Customer Reviews

Waking Life [VHS]

5 star:		(196)
4 star:		(58)
3 star:		(32)
2 star:		(15)
1 star:		(33)

 

 

Richard Linklater is one of the great independent directors working today. No matter what you think of his work, you cannot deny that he is an original voice. I don't like all his movies, but I invariably look forward to trying out each new one. Waking Life is one of the good ones.

To start with, its very existence is a sign of this man's imagination. He films the whole thing and edits it into a feature. Now at this point, most directors would consider their film finished. But not Rick Linklater. No, now he gives it to Bob Sabiston at LineResearch to totally cover over with rotoscoping animation using Sabiston's own software. So, basically, he's made two films in one. And we're the luckier for it.

If you've seen Slacker, you'll be familiar with the style. In that film, one scene blends into another through the use a minor character from one scene (often no more than a walk-on) becoming the focus of the next scene. Well, here the blend is not so logical. Several scenes appear to be dreams from which our hero (played by Wiley Wiggins from Dazed and Confused) awakens at the end. Only even his awakening appears to be part of the dream. Eventually, he realizes that he is not really waking up, and this begins to disturb him. (How to tell when you're dreaming--and make the most of it--becomes the subject of one conversation.) But he continues to meet up with people, often trying to interrupt their monologues with his own questions about his problem. Until he finally runs into a guy playing pinball (Linklater) who tells him simply to "wake up."

But does he?

Animating this film was the best idea Linklater had. Often one's mind wanders during these characters' monologues (several of them just aren't that interesting), but the animation surrounding them keeps your interest. It not only saves the film, but makes it better. It transcends itself. Instead of becoming Slacker meets My Dinner with Andre, it turns into art--that rarest of creatures, cinematic art.

Conversations that would be as dull as a dormitory-kitchen knife are enlivened. Concepts not understood become graspable through the use of illustrative drawings. Even the actors themselves (primarily amateurs including several professors from the University of Texas at Austin) are shown in a new light through the eyes of the animators. (One wonders what they thought of the animators' taking license with their likenesses.) My favorites were the "human interaction" scene, the "holy moment" scene, the story told in the bark, and the above "pinball" scene, where Linklater tells the film's most interesting story about Phillip K. Dick's discovery after writing one of his novels.

Have your own "holy moment" and immerse yourself in the dream world of Waking Life.

(Note on the DVD: This baby is loaded. Making ofs, interviews, several commentaries, and a very compelling animated short film called "Snack and Drink" featuring an autistic boy. Very educational regarding the process of bringing this movie through its paces and very entertaining as well. Well worth the price.)

Richard Linklater calls this a "movie about ideas," and it is indeed unlike most movies. It has only the slightest semblance of a plot. The unnamed narrator, played by Wiley Wiggins, seems to be trapped in a neverending dream in which he encounters a whole series of characters who expound on ideas about existence, dreaming, identity, time, religion, society. It reminded me of conversations with peers in college, sitting in the hallway of a dormitory, in the middle of the night, our minds bursting with ideas, grappling with problems and not finding any solutions but enamored with the quest. Like that, except amplified. The ideas in Waking Life are not like, whoa, you know, the ramblings of a pot-smoking college flunkie, but actual thoughts from intriguing street philosophers like Speed Levitch, fictional characters like Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy's characters from Linklater's Before Sunrise, artists like Steven Soderbergh, or academics like philosophy professor Robert Solomon.

It's a movie that would not have worked nearly as well as live action. The realism would detract from the intellectual dreaminess of the ideas. Linklater's animation technique, which uses computers to paint on top of live digital video footage, is just right for this film. It is as close as I've ever seen to having visuals actually embody the ideas being expressed verbally by the characters. A new, exciting alternative to the documentary as a visual medium for ideas, and just as credible an approach as that of, say, David Lynch, for reproducing the sensation of dream. The animation awakens the reality just as the ideas in the film rouse your mind.

Finally, it's a movie that will inspire a polarized reaction. The person I saw the film with stood up halfway into the film and left, unable to stand it. The greatest films seem to inspire such reaction. I left the theater and stood on the sidewalk outside, thinking.

`Waking Life' uses creative animation techniques and a nearly plot-less conversational format to explore some of the deep philosophical questions of consciousness, dream, and reality. While this may sound heavy and boring, director Richard Linklater (`Slacker') brings a surprisingly light touch to the project, and the result is a fascinating, thought provoking, and highly enjoyable film.
I watched this movie twice in one week. I was alone the first time that I viewed it, and found myself hard-pressed to express either the density of the ideas presented, or just how entertaining that presentation was. So I rented it again, and sat down to watch it with my best friend. We put the remote between us, and then, every few minutes, one or the other of us would grab it, hit pause, and launch into a discussion of what we had just seen. It took us all evening to watch this hour and forty minute film this way, but the result of this exercise was both entertaining and mentally stimulating.
Richard Linklater has a knack for making this type of fare. `Waking Life' is similar in many ways to his debut film, `Slacker', which shares its loose, conversational format and philosophical bent. `Waking Life' is a much stronger, more focused and thoughtful film, however, and it is easy to see Linklater's maturation as a film maker and thinker.
If you simply want mindless entertainment, avoid this movie, it is definitely not for you. If, however, you enjoy films that are clever, innovative, and thought-provoking then `Waking Life' very well might become one of your favorites.

Theo Logos

"Waking Life" is the rare kind of movie that makes your jaw drop in more ways than one. It's worth the price of admission (more than once, in my opinion) just to behold the 'rotoscoping' animation. Shot in digital film with real actors, a team of animators painted over each frame to produce an eery balance between realism and fantasy. Colors reflect a character's emotions at a given time, shapes distort to express thematic conclusions, and lines themselves vibrate with a universal energy. The visuals are beautiful and hypnotic.

What's equally impressive (and perfectly complementary to the animation) is the exposition of "Waking Life". I hesitate to say 'plot' (although the film does build on itself), since the main character (Wiley Wiggins) wanders from person to person in an attempt to understand the world around him. The film is largely a combination of monologues and soliloquies on the nature of dreams, reality, life, death, free will, and everything in between. Wiggins' character can't figure out what's happening to him - he seemingly wakes from dream after dream, wondering if he's really awake.

What I find exhilirating may be frustrating for others, but if you have the chance to see "Waking Life", don't miss it. It's a cinematic masterpiece.

This is a really great movie, totally engrossing and entertaining. I can't recommend it enough. I will, however, acknowledge that it is probably not for all tastes; I just don't understand why people who didn't like it can't do the same. But no, the criticizers can almost never be content with trashing the movie/book/music that they are ostensibly reviewing. Instead they turn their wrath immediately from the subject at hand to those morons, like me, who actually enjoyed the work in question. It's strange....

But anyway, I think anyone who criticizes the MOVIE based on the depth of the philosophical content has missed the point entirely and has maybe taken the whole thing a little too seriously. I'm pretty sure Linklater didn't regard this project as his own personal effort to displace Aristotle in the western canon (heck, during the discussion of free will he has a character explicitly acknowledge that much of what is being discussed could be called sophomoric).

Waking Life is anything but didactic. It is, like Lynch's Mulholland Drive, a DREAM. And just as Mulholland Drive is a dream of and by (so to speak) Hollywood, Waking Life is a dream of and by ideas. And you can't (or at least in my opinion you shouldn't) judge a representation of a dream against what you think would be a proper representation of something else altogether.

One thing I would like to say in Linklater's defense: To suggest that NONE of the philosophical riffs in the film have any sort or academic merit is just plain obstinate. Many of the actors in the film are, in fact, academics, and 3 that I can think of off the top of my head are philosophy professors, who helped craft their monologues and presumably know at least a little (though, I grant you, by no means nearly as much) about the topics as our friendly Amazon critics.

In the criticizer's defense: It's true, Waking Life does not reveal the meaning of life or confirm the existence of God. Sorry if that ruins it for you....

Well, I've said my peace, and in doing so I realize that I'm diving headlong into hypocrisy when I urge reviewers to, please, talk all you want about the movie/book/music in question, but leave us poor total strangers alone.

Animation is not usually associated with deep thinking, but "Waking Life" is an exception. In fact, the animation is precisely what makes this film work so well. A synopsis of the plot is impossible, but essentially a gen-X type character drifts in (and out?) of a dream state. Along the way, he talks to various deep thinkers who share their ideas about dreams, life, and religion. The different actors kind of play themselves and primarily deliver monologues to the main character, who is frequently passive. Sounds pretty grim, but it's definitely not. True, if this movie wasn't animated, it would be incredibly pretentious. However, the animation, which is spectacular, really helps ground this film.

There are certain scenes I'll never forget from this film, particulary the revelation that one cannot turn off the lights in dreams (whether that's true or not is irrelevant). Different segments of the film have been done by different animators, which helps keep things fresh throughout. Most of the stars are not well-known, but watch for Ethan Hawke and Nicky Katt, among others.

I avoided seeing this film in the theaters, despite the stellar reviews, because I am not a fan of movies that explore philosophical or religious issues in such depth. However, I found myself enjoying the movie immensely. It's funny and thought provoking. Highly recommended, especially for persons interested in philosophy and religion.

No movie that I have ever seen contains such an overwhelming abundance of ideas. Good ideas. Penetrating ideas. Ideas about life, reality, the meaning of existence, and lots and lots of ideas about dreams. Linklater must have been a philosophy major at the University of Texas. I say this partly because of the sheer abundance of philosophical explorations of a huge variety of topics, but the presence of actual University of Texas philosophers. I spotted two with whom I am familiar (Louis Mackey, author of one of the best books on Kierkegaard and who portrayed the "Old Anarchist" in SLACKER, and Robert C. Solomon, a prolific publisher of books on a variety of philosophical topics).

But I don't mean to mislead someone and intimate that this is a movie that solely addresses the head, and not the imagination or the heart. It does. Visually, this is one of the most remarkable films I have ever seen. Most individuals anticipating seeing the film are probably already aware that Linklater initially filmed live actors in the movie's scenes, and then collaborated with others in painting over the images to create a remarkable animated film. The result is delightful. Visually, the movie doesn't look like anything else ever made. But the film isn't just gorgeous to look at and stimulating intellectually: it is funny. Nearly ever scene results in laughter, and interpenetrating nearly every discussion, no matter how serious, is humor.

Apart from the visual aspect of the film, WAKING LIFE bears a recognizable resemblance to SLACKER. If you had seen SLACKER and then went to see this one without knowing who directed it, you would be identify both as the work of the same director within a few minutes. In fact, one of the earliest scenes in the movie strongly echoes the first scene in SLACKER. In that movie, a guy at a bus station (played by Linklater himself), catches a cab and begins talking to the cab driver about his dream life. He explains his theory that dreams might be a window into an alternative reality, and tells him that in a different reality, he might have talked and gotten to know a woman he saw at the bus station. WAKING LIFE begins with the main character exchanging glances with a woman at a bus station, then going to catch a cab (though he ends up with a ride from a very unusual individual), and then the rest of the movie is an essay on the nature of dreams.

Though SLACKER and WAKING LIFE are stylistically similar, in the end they are very different films. While both are somewhat episodic, with little (as in WAKING LIFE) or no (SLACKER) plot to speak of, and while both appear to be set primarily in Austin, Texas (I spotted one scene that seemed to have been filmed along the River Walk in San Antonio and another on the Brooklyn Bridge in NYC), and both contain a succession of professional and amateur actors, WAKING LIFE differs in two major ways, apart from the visual. First, WAKING LIFE, despite the variety of character, primarily focuses on the concerns of one young man. Second, while episodic in structure, WAKING LIFE is structured by the constant questioning of the nature of waking reality versus dreaming reality. SLACKER was basically about nothing; WAKING LIFE is definitely about something.

This movie is not for everyone. If you don't like ideas and talking about ideas, you might find this film tedious. It is animated, but it bears utterly no resemblance to a Disney movie. And it really doesn't have much of a plot. If you require a definite and involved plot, this movie won't be to your liking. For those who love extraordinary visual imagery and brilliant conversation about ideas, this movie will be a rare treat.

Slight correction: one character in the movie says that Kierkegaard's last words were: "Sweep me up." This quote is, in fact, based on something Kierkegaard reputedly said a month or so before he died. He was at a gathering at someone's house when he collapsed physically. As people gathered around him, he quipped, "Let it lie. The maid will sweep it up in the morning." He soon entered a hospital and died a month later, apparently of a staph infection. I am not aware of any recorded final words.

With "Waking Life," Richard Linklater returns to the loose, freewheeling structure he employed in his first film, "Slacker." The two main departures in "Waking Life" are 1) he animates the movie by filming live actors and superimposing computer images, and b) he anchors "Waking Life" by employing an unnamed protagonist played by "Dazed and Confused" actor Wiley Wiggins. The animated version of Wiggins wanders through his waking and dreaming life--the line between the two growing ever thinner--as various friends and acquaintances tell him their philosophies of life. (Among them are Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy sitting up in bed, discussing reincarnation and the afterlife; "Before Sunrise" fans will be delighted to know that Celine and Jesse reunited after all!) At first I thought this was a film I wouldn't particularly want to see again, but I find certain images and lines from it haunting me. Some speakers in "Waking Life" are more interesting than others, but the animation by more than 30 artists gives the film a kaleidoscopic, Chagall- meets-Peter Max quality that holds the interest, and Wiggins is an engaging screen presence even as a cartoon! "Waking Life" is a film that gives us substantial food for thought and gracefully insinuates itself into our minds.

Well, I didn't bother wading through all 126 reviews, but I read a good many of them, and it seems to me that people fall into one of two camps: either they hate "Waking Life" because it's pretentious, or they love it because it's thought provoking. I think there's something to be said for each of these views. There is a whole lot of philosophizing going on here - some of it is profound, and some of it is BS - just like life. And, also like life, it's up to YOU to decide which is which! I wouldn't assume that any of what comes out of the characters' mouths are Linklater's pet ideas - characters are characters, and the filmaker may or may not agree with what they are saying. As for the animation, I thought it was pretty cool. It's a real mixed bag though - you might like some segments and not like others. But I'm kind of surprised that anyone would find it boring - I would never say that. "Waking Life" is a fun movie.

In some ways this film is a companion piece to Linklater's earlier film "Before Sunrise." In "Before Sunrise," Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy wander around Vienna all night, having a philosophical discussion about life, the universe, and everything. "Waking Life" is similar--basically its protagonist, played by Wiley Wiggins from "Dazed and Confused," has encounters with a wide variety of unusual people, all of whom explain their personal philosphies to him. The question is, how much of this is a dream, and how much is real? Some of the characters in "Waking Life" are more interesting than others, but on the whole the format of the movie works very well with the amazing animation--live-action footage was drawn over and otherwise messed with to create a film with fascinating and varied visuals. (How was this not nominated for the best animated film Oscar? A travesty.) I was especially happy that Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy appear again, picking up where they left off on a conversation from "Before Sunrise" whose implications have nagged at me since I first saw that film several years ago! Everybody should see "Waking Life," and while you're at it, see "Tape" as well--another strikingly original Linklater film released in 2001.