der Charakter drauf ist, das war wie ein normaler authoritative Narrator. Dafür gibt es kaum Kamara- oder Schnittanweisungen.
Fazit: Ja, man kann das Screenplay sicherlich mal lesen, aber es gibt keine wirklich allzu großen neuen Erkenntnisse im Vergleich zum Buch. Ja, das Ende hat noch einen leicht neuen Twist, der bringt es aber auch nicht wirklich und die Müsliszene, naja, nett. Lest lieber den Roman, obwohl... Das Screenplay hat schon mehr Tempo und schneidet subjektiv doch ein bischen besser ab, als der Roman.
December 6, 2023
PKD just *knew* this had the legs for the silver screen. After practically Hoovering this in a long evening, I’m inclined to agree! Two prior attempts have tried and failed, but maybe the third time’s the charm?
December 27, 2018
What a reality check! What is real? Adam Copnick of The New Yorker says the book is ". . . beautiful and hallucinatory". Yes. Hallucinatory. This book made me work to follow the storyline; and I still need to reread sections to try to figure out what I read.
January 29, 2018
his screenplay stays close and true to the novel. much like reading a Cliffs notes version of the novel
May 7, 2024
Far and away the best PKDick book and a fascinating adaption of his own work for screen. I gotta give it a little time now so I can reread the novel and compare differences. Someone better make this into a movie or else I’ll gather $20 million and do it myself
August 30, 2016
UBIK -- SAFE WHEN USED AS DIRECTED -- PLEASE SEE BELOW
Caution: Ubik may cause cranial implosion in those unfamiliar with the work of Philip K. Dick.
If you are new to the work of PKD I would strongly suggest that you buy the original novel version of this work rather than this screenplay. This is an interesting work for a self-confessed Dickophile such as myself but it’s debatable whether it would be of much interest to the casual reader.
Phil has written an interesting but quite unusable script. He undoubtedly understood the differences between novel and script writing, and this piece shows this awareness initially, but Phil soon forgets that he’s writing for the screen. As the piece moves on he appears to be using it as a vehicle to revisit the ideas in the original book. Many scenes are way too long and there is far too much expositional dialogue. Had this been taken up by a studio it would’ve spent an eternity in “development hell”. In fact I think this would be more successful as a radio play.
I unreservedly recommend PKD’s work, but stick to the novels and short stories. It’s in these formats that he excels. This still warrants 4 out of 5, however, because I found it fascinating.
Caution: Ubik may cause cranial implosion in those unfamiliar with the work of Philip K. Dick.
If you are new to the work of PKD I would strongly suggest that you buy the original novel version of this work rather than this screenplay. This is an interesting work for a self-confessed Dickophile such as myself but it’s debatable whether it would be of much interest to the casual reader.
Phil has written an interesting but quite unusable script. He undoubtedly understood the differences between novel and script writing, and this piece shows this awareness initially, but Phil soon forgets that he’s writing for the screen. As the piece moves on he appears to be using it as a vehicle to revisit the ideas in the original book. Many scenes are way too long and there is far too much expositional dialogue. Had this been taken up by a studio it would’ve spent an eternity in “development hell”. In fact I think this would be more successful as a radio play.
I unreservedly recommend PKD’s work, but stick to the novels and short stories. It’s in these formats that he excels. This still warrants 4 out of 5, however, because I found it fascinating.
January 10, 2009
The Ubik screenplay is what it is: an early-draft screenplay by a novelist who had never even tried to write a screenplay before. It doesn't add much to the story, and it doesn't take away much either-- in fact, most of the dialog is lifted directly from the novel. As a result it's about three times as long as a screenplay should be, and is basically unfilmable. What I *do* like about it is the added detail-- we get more description of people, places, and things that we see in the novel. It didn't change my world or anything-- but I'm *very* glad it's back in print!
February 2, 2018
Read the original book. This screenplay is for Dickheads only (and I'm a Dickhead!)
Read
March 28, 2025Ubik if it weren’t written as well and were slightly more sexist
May 31, 2018
Doesn't really work as a screenplay that could ever be made into an actual film. (Unless you want to sit in a theater and read paragraph-long Ubik labels on the screen). It does work pretty well as a revised version of the novel. I've read the novel Ubik several times, and never quite got it. This version gave me the pure distilled essence of Ubik. It's still not my favorite PKD work, but the screenplay pares the story down to the point that I can keep track of all the moving parts now.
The descriptions and stage directions add a lot to the story, but true to form, Dick's dialogue is pretty bad-- it's hard to imagine actors trying to successfully deliver some of the clunky infodumps in this script. I found all the 60's style sexual harassment quite distracting as well. The sexism is always there with Dick, but I think the pared-down nature of the screenplay style really foregrounded it for me in this case.
A nice supplement to the original novel. An interesting artifact of Dick's career, but not essential.
The descriptions and stage directions add a lot to the story, but true to form, Dick's dialogue is pretty bad-- it's hard to imagine actors trying to successfully deliver some of the clunky infodumps in this script. I found all the 60's style sexual harassment quite distracting as well. The sexism is always there with Dick, but I think the pared-down nature of the screenplay style really foregrounded it for me in this case.
A nice supplement to the original novel. An interesting artifact of Dick's career, but not essential.
June 28, 2019
Abbiamo a che fare con uno scrittore delirante che durante i suoi vaneggiamenti immagina un mondo dove l'essere umano continua a comunicare, grazie ad un congelamento, dopo la morte fino a che non rinasce. Nella vita di tutti i giorni esistono diversi esseri umani con delle particolari potenzialità. Chi può controllare il pensiero, chi è premonitore e chi può cambiare il passato...Come fa Glen Ruciter, direttore di un’agenzia antitelepati, a comunicare con la moglie Ella, intrappolata in un aldilà di semi-vita? Perché Joe Chip scompare dal suo mondo del 1992 per ritrovarsi nell’America degli anni Trenta? Chip vive in una casa dove tutto è a pagamento e precipita in una regressione temporale che ha nella mutazione degli oggetti – una cucina a gas cambia in una a carbone, un’auto moderna diventa una Ford del 1929 – la sua rivelazione primaria. Tutti hanno una convinzione differente di cosa sia la realtà... fino alla scoperta di Ubik, uno spray che impedisce la regressione. Libro molto particolare. Non per tutti perchè è un tipo di scrittura che deve piacere...
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 28, 2024
This is quite possibly my favorite piece of Dick's fiction. It would have been interesting to see filmed. I absolutely love that, like most of Dick's fiction (or life, for that matter), nothing is quite what it appears to be.
February 16, 2019
Would be interesting to see actually if this was made properly. The problem is, I don't think anyone has really done any Dick adaptation justice.
November 17, 2020
I need someone to discuss this with!! I loved the writing, but I need to travel back in time to one of my college Lit courses and be able to discuss this with my class. So I can truly get into it!!
Read
July 19, 2022Hope that i will see a film adaptation of this masterpeace!
Want to read
April 11, 2023to-read
June 29, 2025
Excellent!
August 15, 2012
It's a shame this screenplay has not been readapted or filmed, as it would definitely be one of the better adaptations of Dick's work. For the most part, it always seems to me that the best film adaptations of Philip K. Dick have been of his short stories; Blade Runner and A Scanner Darkly, while both fantastic films, fall a bit short of their source material, while films like Total Recall and Minority Report seem much closer to hitting the nail on the head. Dick's adaptation of his own work into a filmable commodity in Ubik would far outstrip anything else of his that's been filmed before.
May 14, 2013
First of all this isn't a screenplay in the ordinary sense. PKD was approached to write a screenplay for his novel Ubik, and he ended up writing a sort of revision of the novel, with a bunch of novelistic storytelling that wouldn't be there in a real screenplay. Think of this as basically a PKD novel with some screenwriting conventions tacked on.
There are plot differences between this and Ubik, significant enough that if you have read Ubik and liked it, you really, really, need to read this, and will find it a hoot.
Don't read this one first; read Ubik. It's one of the most strange and wonderful science-fiction novels in the world.
There are plot differences between this and Ubik, significant enough that if you have read Ubik and liked it, you really, really, need to read this, and will find it a hoot.
Don't read this one first; read Ubik. It's one of the most strange and wonderful science-fiction novels in the world.
May 19, 2012
This book was a re-read. I originally read it in 2008. I re-read it following re-reading the book "Ubik", by the same author.
I enjoyed both versions, although the screenplay is more polished. PKD has a way of ending some of his stories that don't settle right with me. Some books would have been better ended a chapter early, such as Ubik -- both the book and the screenplay. But, that's one of those qualities that many fans of his work crave.
It's a story well worth reading.
I enjoyed both versions, although the screenplay is more polished. PKD has a way of ending some of his stories that don't settle right with me. Some books would have been better ended a chapter early, such as Ubik -- both the book and the screenplay. But, that's one of those qualities that many fans of his work crave.
It's a story well worth reading.
June 7, 2014
This story just brought to mind too many things I disliked for me to continue trying to make it through. Since my friend pointed out to me I don't have to read what I don't like, I gave up.
While it's true you can't mature as a person without encountering dislikeable things (e.g. the GULag), I decided it's not worth pushing it.
Different people like different things. So while a different friend highly recommended this to me, I didn't take to it.
While it's true you can't mature as a person without encountering dislikeable things (e.g. the GULag), I decided it's not worth pushing it.
Different people like different things. So while a different friend highly recommended this to me, I didn't take to it.
July 7, 2014
I cannot judge this book on its quality by screenplay standards nor by how it compares to Dick's Ubik novel (I read it close to ten years ago). I can say that this screenplay feels more like the classic PKD style than any of the movies others have adapted from his works (with the exception of Linklater's A Scanner Darkly). It was a fun quick read that made me want to jump right into more PKD books. It is a shame this never got put to film.
October 11, 2008
I had the first edition of this
August 23, 2019
A futuristic sci-fi that you need to pay attention to. To understand this book, you need to read carefully because it can get confusing.
February 15, 2014
I read this immediately after reading (and loving) Ubik, and while the novel is preferable, Dick's attempt at a screenplay is a fascinating second take on the same material.
July 20, 2014
A really interesting complement to the novel; reading the directorial notes definitely gave me a different angle on some of the characters.
April 18, 2020
Quite enjoyable adaptation, with some minor differences from the novel. A lot of levity has been added.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews