Waking Life

Rating:
Summary: Wow!
Review: As a previous reviewer put it, the best way of describing Waking Life is calling it the animated version of My Dinner with Andre (Yellow Submarine is a bit off I think), but a movie that takes itself a bit more seriously- and has every right to. I have not seen any of Richard Linklater's other movies, but after this, I certainly will.

I saw this movie twice, and I will be seeing it again. I didn't like this movie the first time- I thought it was a pretentious movie, that despite its innovative style, isn't more than people receiting their first few philosophy courses, the dictionary knowledge of the director. I went to see it with a friend who wasn't very talkative- he was a fellow film student, who wanted to become a critic. He concluded by saying that it was "very good". End of conversation.

Then I went to see it with a few friends. They all loved it- not quite what I expected from a bunch of people who consider "Half-Baked" the masterpiece of the century.

We started having a conversation. Perhaps not the smartest one, or the most knowledgeable, but we talked- we actually attempted to use our brains, to create new ideas, questions, rather then recycling them.

That is when I appreciated this movie. The beauty of it, is that it raises ideas- but doesn't take any further sides except telling us not to accept reality as it is- but to thinking about other possibilities. It told us to dream- what better message is there? The introductory fashion of all the ideas is just for our own comfort- so we can try and take them further.

We talked of art, the nature of dreams, the world as it is now, vengeance- the sort of stuff we, as college students, should be talking about in the first place. We asked questions- this movie reminded us that questions exist, in this world where society gives us their answers to everything. The movie reminded us of the freedom of the mind- a freedom many of us had long forgotten.

This is a movie, though it had its very wry and humoress parts, takes itself seriously- and unlike many movies that do (Kids, Pearl Harbor, etc.) this movie has every right to- it presents us with no truths- it only asks us to think.

The movie itself? Well, there isn't much of a plot- a lot of conversations and a character walking through them, asking himself if he is dreaming, and finally wanting to wake up. I think the character doesn't talk a lot in the beginning, so we can quickly identify with him. When he does start to talk, his words are those we would have said- and his search for awakening is our search for truth.

Stylistically, the movie, which is undeniably postmodern, is very odd. It ranges from EXTREMELY realistic to a sort of impressionism to surrealism. The eyes of the characters sometimes look eerily like the drawings of Jean Cocteau. The way the movie is set up- it is very remniscent of a Bunuel movie- there is a sort of freedom from a traditional plot, there are only situations.

No that I think about it, the only similarity between this movie and My Dinner with Andre is how articulate the screenplay is.

This has been quite a good year in cinema- from the unpretentious "Moulin Rouge" (which definetly would have been horrible if it did take itself seriously), the musical "Mullholland Drive", the fresh and touching "Amelie", the hilarious "The Man Who Wasn't There", and Spielberg's first decent movie since Raiders, namely "A.I".

Waking Life is definetly up there. I admire this movie for how passionately and politely it tells us to just think, how it creates this movie like a homage to past directors like Francois Truffaut, Louis Malle, Jean Cocteau and Luis Bunuel, and possibly some others. I will definetly be watching some more of this director.

Rating:
Summary: love it or leave it
Review: Here's a film explicitly for independant,open minded, critical thinkers. I've never seen as many people leave a theatre as during the first third of this movie. Now, if you enjoy a challenge, this flick functions on three levels. First, those with an eye for detail will appreciate the rotoscopic animation which is nothing short of a live action impressionism that Monet would have revelled in. There's tons of dreamy details in the background which reward multiple viewings. Secondly, the script is wall to wall with complex ideas and philosphies that you stop thinking about when you no longer have the luxery of late night chat sessions to ruminate on them. Very unlike the watered down stuff we're spoon fed in contemporary pop culture, it's a surprise to remind yourself you can still think this way without benefit of mind-altering substances. The philisophy lessons are further complicated by the urgent rythm of the dialog - each idea is like a cry for help. Finally, the overall narrative is almost impossible to distinguish if you're paying too much attention to the rest so be warned because it is there. A really good, trippy, engaging, four dimensional film. It'll frustrate you.

Rating:
Summary: absolutely brilliant film from austin
Review: okay, i truly love this movie, every aspect of it! notwithstanding the great animation (each segment of the film being animated from real-life footage by dozens of separate artists), the premise of the film as a lucid dream is simply awsome. i myself have only had a handful of lucid dreams so far though the movie did indeed inspire my latest one! and it's encouraged me to start 'dreaming' more seriously nowadays.

anyways back to the dvd. it's chock-full of nifty extras. first off there are 3 commentary tracks, each for a separate aspect of the film. the first one if regarding the animation process and is basically all of the animators (20+) talking about their segments, why they chose them and how they chose to animate them. very interesting but mainly technical stuff so not for the faint-hearted. next is the great commentary track with director richard linklater and cast members. this is my favorite one because hearing hero wiley wiggins on the track just makes you fall in love with him, he's so sweet! third up is a text commentary (i.e. subtitles over the film) which is incredibly fascinating and regards the ideas and philosophies the people wiley's character encounters throughout the film are speaking of. take note though that the subtitles are incredibly long and run by really fast so if you want to indulge in the explanations you'll have to have your finger on the pause button throghout the film to be able to catch everything.

the deleted animated scenes are nice as are the other animated shorts bob sabiston and linklater had made that are included in the dvd (it is a great dvd after all!), and you can catch a glimpse of the real-live action by looking at selected live action takes as well. the featurette is nice and the animation tutorial is incredibly technical and therefore not really engrossing, and finally the trailers are a nice way of seeing how the plot of a movie can be warped entirely by (most probably) hollywood suits to fool people into going to see a movie which is totally different.

this is one movie you'll be watching again and again throughout your life!

Rating:
Summary: -WOW-
Review: Wow, this was the impression i was left with after watching this movie. "Waking Life" is intensly philosophical, it challenges your perception on life, death, religion, society and reality itself. How much of a role do your dreams play in your waking life? Can you control your dreams or are you controlled? These ideas are a medium for the more philosophical disscusions the lead has with the countless people he talks do while wondering around doing absolutley nothing.

The amount of talking in the film could be intimidating but only because it forces you to think about what is being said because it is all very deep stuff. At one stage a woman talks of death as being an extended dream that you can't wake from. The anonimity of the majority of characters lets the ideas take form free of any pre-concieved notions you might have if say the ideas were coming from someone well known.

The mass of talking is balanced well with the very innovative animation. The film becomes a living breathing work of art with the characters being represented in watercolour, charcoals, line drawings and in styles reminiscent of surrealists such as magrite or dali and some scenes looking familar to a picasso painting. The animation is used to great effect to emphasize some of the characters points.

In short if you want to be challenged, if you want to view life from a new perspective, watch this movie.

Rating:
Summary: Shimmering and Innovative
Review: "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.

Rating:
Summary: Would've been a great short-film
Review: "Waking Life" is a visually spectacular and innovative film. With the use of rotoscoping (a technique where animation is drawn on top of digital live-action footage), the style of the movie ranges from super-realism to bad-acid-trippy surrealism, and there is never a dull moment for your eyes. It's a little too much to take for a 2-hour period though. There are far too many movements on the screen at any given time for your brain to digest (e.g. eyes, noses and mouths all move separately in a fluid manner) and I eventually got a nasty headache.

As far as the story goes -- well, there isn't one. Like Richard Linklater's previous movies, "Waking Life" is just a collection of scenes where various characters indulge themselves in pseudo-philosophical blabberings. These "discussions" are occasionally insightful and funny, but more often than not, they are pretentious, uninteresting and downright boring. It also suffers from what I call a Kevin-Smith-Syndrome, where a movie has just too *much* dialogues that it eventually becomes annoying. Maybe it's just me, but I don't want characters to talk non-stop through the entire span of the movie. Silence, indeed, is underrated.

If you are a fan of Linklater and his style, you'll definitely enjoy it. And even if you are more of a conventional movie fan (i.e. you want a *plot*), it's worth checking out just for the visuals. I think this could've been much better as a short-film, rather than a full-length feature, though.

Rating:
Summary: Pretentious but good
Review: I really liked this movie although it is a bit too much. It was a very ambitious undertaking and was done well but the graphics give you a serious headache after awhile. Not too many full length films have been made in this style and I can see why. the interviews were interesting as long as you don't watch them all in one go.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting Animation Meets Armchair Philosophizing
Review: Waking Life_ is certainly an intense film, quite unlike anything that is currently out there. Overall, I enjoyed the film, but it took a couple of viewings to fully absorb everything. Throughout the film, our protagonist wanders around trying to navigate the gap between dreaming and reality, listening to everyone who has a mind to talk to him. Naturally, some of the monologues are interesting and stimulating, while some of them are pure rants. Even the more philosophical talks are delivered with an ordinary language that renders them a bit childish: "It's like, quantum physics, man. You know, like, the real stuff that's out there, man." This is not an actual quote, but rather a demonstration of the kind of speech to which I am referring. I get tired of the surfer speech and agree with other reviewers who have called the philosophies "juvenile" at times. There are many points in the film where we get to listen to your average Joe spout off about "the truth" when it is obvious that he probably couldn't even pass his driver's exam.

Still, the animation in this film is truly unique and interesting to watch. Despite the film's rambling nature and absence of plot, the spliced sequences make for an interesting ride that definitely breaks the norm. If you enjoy animated films that are a bit "out there," you should see _Waking Life_.

Rating:
Summary: Glorious
Review: "Waking Life" is so full of ideas, one flowing to the next, it really does feel like some sort of lucid dream. The animation adds to the overall vitality of the film. It jumps off the screen, challenging the viewer to wrestle with these questions, to take responsibility for his/her existence for at least a couple of hours. There is a sense of urgency bordering on desperation as the dream continues and the search for a center, for some kind of clear understanding begins to seem endless.

There is so much here to absorb, you can really loose yourself completely in the film. At one point, we watch two men discussing the nature of film as an art form (I can't remember who they were) and then the perspective widens and we see that they are, themselves, on a movie screen in a theater with our main character as its sole occupant, which makes sense since it only exists in his mind - in his dream. Of course, we are also in a theater watching the film, adding another level to this already multi-layered context.

After seeing this movie, I felt thoroughly invigorated. I wish there were more films like this.

Rating:
Summary: Not Philosophy, but Poetry, Not Poetry, but Life
Review: I'm glad to see so many people taking to this movie, and certainly, I'm not surprised to see some people not taking to it. For me, this was a great movie, but I am provoked to think about some of the criticisms.

First, was that it appeared that someone just downloaded a lot of digital footage into their i-mac and hit the 'animate' button. Fortunately or unfortunately, there is no such button. The process involved in producing this kind of artistic reinterpretation of video is necessarily produced by hours of painstaking draftsmanship and computer programing. You can appreciate these touches in the variety of different artistic voice expressed by the dozens of animators, mostly fine artists independent of the 'animation' industry. As an artists and someone who has had to work with digital media, I can say that making a five minute clip in flash is hard enough, let alone the ambitious scope of this film.

Secondly, that the characters were 'average Joes' spouting out meaningless arm-chair philosophies when they really didn't have any knowledge relavence seems like a judgemental and superficial criticism. The truth is that the movie is cast mostly with professors from the University of Texas, some, such as Richard Solomon, who are nationaly acclaimed, as well as artists, writers, film-makers, and poets.

But still, what difference does that make in the relevance of their opinions? If a deranged homeless drifter had told me the same meditations of David Sosa (UT professor of philosophy, concerned about the randomness of quantum physiscs and free will) or the lamentations of Louis Mackey (UT professor of philosophy, who was concerned with the over abundance of life) I would buy that person the nicest meal I could find, because a mind is a mind and words are words, their value is independent and unique, untied from the physical world they may seem bound to.

But one should also bear in mind, for all it's philosophical talk, this is not a philosophical textbook, and I don't even think it is a philosophical work. Philosophy is the window dressing for the deeper issue of life and the human mind. These issues, and these surreal experiences that we think of as joy or pain, are all far beyond proofs and philosophy and empericism or rationalism.

One should note that probably half the movie isn't even about philosophy. It's rants and musings or tall tales and outpourings of emotion that serve to define the people who are saying them.

That's why it's not presented in terms of proofs, answers, absolutes, and continuites. It is an emotional portrait of a few dozen interesting characters, painted with poetic nonsense to penetrate beyond the rigid barrier of preconcieved identites and definitions and into the softer, liquid core that provides the substance to a world that we try to freeze in place with our rules and metaphysical grammars.

It is no coincidence that this is what our subconcious does with dreams.