Waking Life is among a handful of films (Woyzeck, Magnolia, The Passion of Anna) that really frustrate me, because as much as I love them I can't necessarily recommend them to everyone. There are certain films for which one needs to be on a certain wavelength to enjoy, no matter how cultured or intelligent. This film is best for those who have sat around thinking about the big questions in life for long periods of time, dying for someone to talk to about them. I guess Waking Life isn't about those questions so much as it's about the people who are asking them, the wonderers, the thinkers, and especially the dreamers. For those who can appreciate it, it's a cleansing experience, one of a purity and beauty that has no equal in the films I've been fortunate enough to see.
533 Reviews
very good, creative, expansion of Slackers
RJGodin227 February 2003
It is rare for a director to return to a film and improve it but Linklater does it here. Taking the general form of Slackers, he adds a metaphysical story line and coats it with extraordinary eye candy.
The rotoscoping really provides an acid trip experience of constantly shifting planes with backgrounds going one way and characters going the other.
The string quartet tango score also is an excellent use of music to reinforce the exotic aspects of the production.
The monologues are thought provoking and compelling. The story line examining dream/death connection is novel. Score points for originality of story, art direction and narrative line. Some quite funny parts (e.g. boat car, bar shoot out, etc.), some creepy parts (e.g. jailbird rant, second boat man meeting, etc.).
I have seen this several times and enjoyed it every time. Farily rare is the movie that can really stand up to multiple viewings. This is one.
Very refreshing. See it.
The rotoscoping really provides an acid trip experience of constantly shifting planes with backgrounds going one way and characters going the other.
The string quartet tango score also is an excellent use of music to reinforce the exotic aspects of the production.
The monologues are thought provoking and compelling. The story line examining dream/death connection is novel. Score points for originality of story, art direction and narrative line. Some quite funny parts (e.g. boat car, bar shoot out, etc.), some creepy parts (e.g. jailbird rant, second boat man meeting, etc.).
I have seen this several times and enjoyed it every time. Farily rare is the movie that can really stand up to multiple viewings. This is one.
Very refreshing. See it.
The iguana bites those who do not dream
madahab5 January 2022
There are only a handful of films that have evoked a WOW!! Reaction out of me and Waking Life is on that short list. It is a stunning experience for both the eyes and mind. Apart from two scenes it is a very positive film, which makes those two scenes out of place. The rotoscoped animation varies from sequence to sequence and some might find it (especially if they have issues with motion sickness) a little uneasy to watch. I was more absorbed in the topics of conversation and ideas that are rich throughout the film. Some may find the lack of a linear story or any sort of resolution a little frustrating but I think it would have diminished the film greatly if anything was explained. It is only tainted by the appearance of Alex Jones, yep, that Alex Jones. At the time of seeing in 2001 I had no idea who he was. Years later I was watching it and now the voice was very familiar. I read the credits and confirmed that it was him. This is my favourite sequence. In it he plays a variation of the "character" we've come to know on his show but here there is hopeful nature to his rantings. Despite this Waking Life is still a film that ignites my imagination. On the d DVD copy it has a feature which text appears on the screen when they characters are talking about a book or specific philosopher. I hope the Criterion Collection releases a blu-ray version.
Beautiful sloppiness; an excellent mistake
saturdaze9 December 2002
Warning: Spoilers
Imagine a man who shows up for a job interview wearing a torn T-shirt, sneakers, and sunglasses. The manager interviewing him can't believe that someone would have the audacity to show up like this but he can't help being impressed by this guy's intelligence, charm, sensitivity, and work-ethic...skills which every employer desires in a potential employee. Well, "Waking Life" is like that smart but sloppy man showing up for the job interview, and the employer is us, the audience.
I've read the other User Comments and the common complaint among those who hate this movie is the fact that it meanders, is filled with seemingly endless, tedious philosophical ramblings, and has no characters we can connect with in a deep, emotional way. And to those people I have to say this: You're absolutely right. This movie is all of those things. It also happens to be one of the most exciting, inspiring, eye-opening and haunting experiences I've had at the movies in a long time.
For me, the movie ultimately succeeds in spite of its long, non-cinematic, abstract discussions because it's a movie about a DREAM. And aren't dreams the ultimate abstraction? How can you make a movie about something as abstract as dreams without also being abstract to some degree? This is a legitimate case of the Form matching the Content. And I truly feel that this movie accurately--very accurately-- illustrates the landscape of dreams. Some people have felt that the rotoscoping animation grates after a while but I feel that it's probably the movie's greatest asset: the live-action painted over by computer animation results in images that look both real and unreal, that look more to be based on something that's real than being real itself--and that's exactly how images look and feel in dreams (at least in my dreams).
That said, I won't go so far as saying this movie is a cinematic masterpiece, as some people have asserted. Long, static, philosophical discussions and a bunch of Talking Heads don't really belong in a movie, which needs developed characters and a consistent conflict that runs like a thread throughout the story. On that level, the movie falls short.
At its best, though, the movie works on two levels: On one level, it's the story about a guy who's trying to "wake up" from a metaphorical sleep of ignorance and unawareness. On a second level, which is more speculative and ambiguous than the first, it's the story about a guy who has just died and is experiencing nearly 120 minutes of post-mortal consciousness.
Some might disagree with the second story possibility, but I personally believe that it's the movie's Real story. There are some hints scattered throughout the film which seem to indicate that Wiley Wiggins' character is dead (spoilers ahead): 1. early in the movie, right before Wiggins gets hit by the car, he gets a ride in a boat-car which has a skull-and-crossbones banner hanging from it; 2. there are three scenes where Wiggins rides on a train, which implies that some kind of transitional Transportation is taking place--he's moving from one realm (life) to another (death); 3. the film starts in the daytime and gradually builds to nighttime where it ends--in literature (which this movie alludes to several times), night has always represented Death; 4. in the scene where Wiggins tells the red-headed woman that he believes he's dreaming, he ends by saying "But this dream is different--it's almost as if I'm being prepared for something": RIGHT AFTER he says that, we see him briefly on the train again, and right after that, we see him on a bridge which, like the train, represents transition, a change from one state to another; 5. in the Night scenes at the end, random people pass by Wiggins, making cryptic comments about death (i.e.- "Kiergegaard's last words were 'sweep me up'."): it's as if these people are trying to tell the Wiggins that he's dead.
Seen from this latter perspective, the movie plays almost like a tragedy: a man, about to die, looks back on his life (just like the old woman whom Julie Delpy mentions early in the movie) and realizes that he has been none other than an observer, a watcher, a listener rather than a Doer. And by the time he realizes this, it's too late--he's pulled into the sky/Eternity/Death.
I've read the other User Comments and the common complaint among those who hate this movie is the fact that it meanders, is filled with seemingly endless, tedious philosophical ramblings, and has no characters we can connect with in a deep, emotional way. And to those people I have to say this: You're absolutely right. This movie is all of those things. It also happens to be one of the most exciting, inspiring, eye-opening and haunting experiences I've had at the movies in a long time.
For me, the movie ultimately succeeds in spite of its long, non-cinematic, abstract discussions because it's a movie about a DREAM. And aren't dreams the ultimate abstraction? How can you make a movie about something as abstract as dreams without also being abstract to some degree? This is a legitimate case of the Form matching the Content. And I truly feel that this movie accurately--very accurately-- illustrates the landscape of dreams. Some people have felt that the rotoscoping animation grates after a while but I feel that it's probably the movie's greatest asset: the live-action painted over by computer animation results in images that look both real and unreal, that look more to be based on something that's real than being real itself--and that's exactly how images look and feel in dreams (at least in my dreams).
That said, I won't go so far as saying this movie is a cinematic masterpiece, as some people have asserted. Long, static, philosophical discussions and a bunch of Talking Heads don't really belong in a movie, which needs developed characters and a consistent conflict that runs like a thread throughout the story. On that level, the movie falls short.
At its best, though, the movie works on two levels: On one level, it's the story about a guy who's trying to "wake up" from a metaphorical sleep of ignorance and unawareness. On a second level, which is more speculative and ambiguous than the first, it's the story about a guy who has just died and is experiencing nearly 120 minutes of post-mortal consciousness.
Some might disagree with the second story possibility, but I personally believe that it's the movie's Real story. There are some hints scattered throughout the film which seem to indicate that Wiley Wiggins' character is dead (spoilers ahead): 1. early in the movie, right before Wiggins gets hit by the car, he gets a ride in a boat-car which has a skull-and-crossbones banner hanging from it; 2. there are three scenes where Wiggins rides on a train, which implies that some kind of transitional Transportation is taking place--he's moving from one realm (life) to another (death); 3. the film starts in the daytime and gradually builds to nighttime where it ends--in literature (which this movie alludes to several times), night has always represented Death; 4. in the scene where Wiggins tells the red-headed woman that he believes he's dreaming, he ends by saying "But this dream is different--it's almost as if I'm being prepared for something": RIGHT AFTER he says that, we see him briefly on the train again, and right after that, we see him on a bridge which, like the train, represents transition, a change from one state to another; 5. in the Night scenes at the end, random people pass by Wiggins, making cryptic comments about death (i.e.- "Kiergegaard's last words were 'sweep me up'."): it's as if these people are trying to tell the Wiggins that he's dead.
Seen from this latter perspective, the movie plays almost like a tragedy: a man, about to die, looks back on his life (just like the old woman whom Julie Delpy mentions early in the movie) and realizes that he has been none other than an observer, a watcher, a listener rather than a Doer. And by the time he realizes this, it's too late--he's pulled into the sky/Eternity/Death.
A film for passionate thinkers.
Spamlet19 March 2003
This is one of the most thought provoking films I've ever seen. It's also visually stunning and perfectly acted: every single one of these people seem to be just giving their own opinions as if you were overhearing/having a meaningful conversation with them.
We can chalk this up to the genius of Linklater who over the years has shown not only the pretentiously humorous coffee house crowd cliches but also the searching, often deeply insightful side of our generation that the media overlooked when we were dubbed slackers. In films he has written: "Slacker" and "Before Sunrise" and in his films of stage plays Bogosian's brilliant, Chekhovian "SubUrbia" and the faintly melodramatic "Tape", Linklater has always been fascinated with the question of what we should doing with our lives. Our responsibility is to contribute something lasting and meaningful to our society. But what exactly is that? Where and when should I do it? Who with? How do I know if I've really found it? Why is it so important again, anyway?
I saw this movie for the first time late last night and 5 minutes before it started I had fallen asleep and was hoping I'd be able to make it all the way through the film. From the first frame I was riveted and completely awake and remained so even after it was over; contemplating all the myriad viewpoints the film had thrown at me.
This movie is so exciting and bursting with ideas that I'm going to buy the DVD as soon as I possibly can and watch it over and over trying to absorb it all.
See this film. It will remind you of how thrilling it is to be an active thinking, feeling member of the human race.
We can chalk this up to the genius of Linklater who over the years has shown not only the pretentiously humorous coffee house crowd cliches but also the searching, often deeply insightful side of our generation that the media overlooked when we were dubbed slackers. In films he has written: "Slacker" and "Before Sunrise" and in his films of stage plays Bogosian's brilliant, Chekhovian "SubUrbia" and the faintly melodramatic "Tape", Linklater has always been fascinated with the question of what we should doing with our lives. Our responsibility is to contribute something lasting and meaningful to our society. But what exactly is that? Where and when should I do it? Who with? How do I know if I've really found it? Why is it so important again, anyway?
I saw this movie for the first time late last night and 5 minutes before it started I had fallen asleep and was hoping I'd be able to make it all the way through the film. From the first frame I was riveted and completely awake and remained so even after it was over; contemplating all the myriad viewpoints the film had thrown at me.
This movie is so exciting and bursting with ideas that I'm going to buy the DVD as soon as I possibly can and watch it over and over trying to absorb it all.
See this film. It will remind you of how thrilling it is to be an active thinking, feeling member of the human race.
How could anyone not enjoy this movie?
superfragglerock2 December 2004
Okay, i haven't read any comments yet, but a lot of the "one line summaries" sound negative. I just finished watching this film, and registered an account with IMDb solely to speak of this film. These are the types of movies that we should be expecting from filmmakers today. Aren't we all tired of the blockbuster bullshit by now? True, it's not a "typical movie" and yes...it is a cartoon. But, the style is completely unique and entirely necessary for the story. If it were simply caught on film and released in that same manor, it would not have had the monstrous effect that it had, and it would not have come across in a way that would retain the interest of this generation's ADD youth (which SHOULD be it's primary demographic...they are the ones who can still change this world, and create the paradigm shift that is necessary) This movie is the fiber of all life, it IS that collective unconscious from which we all draw our own, personal beings. It explains the philosophies of years gone by and minutes gone by in a way that anyone could understand them. While I know that some closed minded people are going to be scared and confused by all of this necessary information, if only one mind is opened because of it, I know that Richard Linklater would be greatly pleased.
Fantastic Work of Film Art
StellaLuna1119 August 2002
Waking Life has broken new ground surrounding the idea of animation. Filming people, then having artists with different styles "animate" the recorded scenes was brilliant. The visuals are constantly changing, providing an aurora of sights that you can not take your eyes off of. Trippy? Yes, Burnt Out? No- This movie can not only be appreciated for the wild images, but for the story-line as well... On second thought-story-line might not be the right word. The actual "plot" of this movie can be seen as an hour and a half of the most interesting philosophy course one can find. The characters and conversations are deep, fascinating, and thought-provoking. You must see this movie more than once because it is almost impossible to absorb what you see and be able to fully appreciate the genius of the script. I've seen it about 5 times and there are still some scenes I have yet to fully grasp. Sit back and treat your eyes and mind to the most stimulating film of the year.
A mind expanding experience.
oddi-323 January 2003
I greatly enjoyed Waking Life, I was most impressed by the animation and the philosophical dialog that just kept hanging on the characters' every word. This movie is not for everyone, at least not for those who like their films 'light'. The fact is that Waking Life consists mostly of the main character discussing philosophical topics with various colorful characters. At some point it was difficult to remain concentrated to everything the characters say, for they were rambling quite discoursively, making the audience feel like they're attending a lecture. But the animation makes up for that, because the film has so much visual content that one could also watch it with out the dialog, just being immersed in the art.
I'm not an expert in philosophy, I've just taken one beginners class, although i am interested in the topic. In reply to complaints condemning the film pretentious or complaining that it's philosophical ideas are old or overused. I'd say that Waking Life, rather than trying to reinvent philosophical theories, tries to present these ideas in the form of a film the same way as Jostein Gaarder's book 'Sophie's World'. It could in that way function as a sort of 'window' into the world of philosophy, a first touch. I'd hesitate calling it a beginners guide to philosophy as the language is demanding, especially for non natives. But on my part, I feel having expanded my horizons, by experiencing Waking Life. This movie can be enjoyed on many levels, and also a whole spectrum of interpretations can be drawn from it, watch it and see what it makes you feel.
I'm not an expert in philosophy, I've just taken one beginners class, although i am interested in the topic. In reply to complaints condemning the film pretentious or complaining that it's philosophical ideas are old or overused. I'd say that Waking Life, rather than trying to reinvent philosophical theories, tries to present these ideas in the form of a film the same way as Jostein Gaarder's book 'Sophie's World'. It could in that way function as a sort of 'window' into the world of philosophy, a first touch. I'd hesitate calling it a beginners guide to philosophy as the language is demanding, especially for non natives. But on my part, I feel having expanded my horizons, by experiencing Waking Life. This movie can be enjoyed on many levels, and also a whole spectrum of interpretations can be drawn from it, watch it and see what it makes you feel.
and it happened in Texas...
lee_eisenberg27 June 2006
"Waking Life" is not an easy movie to explain. Portraying the philosophical adventures of a young man, the movie does some mind-blowing things. Certainly the animation is not like anything that you've ever seen. As to the question of whether or not the movie is trying to make a point about anything, I guess that it's looking at the current state of the world.
Did I like it or not? It is definitely worth seeing, but not for those with short attention spans, or who just want to be "entertained". This movie is closer to "The Seventh Seal" than to most of Richard Linklater's other movies. Check it out.
Did I like it or not? It is definitely worth seeing, but not for those with short attention spans, or who just want to be "entertained". This movie is closer to "The Seventh Seal" than to most of Richard Linklater's other movies. Check it out.
it's fractured and a little 'all-over-the-place', but it's alive and it gets the sparks in your head going in ways few movies can
Quinoa198418 October 2006
Waking Life is almost like a compilation of short films as opposed to one complete full length feature. But then the film insists repeatedly that there is a logic to it, dream logic. This, however, could even be circumspect. It's really a unique blend of philosophical monologue &/or soliloquy &/or dialogs, a mix of 'isms' (asburdism, surrealism chiefly, even magical realism in tiny spots), and if there were any film of the past ten years that I might offer up as a recommendation to Godard, it might be this. Richard Linklater also serves up his kind of sequel to his first film, Slacker, which was about as free-form and experimental and questioning and thinking about the ways of life as any given group of college kids (the bright ones I mean) might have on a bright day. It's ironic though after seeing the film to think that this is even considered a 'stoner movie'. The color scheme, developed by Bob Sabiston (who would also head A Scanner Darkly, another Linklater film), is about as wild and perfunctory for the kind of mood that Linklater could get. Wily Wiggins, after getting hit by a car, drifts in and out of dreams- constantly dreaming one could only possibly think to guess- as people come forward in Austin Texas to put forward views on life. But will this state of constant dreaming (sometimes 'lucid' sometimes not) continue?
This is the thread that hangs all of the film together like a true-blue stream-of-consciousness clothesline that would appeal to stoners, I think, and at one point I did even consider being high for the duration of the picture. I was more glad to be sober for it all though, because as I write this I wonder if I could even grasp everything- or maybe need to again- on a 2nd full viewing. So much still sparks off in my head of things I connected with by what the characters talked about to Wiley (chiefly things regarding existentialism and Sartre, free-will, how dreams can affect how we perceive things in the 'real' life, and the ideas concerning cinema itself and Bazin). While once or twice it came close to becoming almost TOO much of a eye-grabbing and mind-churning thing that once or twice it's more of a random 'essay' than really a good scene. But like with Slacker, there's also the occasional jab of fine humor from Linklater, like the ape working the projector reading off paper, or the guy who reappears as a convenience store clerk. Towards the end, as Linklater himself appears on camera and has maybe the longest talk of all, Waking Life becomes all the more clear and revelatory.
This is really, when it comes down to it, an independent production with a real independent thought process to it. Linklater, with Sabiston as something like his best kind of collaborator, guides us through all of this to see what's so wonderful, strange, horrifying, incendiary, crude, and worthwhile about what it is to try and live one's life, but also in seeing it through the perspective of the un-reality of a reality of some kind of other dream state. Or something of that nature. At any rate, it wont be everyone's cup of tea, and if you do decide to make it as such a stoner movie be ready to take in everything that's being said along with the crazy animation. While I might take Linklater's Scanner Darkly just slightly over this one (due to the animation for that being better in its control and working much better with a much more sustained subject matter), Waking Life still holds its own as one of his most ambitious projects that ends up going one step further than Slacker. He's working at full-speed with the faculties of experience, intelligence, questioning (and maybe not always, appropriately, with answers), and ultimately creativity. And that musical accompaniment is one of the finest in years.
This is the thread that hangs all of the film together like a true-blue stream-of-consciousness clothesline that would appeal to stoners, I think, and at one point I did even consider being high for the duration of the picture. I was more glad to be sober for it all though, because as I write this I wonder if I could even grasp everything- or maybe need to again- on a 2nd full viewing. So much still sparks off in my head of things I connected with by what the characters talked about to Wiley (chiefly things regarding existentialism and Sartre, free-will, how dreams can affect how we perceive things in the 'real' life, and the ideas concerning cinema itself and Bazin). While once or twice it came close to becoming almost TOO much of a eye-grabbing and mind-churning thing that once or twice it's more of a random 'essay' than really a good scene. But like with Slacker, there's also the occasional jab of fine humor from Linklater, like the ape working the projector reading off paper, or the guy who reappears as a convenience store clerk. Towards the end, as Linklater himself appears on camera and has maybe the longest talk of all, Waking Life becomes all the more clear and revelatory.
This is really, when it comes down to it, an independent production with a real independent thought process to it. Linklater, with Sabiston as something like his best kind of collaborator, guides us through all of this to see what's so wonderful, strange, horrifying, incendiary, crude, and worthwhile about what it is to try and live one's life, but also in seeing it through the perspective of the un-reality of a reality of some kind of other dream state. Or something of that nature. At any rate, it wont be everyone's cup of tea, and if you do decide to make it as such a stoner movie be ready to take in everything that's being said along with the crazy animation. While I might take Linklater's Scanner Darkly just slightly over this one (due to the animation for that being better in its control and working much better with a much more sustained subject matter), Waking Life still holds its own as one of his most ambitious projects that ends up going one step further than Slacker. He's working at full-speed with the faculties of experience, intelligence, questioning (and maybe not always, appropriately, with answers), and ultimately creativity. And that musical accompaniment is one of the finest in years.
A fun conversation
adamw_1323 August 2002
Waking Life is not a movie, it's a conversation. Which might be OK if it's "My Dinner With Andre," but not here. It may be a great conversation, and, as conversations go, an entertaining one. But not as movies go.
These conversations are interesting, and I may even agree with a lot of it. I may have even thought and talked about these very same philosophical and abstract ideas. It can be fun. I like big ideas, I love to think in movies. I love Gattaca and Memento and Dark City, to name some recent examples.
And believe me, I agree with the sentiment that it's good to ask questions and feel "alive" instead of some creature that is forced into what to think. And I do, in fact, find myself often longing for those days of yore, where these types of on-campus conversations happened regularly, as opposed to the mundane junk we talk about on a daily basis.
But ultimately, though I might want to read the book, this does not make for a good movie. All of the fantastic and brilliant artistic effects in the world -- which this has -- should not deceive you into thinking otherwise.
One problem is, I've had many of these conversations already, and they are generally fruitless. They may be mentally stimulating and interesting, but they ultimately are nothing more than mental gymnastics.
But that's not really it. Mental gymnastics can be great in and of themselves. Our mind needs to be exercised or it just shrivels up.
The big problem is, even if we're inclined to enjoy conversations and mind puzzles like this, we don't enjoy being passive observers of them. Whatever joy might be derived from this kind of thing comes from actually participating in the conversation, even if that means just writing your own essay.
I believe participation is of the essence, because ultimately these kinds of conversations are an egotistical exercise. Since these big ideas don't really have answers, the conversations are ultimately fruitless and frustrating, so just listening to them gets you nowhere. In fact, you could say these conversations are ultimately pointless to have, except as mental gymnastics ... just as basketball is ultimately a pointless pursuit except for the fun and exercise of it.
I wonder if he's done this creative animation to hide the quasi-acting he made famous in "Slackers." That would be really brilliant, come to think of it, since we tend to forgive bad acting, over-acting, under-acting -- or whatever you want to call it -- in animation. I liked Linklater's "Dazed and Confused" and "Suburbia," but at least those movies had people trying to act.
Of course, it could be argued, these characters aren't even pretending to act. They're just talking. But that would bring us right back to the original point.
These conversations are interesting, and I may even agree with a lot of it. I may have even thought and talked about these very same philosophical and abstract ideas. It can be fun. I like big ideas, I love to think in movies. I love Gattaca and Memento and Dark City, to name some recent examples.
And believe me, I agree with the sentiment that it's good to ask questions and feel "alive" instead of some creature that is forced into what to think. And I do, in fact, find myself often longing for those days of yore, where these types of on-campus conversations happened regularly, as opposed to the mundane junk we talk about on a daily basis.
But ultimately, though I might want to read the book, this does not make for a good movie. All of the fantastic and brilliant artistic effects in the world -- which this has -- should not deceive you into thinking otherwise.
One problem is, I've had many of these conversations already, and they are generally fruitless. They may be mentally stimulating and interesting, but they ultimately are nothing more than mental gymnastics.
But that's not really it. Mental gymnastics can be great in and of themselves. Our mind needs to be exercised or it just shrivels up.
The big problem is, even if we're inclined to enjoy conversations and mind puzzles like this, we don't enjoy being passive observers of them. Whatever joy might be derived from this kind of thing comes from actually participating in the conversation, even if that means just writing your own essay.
I believe participation is of the essence, because ultimately these kinds of conversations are an egotistical exercise. Since these big ideas don't really have answers, the conversations are ultimately fruitless and frustrating, so just listening to them gets you nowhere. In fact, you could say these conversations are ultimately pointless to have, except as mental gymnastics ... just as basketball is ultimately a pointless pursuit except for the fun and exercise of it.
I wonder if he's done this creative animation to hide the quasi-acting he made famous in "Slackers." That would be really brilliant, come to think of it, since we tend to forgive bad acting, over-acting, under-acting -- or whatever you want to call it -- in animation. I liked Linklater's "Dazed and Confused" and "Suburbia," but at least those movies had people trying to act.
Of course, it could be argued, these characters aren't even pretending to act. They're just talking. But that would bring us right back to the original point.
Fear not - dreamers are not the dead ones
mads-12929 June 2012
This movie is a true account of life outside the Barbie and Ken boxes of suburbia. I seriously consider this a beautiful experience that most people should enjoy and discuss in order to embrace evolution of human life.
If this does not seem match your 'preferred genre profile' or 'entertainment style', do this;
Watch it alone with a open mind - and stay present - accept and understand.
You may in the end be rewarded with a deeper insight to human life through the channeled wisdom of the people involved. Except the red guy in jail who is a truly scary embodiment of unconsciousness... along with the guy who shoots the bartender. Some of the protagonists are deeply trapped within their own minds while other have liberated themselves and as free as birds. Humans as humans should be. Human 2.0 (or is it 3 or 4).
If this is for you: watch it and smile.
The contrast is both scary and powerful and serves to show how we should take responsibility for our lives and each other. But the movie is not moralistic - it's simply honest and most of the people reconstruct a reality that all humans deserve to sense beneath 'the matrix'... as such it's a quest for the truth and the meaning of life.
The first 10 minutes may be an exit prequel for completely unconscious people (almost had me turn it off - I didn't). Guess I am just another example of how we are zombies brainwashed into stereotyped entertainment schemes - accepting the unreal - drama and indifference as the point of life when there is so much more.
In the end it comes forward more as an emotion than through the beautiful perspectives on human life and beyond is portrayed. The narrative is well constructed and creatively put together in a 'acid'-like yet non-cheesy cartoon theater setting. The setting becomes the voice of the movie along with the young male main character trapped in the infinite loop of life. Who am I? What matters? What is dream? What is real?
Personally I will always be grateful for this experience Richard Linklaiter - so thank you! Whether alienated from society, alone, open for new impressions or in spiritual search of meaning and enlightenment this dream is surely one everybody should benefit from having at least once in the lifetime...
The dreamers are not the dead ones!
If this does not seem match your 'preferred genre profile' or 'entertainment style', do this;
Watch it alone with a open mind - and stay present - accept and understand.
You may in the end be rewarded with a deeper insight to human life through the channeled wisdom of the people involved. Except the red guy in jail who is a truly scary embodiment of unconsciousness... along with the guy who shoots the bartender. Some of the protagonists are deeply trapped within their own minds while other have liberated themselves and as free as birds. Humans as humans should be. Human 2.0 (or is it 3 or 4).
If this is for you: watch it and smile.
The contrast is both scary and powerful and serves to show how we should take responsibility for our lives and each other. But the movie is not moralistic - it's simply honest and most of the people reconstruct a reality that all humans deserve to sense beneath 'the matrix'... as such it's a quest for the truth and the meaning of life.
The first 10 minutes may be an exit prequel for completely unconscious people (almost had me turn it off - I didn't). Guess I am just another example of how we are zombies brainwashed into stereotyped entertainment schemes - accepting the unreal - drama and indifference as the point of life when there is so much more.
In the end it comes forward more as an emotion than through the beautiful perspectives on human life and beyond is portrayed. The narrative is well constructed and creatively put together in a 'acid'-like yet non-cheesy cartoon theater setting. The setting becomes the voice of the movie along with the young male main character trapped in the infinite loop of life. Who am I? What matters? What is dream? What is real?
Personally I will always be grateful for this experience Richard Linklaiter - so thank you! Whether alienated from society, alone, open for new impressions or in spiritual search of meaning and enlightenment this dream is surely one everybody should benefit from having at least once in the lifetime...
The dreamers are not the dead ones!
Talking Heads Made Visually Interesting
noralee14 October 2005
"Waking Life" is like an animated "My Dinner with Andre" so that the talking heads are certainly more interesting to look at.
The mostly rotoscope-like technique makes for more intriguing characterizations than most animation, with interesting use of character actors and intellectuals with quirky faces and attention-commanding voices, no matter what sense/nonsense they're talking about dreaming/waking/consciousness/life/death.
The cameos of such as Ethan Hawke (who is just as sexy animated as filmed) and Stephen Soderbergh and Adam Goldberg are fun to pick out.
As the scenes were taped in "real life" first, the sounds are also more realistic than animation usually utilizes, from footsteps, to breathing and location atmospherics like traffic.
(originally written 11/10/2001)
The mostly rotoscope-like technique makes for more intriguing characterizations than most animation, with interesting use of character actors and intellectuals with quirky faces and attention-commanding voices, no matter what sense/nonsense they're talking about dreaming/waking/consciousness/life/death.
The cameos of such as Ethan Hawke (who is just as sexy animated as filmed) and Stephen Soderbergh and Adam Goldberg are fun to pick out.
As the scenes were taped in "real life" first, the sounds are also more realistic than animation usually utilizes, from footsteps, to breathing and location atmospherics like traffic.
(originally written 11/10/2001)
pretentious garbage
Jeff-19715 December 2001
Let me begin by saying that reviewing this movie puts you into a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. If you think it sucked, well, you're just too stupid to understand it, or you don't have the attention span. "Why don't you just go see Monster's Inc.", they'll rebut. So you are forced to say that you like it. I'd be willing to bet that at least 50% of those saying it is great (with no specificity) are just trying to avoid looking like they can't understand it.
Now, onto my review. I wonder if the people who call Linklater brilliant think that he somehow wrote all these theories? That he is some metaphysical genius that invented all these positions? I would hope not, as he obviously didn't. Which leaves me to ask, "What did he do that deserves my praise?" The guy went to a university with a tape recorder, got some real-audio of some Psychology 101 and Philosohpy 101 lectures, and paid some animators to draw someone saying them.
The theories discussed are not advanced. They are fairly common and easy enough to follow. Even the boy admits, "they sound familiar, like I'd heard them somewhere". They don't get more complex. They don't refute each other. They don't build. They don't reach a conclusion. They are just strewn together, willy-nilly. If you're going to make a film exploring all of these issues, at least do me the favor of taking a position on them... give me some insight, some enlightenment. To just present them without organization or taking a position just seems to translate to me as: "See how much I know??" Like a discussion with someone after their first philosophy class, when they recite theory to you, without questioning, challenging, or even favoring any of it.
I feel that the use of the plot being that the boy was dreaming (or dead) was to hide the fact that Linklater DIDN'T have any profound point to make. Only in a dream could he get away with an incomprehensible, poorly organized blob of discussion on a topic. Had this movie been set in the real, waking world, he would have had to go somewhere with this... to make a point or take a position. But as it was he could just let it be slop.
See this movie only if you'd like to pretend you and your friends are intellectuals for a night. Then log onto imdb.com and write about how profound and moving it was, but don't, whatever you do, say why. Just saying that it was deep and explored reality and the mind will suffice.
Did this movie make for a stimulating evening? It could. But don't think that this movie is intellectually superior to another just because it uses big words and discusses metaphysics. You can analyze pop movies and try to pull meaning from it, too. And at least the pop movies mask it in the DETAILS OF A STORY instead of just purely PRESENTING YOU WITH RAW THEORY. Is Moby Dick just about a whale? Is Star Wars just about rescuing a princess? No. These tales explore quite a bit of human dynamics and philosophy, but at least they have the sense of ART to present it in a masked way.
This is not an art film. It isn't even a film. It's an intro class lecture with pictures.
Now, onto my review. I wonder if the people who call Linklater brilliant think that he somehow wrote all these theories? That he is some metaphysical genius that invented all these positions? I would hope not, as he obviously didn't. Which leaves me to ask, "What did he do that deserves my praise?" The guy went to a university with a tape recorder, got some real-audio of some Psychology 101 and Philosohpy 101 lectures, and paid some animators to draw someone saying them.
The theories discussed are not advanced. They are fairly common and easy enough to follow. Even the boy admits, "they sound familiar, like I'd heard them somewhere". They don't get more complex. They don't refute each other. They don't build. They don't reach a conclusion. They are just strewn together, willy-nilly. If you're going to make a film exploring all of these issues, at least do me the favor of taking a position on them... give me some insight, some enlightenment. To just present them without organization or taking a position just seems to translate to me as: "See how much I know??" Like a discussion with someone after their first philosophy class, when they recite theory to you, without questioning, challenging, or even favoring any of it.
I feel that the use of the plot being that the boy was dreaming (or dead) was to hide the fact that Linklater DIDN'T have any profound point to make. Only in a dream could he get away with an incomprehensible, poorly organized blob of discussion on a topic. Had this movie been set in the real, waking world, he would have had to go somewhere with this... to make a point or take a position. But as it was he could just let it be slop.
See this movie only if you'd like to pretend you and your friends are intellectuals for a night. Then log onto imdb.com and write about how profound and moving it was, but don't, whatever you do, say why. Just saying that it was deep and explored reality and the mind will suffice.
Did this movie make for a stimulating evening? It could. But don't think that this movie is intellectually superior to another just because it uses big words and discusses metaphysics. You can analyze pop movies and try to pull meaning from it, too. And at least the pop movies mask it in the DETAILS OF A STORY instead of just purely PRESENTING YOU WITH RAW THEORY. Is Moby Dick just about a whale? Is Star Wars just about rescuing a princess? No. These tales explore quite a bit of human dynamics and philosophy, but at least they have the sense of ART to present it in a masked way.
This is not an art film. It isn't even a film. It's an intro class lecture with pictures.
Linklater brings us deeper.....
garvey80200018 August 2004
I recently viewed Waking Life By Richard Linklater and found it to be a truly unique viewing experience. The film deals with the idea of lucid dreams and the nature of our existence and many other philosophical questions. What struck me about the film was the way in which the superb animation was layered over the film. What this achieves is indeed a sense of a dreamlike viewing experience.Everyone has those dreams where they have a great sense of having gone somewhere and done something wonderful when they wake up. It may be difficult to remember details of your surroundings or what exactly you did but you know you were somewhere doing something. The jumpy nature and fluid characteristics of the animation really help to create that very same feeling while viewing the film.
I cannot stress the creative genius of Richard Linklater enough. He appears himself at the end of the movie and brings some closure to the main protagonists' dilemma of being trapped in this dream state. The film highlights the idea of how intertwined our dream lives and our Waking lives are. Memories that we once thought to be real often turn out to dreams and vice versa. Fans of philosophical debate and chat will be in heaven here however those who find themselves easily bored by such discussions may be skipping some scenes.
Finally, Waking Life is another chapter in the pioneering film-making of Richard Linklater. He has given us such gems like Before Sunrise and Dazed and Confused. He has achieved in bringing film back to its essentials.. performance and script.
I cannot stress the creative genius of Richard Linklater enough. He appears himself at the end of the movie and brings some closure to the main protagonists' dilemma of being trapped in this dream state. The film highlights the idea of how intertwined our dream lives and our Waking lives are. Memories that we once thought to be real often turn out to dreams and vice versa. Fans of philosophical debate and chat will be in heaven here however those who find themselves easily bored by such discussions may be skipping some scenes.
Finally, Waking Life is another chapter in the pioneering film-making of Richard Linklater. He has given us such gems like Before Sunrise and Dazed and Confused. He has achieved in bringing film back to its essentials.. performance and script.
Waking Life is a philosophical buffet for those whose minds are hungry
jukangliwayway24 July 2013
The first scene caught me off-guard, feeling and sensing the real people behind the hypnotic yet grotesque rotoscope animation. At first it might distract or feel weird seeing shakiness all over and big eyes seemingly pulsating in and outside the lines of their faces, but after the initial unsettling cartoonish vibe, everything just becomes more surreal. It's art, and it's beautiful.
Richard Linklater's attention to details with his cameraworks and cinematography gives you a unique experience, but what makes his movies stand the test of time is his script. As taut as a newly-adjusted guitar string, his dialogues/script reverberates from your ear into your mind & into your soul, and it will be hard to shake it out of your system . It's as real as life, as tight as Superman's spandex. It's a fantastical feeling. At some point while watching I ask myself, if this is done without the animation, would it be the same movie? No. What makes Waking Life as surreal & beautiful as a famous work of art is the fusion of its unique animation, script, & the music. The fast-talking, quick-paced documentary vibe, the use of musical instruments that stirs at your soul, the fascinating animation, and the thought-provoking dialogues worked perfectly for me. As one character has said, "Don't ever be bored!" And I wasn't.
As the writer character in the movie said, the greatest story ever told is "people, gestures, moments, bits of rapture, fleeting emotions." You don't need a coherent plot or a named protagonist for this kind of movie, all you need is to clear your mind and enjoy this wonderful, cerebral dream-like experience. And before you drift off, DON'T FORGET, which is to say, REMEMBER, because remembering is so much more a psychotic activity than forgetting, the iguana will bite those who do not dream.
Richard Linklater's attention to details with his cameraworks and cinematography gives you a unique experience, but what makes his movies stand the test of time is his script. As taut as a newly-adjusted guitar string, his dialogues/script reverberates from your ear into your mind & into your soul, and it will be hard to shake it out of your system . It's as real as life, as tight as Superman's spandex. It's a fantastical feeling. At some point while watching I ask myself, if this is done without the animation, would it be the same movie? No. What makes Waking Life as surreal & beautiful as a famous work of art is the fusion of its unique animation, script, & the music. The fast-talking, quick-paced documentary vibe, the use of musical instruments that stirs at your soul, the fascinating animation, and the thought-provoking dialogues worked perfectly for me. As one character has said, "Don't ever be bored!" And I wasn't.
As the writer character in the movie said, the greatest story ever told is "people, gestures, moments, bits of rapture, fleeting emotions." You don't need a coherent plot or a named protagonist for this kind of movie, all you need is to clear your mind and enjoy this wonderful, cerebral dream-like experience. And before you drift off, DON'T FORGET, which is to say, REMEMBER, because remembering is so much more a psychotic activity than forgetting, the iguana will bite those who do not dream.
Dreamy movie
Superunknovvn15 January 2007
"Waking Life" is a dreamy movie by definition. It reminded me a bit of Jim Jarmusch' "Night On Earth" - maybe because those movies have similar (yet fantastic) scores, maybe it's because both are told in episodes with little else going on than people talking to each other. "Waking Life" is really unlike any other movie, though.
Besides the highly philosophical and intriguing dialogues it's the unique visuals that set this movie apart from any other motion picture out there. The movies' look isn't a case of style over matter at all, it's what gives "Waking Life" it's dream-like quality. This look is what really sucks you into this completely different world, this dream world.
Although I've loved some of Linklater's movies dearly ("Before Sunrise/Sunset", "Dazed & Confused", "School Of Rock") and I have appreciated him as a rather versatile director before, it's "Waking Life" that convinced me that he's a real master, as artistically skilled as Michel Gondry or Darren Daronofsky. It may not be Linklater's very best movie, but his directing and his writing here are probably his most artistic and masterful work so far.
Besides the highly philosophical and intriguing dialogues it's the unique visuals that set this movie apart from any other motion picture out there. The movies' look isn't a case of style over matter at all, it's what gives "Waking Life" it's dream-like quality. This look is what really sucks you into this completely different world, this dream world.
Although I've loved some of Linklater's movies dearly ("Before Sunrise/Sunset", "Dazed & Confused", "School Of Rock") and I have appreciated him as a rather versatile director before, it's "Waking Life" that convinced me that he's a real master, as artistically skilled as Michel Gondry or Darren Daronofsky. It may not be Linklater's very best movie, but his directing and his writing here are probably his most artistic and masterful work so far.
Packed with ideas
boltons-120 June 2005
Waking Life is a good movie for those who don't easily get seasick. The constant motion reminded me of being on a cruise ship, an alternate reality in itself. If you can get by the constant flowing "dreaminess" (on a cruise there are those who pop Dramamine or wear a patch) then there is a great deal to ponder: existentialism, nihilism, collective consciousness, human evolution, the criminal mind, lucid dreaming, free will, the holy moment, the power of the subconscious, your own reality and many other topics. The plot is introduced really late in the movie so the viewer is left wondering"what the hec is going on?" However, patience does pay off and it will all come together for you if you don't get seasick and if you remember to use your higher brain function. I liked the gonzo style of the filmmakers and their creativity. This movie could lead to lengthy discussions on many different topics and I could even see a Philosophy Professor using it as a final exam. Watch it and expand your mind or don't and just "Dream on Dude"!
For a thinker, a masterpiece
olcare23 April 2023
This is life. While watching, I thought so much that I got tired, but the masterpiece of this movie comes from the amazing combination of questioning dreams and life (respectable). Listen from the perspective of an ordinary viewer too.
The film makes extraordinary, profound reflections on many things that have happened in your life within a multi-layered dream, and at some parts, I had to pause and watch twice to understand (my recommendation is to watch by pausing). The rotoscope technique was as if it was created for this film and its amazing compatibility impressed me a lot.
I realized that we think very little about our lives, this film says to think more as life is very layered, in my opinion. Of course, everyone will interpret it differently, but it should be thought about after watching.
If you ask, "how can acting stand out with this technique?", they stand out very well. The voices of the actors in every frame seem as if they were created specifically for that dialogue, and the distant music in some scenes was the same.
Rinklater has gained my extreme respect because he showed me something truly amazing. This is not a film to be watched once and never again; it is a work that can be watched repeatedly, constantly and is something I admire.
Also, he made it with a very low budget, and he is giving us a pure otherworldly idea, I don't know how else to describe it. I won't give examples of individual scenes because each scene is so subjective that everyone should watch and come up with their own interpretation. This review is from an ordinary viewer who is extremely impressed and watches a lot of movies; I am looking at 2023, and the number of these types of movies is dwindling, hopefully the number of these types of films will increase.
WATCH THIS MOST INQUISITIVE, DEEP, AND SIMULTANEOUSLY EXHAUSTING MASTERPIECE OF A FILM AND MAKE OTHERS WATCH IT TOO.
Note: This is definitely a tiring film, it should be watched by pausing and with full concentration.
The film makes extraordinary, profound reflections on many things that have happened in your life within a multi-layered dream, and at some parts, I had to pause and watch twice to understand (my recommendation is to watch by pausing). The rotoscope technique was as if it was created for this film and its amazing compatibility impressed me a lot.
I realized that we think very little about our lives, this film says to think more as life is very layered, in my opinion. Of course, everyone will interpret it differently, but it should be thought about after watching.
If you ask, "how can acting stand out with this technique?", they stand out very well. The voices of the actors in every frame seem as if they were created specifically for that dialogue, and the distant music in some scenes was the same.
Rinklater has gained my extreme respect because he showed me something truly amazing. This is not a film to be watched once and never again; it is a work that can be watched repeatedly, constantly and is something I admire.
Also, he made it with a very low budget, and he is giving us a pure otherworldly idea, I don't know how else to describe it. I won't give examples of individual scenes because each scene is so subjective that everyone should watch and come up with their own interpretation. This review is from an ordinary viewer who is extremely impressed and watches a lot of movies; I am looking at 2023, and the number of these types of movies is dwindling, hopefully the number of these types of films will increase.
WATCH THIS MOST INQUISITIVE, DEEP, AND SIMULTANEOUSLY EXHAUSTING MASTERPIECE OF A FILM AND MAKE OTHERS WATCH IT TOO.
Note: This is definitely a tiring film, it should be watched by pausing and with full concentration.
Better be awake for this one!
meeza30 September 2002
Director Richard Linklater has enlightened us with a film of such intellect and analytical expression in `Waking Life'. The film is based on several characters discussing phenomenons such as existentialism, art, theology, and much more. Unfortunately, sometimes it does take a lifetime to fully understand what these characters are talking about. Yes! Bring your thinking caps (and dictionaries) to this one. However, somewhere along the film you will be `waking up before you go go' for the wonderful creative human animation the film presents. The movie was shot on digital camera utilizing real life actors which later would be transferred utilizing animation techniques. Movie warning: `Waking Life' is the brainstormer of the year. *** Average
Dream on...
santegeezhe7 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I've always known this movie was a love it or hate it prospect, and looking over the reviews confirms this is the case. It's the kind of movie you'll either shut off after ten minutes, or love completely. For me, it's the latter.
I found this movie to be a thought provoking exploration of the world of dreams and dreaming, and the nature of reality. It creates a vivid, dreamlike atmosphere where nothing is quite what it seems and anything is possible. In large part, this is due to the "trippy" (for lack of a better word) animation style, which is constantly changing and shifting, much like the rhythms and images of real dreams.
Roughly the first half of the movie consists of a series of lectures, wherein the protagonist is a passive participant. Basically he (and thus we) are being lectured by a series of people, presumably academics, on various philosophical topics. This part of the movie could be either quite interesting, or terminally boring depending on your point of view. In any event, it gives us as viewers quite a bit to chew on, and goes a long way towards creating the mood of the film.
Gradually, the protagonist becomes a more active participant in his "dream" - for we're never sure as viewers exactly what's going on. It is implied that our hero could be dreaming, or awake, or possibly even dead. But gradually he begins to interact more with his environment, and manages to incorporate much of what he's learned via the "lectures" into his life and/or dream experience. This is the plot as it stands, but this movie isn't really your typical plot driven film. It's more of an experience, like a long, strange, vivid dream.
I really enjoyed this movie, so much so that I felt compelled to buy it. I'm not exaggerating when I say that this film affected me deeply, and made me re-examine what dreams mean to me and my life. It gave me a deeper appreciation of the dream state, and of the lessons about life and about ourselves that can be learned there. Dream on.....
I found this movie to be a thought provoking exploration of the world of dreams and dreaming, and the nature of reality. It creates a vivid, dreamlike atmosphere where nothing is quite what it seems and anything is possible. In large part, this is due to the "trippy" (for lack of a better word) animation style, which is constantly changing and shifting, much like the rhythms and images of real dreams.
Roughly the first half of the movie consists of a series of lectures, wherein the protagonist is a passive participant. Basically he (and thus we) are being lectured by a series of people, presumably academics, on various philosophical topics. This part of the movie could be either quite interesting, or terminally boring depending on your point of view. In any event, it gives us as viewers quite a bit to chew on, and goes a long way towards creating the mood of the film.
Gradually, the protagonist becomes a more active participant in his "dream" - for we're never sure as viewers exactly what's going on. It is implied that our hero could be dreaming, or awake, or possibly even dead. But gradually he begins to interact more with his environment, and manages to incorporate much of what he's learned via the "lectures" into his life and/or dream experience. This is the plot as it stands, but this movie isn't really your typical plot driven film. It's more of an experience, like a long, strange, vivid dream.
I really enjoyed this movie, so much so that I felt compelled to buy it. I'm not exaggerating when I say that this film affected me deeply, and made me re-examine what dreams mean to me and my life. It gave me a deeper appreciation of the dream state, and of the lessons about life and about ourselves that can be learned there. Dream on.....
Overly Intellectualized Beauty
ayric21 December 2001
Waking Life has become sort of a cult film because it is a new art form. The film was first filmed with real actors and then animated over. Every frame seems to have been hand-drawn, and not particularly exact, which creates a very unstable picture. All lines seem to dance on the screen, and it is to say the least, more disturbing than watching NYPD Blue for the first time. This is, however, very interesting and beautiful and the unsettling aspect of it disappears after a while. The downside of this is that the film consists of some really heavy dialogue, and it is extremely hard to concentrate on the images as well as the words.
It is evident that Linklater has studied psychology and philosophy. These are highly fascinating subjects, but they may not be as well-placed in this case. Although Linklater provides no answers to his philosophical subjects which are constantly discussed, I got the sense of being preached. That is never a good idea for an artist. Some of the points are very good, like the dream theories, but most of the time the viewer is put on the school bench. Linklater wants to change the world, but he should not make such direct attempts. Some parts of the film contain one on one conversations. It is fun participating in philosophical discussions, but being on the eavesdropping side usually makes it more ridiculous. Especially when you're eavesdropping on youngsters who believe they have solved the puzzle of life.
Linklater's philosophical ideas were evident in his Before Sunrise too, but it worked better then because that was mostly a love story which overshadowed the strange dialogue.
Waking Life is not all bad, it's just that much of the film seems not to belong in a theater. And when the discussions become too preachy, you can always turn all your concentration on the fabulous artwork.
Rating: 6/10
It is evident that Linklater has studied psychology and philosophy. These are highly fascinating subjects, but they may not be as well-placed in this case. Although Linklater provides no answers to his philosophical subjects which are constantly discussed, I got the sense of being preached. That is never a good idea for an artist. Some of the points are very good, like the dream theories, but most of the time the viewer is put on the school bench. Linklater wants to change the world, but he should not make such direct attempts. Some parts of the film contain one on one conversations. It is fun participating in philosophical discussions, but being on the eavesdropping side usually makes it more ridiculous. Especially when you're eavesdropping on youngsters who believe they have solved the puzzle of life.
Linklater's philosophical ideas were evident in his Before Sunrise too, but it worked better then because that was mostly a love story which overshadowed the strange dialogue.
Waking Life is not all bad, it's just that much of the film seems not to belong in a theater. And when the discussions become too preachy, you can always turn all your concentration on the fabulous artwork.
Rating: 6/10
This just became my favourite film of all time.
shaft20715 May 2005
I'm not sophisticated, nor intellectual, but I do have an appreciation for fine film. This is one of them. Amazing is the only word I could use to describe this. I have shown my peers/friends this film only to see the exact same result to mine... absolute dumb founded appreciation of its brilliance. I will die a happy man knowing that not only I may dream for up-to 16 minutes, but I may live forever in a dream state. This film is like the message of Bill Hicks in 138 minutes. Please view this film, for it contains the message that every human needs to hear. Further more, I need to add ten lines to my review to enable me to post it on this site.
"Waking Life" or dreaming life? That is the question Linklater's cast asks in this clever new update of "Vivre Sa Vie" and "My Dinner With André"
claytonlowe10 October 2001
Anybody remember those rotoscoped Levi jeans commercials, or did I just make it up? Anyway, that's what "Waking Life" looks like, only in this hip new movie by Richard Linklater, the chicks, dudes, and old geezers stand around talking about not being able to distinguish dreams and reality, and all that other kind of existential stuff.
Godard did it in "Vivre Sa Vie" when Anna Karina sat herself down in a bar with a real philosopher- and Louis Malle did it when Andre Gregory and Wallace Shawn sat and talked all night at their table in "My Dinner With Andre." But every generation has to re-invent the past and make it their own. And why not?
The bonus this time around is that the digital rotoscoping technique (filming the actors live, then animating them) is super kool. And it's great that there's a hot new filmmaker who's interested in making movies about people who speak to each other and actually talk about ideas. It brought to mind the time when, back in the dark ages of black and white, the young son in Bergman's "Through a Glass Darkly" looked at the camera and said disbelievingly, "Papa spoke with me."
Keep your eyes out for Linklater's other new offering -shot on digital video- and, appropriately, called "Tape." It stars Ethan Hawke, UmaThurman, and Robert Sean Leonard, and it too is a cinematic treat.
Godard did it in "Vivre Sa Vie" when Anna Karina sat herself down in a bar with a real philosopher- and Louis Malle did it when Andre Gregory and Wallace Shawn sat and talked all night at their table in "My Dinner With Andre." But every generation has to re-invent the past and make it their own. And why not?
The bonus this time around is that the digital rotoscoping technique (filming the actors live, then animating them) is super kool. And it's great that there's a hot new filmmaker who's interested in making movies about people who speak to each other and actually talk about ideas. It brought to mind the time when, back in the dark ages of black and white, the young son in Bergman's "Through a Glass Darkly" looked at the camera and said disbelievingly, "Papa spoke with me."
Keep your eyes out for Linklater's other new offering -shot on digital video- and, appropriately, called "Tape." It stars Ethan Hawke, UmaThurman, and Robert Sean Leonard, and it too is a cinematic treat.
A movie designed to impress people...
timster-mcchi6 July 2008
...who don't know anything about psychology or philosophy. Given the general lack of plot and characterizations in this movie, its ideas are all it's got. And as it turns out, its ideas are catastrophically weak and largely banal. The majority of the ideas in this movie are borderline incoherent and poorly elaborated, steeped in the intellectual waste that is post-modernism and consisting of vague and sweeping rhetoric that only simulates the act of actually thinking about anything. The few ideas that do have merit are used to draw outlandish and untenable conclusions, with only one exception in the entire movie (your job is to figure out which one). Additionally many of these are very basic and simple and could be found just by reading secondary sources on philosophy, psychology, linguistics and evolution. On top of all this, Linklater fails to provide any structure or stance for these ideas, tossing them about all haphazardly, trying to impress the viewer with the sheer volume of ostentatiously dressed but poorly thought out, banal ideas. This makes the movie come across as extraordinarily self-indulgent and mind-numbingly pretentious...which, it is. The only redeeming feature of this film is the use of rotoscoping, which is a very versatile technique and used to decent effect in this movie. Unfortunately, because the movie itself is so bad, rotoscoping is sadly reduced to a gimmick to distract viewers from thinking about how much money they just wasted to see this movie.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
