I'll take you up on that discussion . . . regrettably, I am nearly a year late.

I think the concept itself is fascinating; I would like to read the book but have not done so yet. As you said, it's timely. I agree that a future like this is not so far-fetched, but at the same time the film left me cold (no pun intended). I didn't really care about any of the characters, and I struggled to get into it or feel invested in what I was watching.

Been years since I saw this but I remember really liking it ...um except for the jet pack scene (special effects were distractingly bad). But I think Truffaut did a great job of adapting the vibe of the book. @barrymost I highly recommend reading it, and I think it's only around 150 pages so you could feasibly read it in a day. The characters in the book are somewhat cold and unlikeable, and Linda was at times revolting. I recall a chapter about how she would relieve stress by racing down the country roads trying to hit rabbits. (This figured in with the shocking ending which I believe was changed in the movie.)

I've been reading more Bradbury and realizing that a lot of his characters are not very likeable, often they're caricatures of society, or they're so cryptic that you don't know what's going on in their heads. His stories seem to be more about the absurdity of the situation rather than any character development. So if you felt detached from the characters I guess the film was a success at that.

Something Truffaut did that was brilliant was having Julie Christie play both Linda as well as Clarisse. Again, maybe this was a nod to how interchangeable people are in that dystopian society, how there's no real originality or distinction. I remember this being one of the coldest scifis of the time. Not quite as cold as "Open the pod bay doors HAL" "I'm sorry Dave I'm afraid I can't do that" but definitely in the same spirit.