Waking Life

Rating:
Summary: A beautiful film
Review: This film is a beautiful piece of work. It truly captures the feeling of being in a dream--the animation is lovely & the score sets the mood perfectly. Even the sound is slightly muffled at times, to evoke a dream-like quality: like when you are half-awake & the sounds around you in the outside world are incorporated into your dream.
It is a very thought provoking and profound movie. It's not really a movie that one would watch for a bit of light entertainment, as at times it can get fairly complex. But it is a very entertaining movie that stays in your memory & is fun to mull over and analyze--no interpretations are wrong.
I wish that I had dreams that were as cool and intellectually stimulating as the dreamer in this movie is having. Even the use of color throughout the movie is captivating!
The DVD is great, because it has some animation that ended up on the scrap-heap and live footage of the actors, before the animation was layered over them so fantastically.
It is a favorite movie of both my husband & I.

Rating:
Summary: 'dream is destiny.'
Review: Linklater's "Waking Life" begins very simply, with a young girl and boy playing with what Linklater describes in his commentary track as a "cootie catcher" or "fortune teller," which reveals one of the basic principles of the film: 'Dream is Destiny.' From there, the film becomes much heavier and the dialogue becomes much more thick, like a shrouding fog - forget the popcorn, bring the longest attention span you can muster - but it all branches from the same basic principle: That our dreams provide more than just an escape as we stumble our way through life.

Two theatrical films tackled such a weighty subject last year - the other, Cameron Crowe's "Vanilla Sky," works, but not as well as "Abre los Ojos", the Spanish film upon which it is based - and while Tom Cruise managed to take the idea to the masses (and to blockbuster status), it is clearly Linklater's film which emerges victorious. The characters are rich, vibrant, and believable, and the vignette presentation makes it possible for the film not to run away from itself; by breaking it down into little segments with countless different faces, we are able to process the information we are receiving much more fluidly.

The concept is a well-conceived one. The story may have fallen flat on a live action film, and the animation may have been viewed as cumbersome on a different project, but married together, they create a different and believeable reality, a universe that we, the audience, are allowed to inhabit for our 100 minutes.

Linklater says that the film in many ways is a brother to "Slacker." I disagree, for while that film felt contrived and odd, "Waking Life" succeeds at every avenue and makes me excited about the current state of moviemaking. We can only dream that more filmmakers choose to make projects as fascinating as this... and, after all, dream is destiny.

Rating:
Summary: Wake up your Mind
Review: I haven't yet bought this DVD, but very much plan on doing so. I have always wondered, even to myself, the purpose for *buying* a movie. Am I really going to watch it, over and over again? There are plenty of DVD's I have bought, which I don't think I have watched since I bought them (this question, of course, becomes moot when dealing with a child's movie..since my four year old will watch Star Wars Episode One over and over..and he has relished in the menu aspect of being able to control the movie and its features... he is the new line of movie watchers: the interactive watcher).

One common feature that this DVD offers which has been used ad infinitum on most every DVD, but which I have finally found wonderfully useful on this DVD: the commentary. It's neat knowing that the filmmakers have offered comments to run through a movie, but, except for American Beauty, I have not found the urge to use this feature. This DVD offers a running text which gives you background on the philosophic ideas being presented, and even suggestions and excerpts from texts to consider if you want to explore a specific philosophy further.

A reviewer quoted here mentions how most of the audience walked out a third of the way through this movie when it was in the theater.I can understand that since, as a linear piece, it is quite taxing on attention span, despite the engrossing animation. For a world conditioned to be distracted every ten minutes, it is quite a feat to sit through the movie, even for one such as I who feels he has quite a long span of attention. This movie is ripe for DVD. It is easy to pull out pieces to watch, stop, skip, return, repeat, in a way that even video tape could not afford. In a way, this is a showpiece for the DVD format, which makes me wonder if other additional features could be created which were innovative to DVD... perhaps a randomizing feature which delinearized the film...hmmm.

Anyway, if you are a deep thinker and love a mind challenge, BUY it on DVD. If your heroes are Jean Claude Van Damme, Stephen Segal, and Sylvester Stallone at his grunting best, you will be totally bored by this movie...go out and get the latest, blow-all-the-bad-guys'-guts-out Playstation game!!!

Rating:
Summary: The Very Definition of Pretentious
Review: Ugh. I hate this movie more than any film I have ever seen in my life, and frankly, this film deserves it. The whole concept of this movie is one dopey looking guy wandering around and waking up from his dream, while not really waking. That's not so bad. The horrible part is a bunch of 15 year olds just finished reading Philosophy for Dummies and a few other new age books, and they want to share their horribly flawed views of the universe with horrendous leaps in logic. Oh, and they're armed with a thesaurus. It's a pretentious "Who can use the biggest words" game throughout, and it impresses no one. Add in a few adjectives that serve no purpose, and the result is four guys walking down the street when one shouts "Society is choking on its own vehnile existence in a swarm of complacency" and one replies "We are dancing exuberance in the light of eternity!" I think this may be an attempt to hide the fact that what they are actually talking about is very simple, and often, very silly. One man takes 10 minutes of droning on to say that leaps in human advancement are happening in shorter and shorter amounts of time, which is a decent observation, then out of nowhere he says evolution and survival of an organism will depend on truth, justice, morality, and sincerity. There are a few good speeches in there, one at the very end and a few in between, but it's hard to take any of them seriously when they describe free will and the nature of the self with healthy doses of "like, y'know" every other line. The only pros this movie has is the great visual style, and that it facilitates conversation (although most of the conversation will be "WHAT THE? I HATE THIS MOVIE!"). Don't buy this. Rent it once, laugh, cry, shout, have a real discussion about the topics without the bs involved, and go on with your waking life.

Rating:
Summary: a failed experiment
Review: This film just didn't sit well with me. I found it to be unenlightening, suprisingly boring and redundant. The much hyped animation is rarely used in an interesting way (mostly it bugs out physical features or makes the backgrounds wavy) and it wasn't that cool. Yet, it's the way Linklater pushes his pet thoeries down the viewers throat that bugged me the most. The ideas touched on are not that fresh and are steeped in jargon and catchphrases. The formless and abstract style of the film makes me believe that Linklater thought the ideas alone (or along with the "eye candy") could keep the viewers attention but count me in the camp that just were not buying it. Almost all of the film is comprised of monologues that touch on philosophy, the nature of dreams or various psychological or sociological topics. Most either tail off into new age-ish babble,quotations of popular figures, half baked anecdotes or stale sloganeering. It too often sounds like stoned undergrads tape recording pointless exercises in academic oneupsmanship. Vast sections just come off sounding as if they were paraphrased from various text books and study guides. There are precious few "real" characters (even "the dreamer" is so slightly drawn that he could never have a conventional film built around him)- only "cartoons" spouting spring loaded theories or a few people who are involved in stories that have no real effect. I'm a fan of many films people find out there but I'd never realized how much I loved a good story or fleshed out character until I got to the 4th or 5th faceless monologue about the differences between dreams and reality in Waking Life. Some of the "dialogue" is laughable..., some lamentably distant but alot was just plain dull. Still, it's almost impossible to have 90+ minutes of talk without hitting on something interesting. The sad part is how seldom that happens. The real downside of the concept of this film is that if you don't find many of the ideas interesting, plausable or worthy of such a drawn out disection (or find no interest in the animation)-you will come to hate this movie. That's the weight that Linklater puts on these ideas. It's believable that the constant (and distacting) motion of the animation is just a way of distracting the viewer away from the lack of action in the film. Even with that distraction I noticed that this film has something in common with the comedies of Mel Brooks or others of that ilk. The jokes come so fast that you don't even notice it's hit or miss. The theories come so quick here that you may not realize that the last one was complete b.s or hopelessly boring. Again, the sad part, I noticed. Waking Life feels like an artsy student film padded to feature length. There just isn't enough meat on the bones for me and the few interesting parts got lost in a sea of lifelessness and attempted depth. This film takes it's self WAY too seriously. If you are looking for something different,but still good, there are better places to search. ...Look for a better film by Richard Linklater like Dazed & Confused or Before Sunrise. Try the Royal Tennenbaums, Ghost World, the films of Christopher Nolan or even the Man Who Wasn't There. They are all a little left of center (like Waking Life) yet they posess everything this film lacks: interesting characters and stories, more coherent takes on modern life and they all have a pulse. I can see what Richard Linklater was going for here and was actually excited to see it (having heard the hype and having enjoyed all previous Linklater films) but I refuse to congtatulate the effort or give points for trying when it comes of as such an empty, pompous and humorless exercise in rhetoric and style. Here's a tip: always be suspicious when too many people use the word "trippy" when describing something. It usually means you're in for an ordeal... As one stoned dreamer says "Everyone knows-fun rules!". For me, this film was no fun. A true letdown.

Rating:
Summary: Waking Life - awaken the mind!
Review: Why do we dream?
Is it just a way for our brain to sift through the sights and sounds and smells and other sensations we experience in day to day life, and pack them away?
Or is there a deeper meaning? Are dreams really messages coming from the subconcious, trying to force themselves into our awareness?
Are they prophecies of events to come?
Or are dreams merely another reality, one that works much like this one except that we have no set limits, and we can see the results of our choices so much sooner?
And when you have gotten all that you can gather from the dream, whatever its purpose may be, do you decide to go on to another dream, or wake up?
For that matter, how do you wake up?

Waking Life (2001, rated R) broaches the subject in such a way that even the most intelligently skeptical cynic has to sit down and consider the possibilities. The film first grabs your attention with the surrealistic visuals, that make the viewer think of something he once dreamed about. The photographers filmed the flick digitally in the everyday Hollywood way, and the graphic artists worked their magic. The viewer sits, captivated by the individuality of the filmwork, and notices almost immediately how real the soundtrack is, in contrast with the absurdity of the visuals. As like in a dream, where one can't always believe what he sees, but can always trust what he hears.

After Waking Life was released in October 2001, Bob Sabiston, the graphic designer, was nominated for Digital Effects Artist of the Year for the 2001 American Film Institute Awards. The film was also nominated for IFP/West Independent Spirit Awards' Best Feature, Best Director, and Best Screenplay, in 2002. Waking Life won Best Experimental Film from the National Society of Film Critics, and Best Animated Film from the New York Film Critics Circle, both in 2001.

But awards don't say much about personal impact. This really is a movie that, to get the best feel for, a person has to watch. One cannot judge it by what someone else says. The film takes leaps and twists and loops where one could not anticipate... just like a dream would. Every last detail, including a mosquito, has it's very specific purpose, and it's up to the viewer to decide what it is. Waking Life takes place in a world with no beginning and no end, and where everyone speaks in quotes of Sartre, Kierkegaarde, Kafka, and Camus... and you know exactly what they all mean. At times sacrilegious, and others... just plain religious, this is a very thought-provoking, philosophizing work of art.

You really should find out for yourself just how unbelievably moving this piece is, but... if you need any more convincing, here's a quote from Roger Ebert:

"I have seen "Waking Life" three times now. I want to see it again--not to master it, or even to remember it better (I would not want to read the screenplay), but simply to experience all of these ideas, all of this passion, the very act of trying to figure things out. It must be depressing to believe that you have been supplied with all the answers, that you must believe them and to question them is disloyal, or a sin. Were we given minds in order to fear their questions?"

Rating:
Summary: Hmm...Interesting
Review: This is without any reservation what so ever, the most thought provoking film I have ever seen. This rotoscoped anamated story is about a young moving through a dream and learning much along the way. It is not (as a generalization), a film that a strictly action fan might enjoy, but because of the captivating animation and insightful dialogue. If you liked "Before Sunrise" or thought that the best thing about Tarantino's movies were the dialogue, then you might really get a kick out of "Waking Life."

Rating:
Summary: a bold but failed experiment...
Review: do people paraphrase philosophy and psychology text books in your dreams? if they do,then check out Waking Life but for me this was a failed experiment. it's a swirled cone of philosophical meanderings,new age drivel and a few interesting ideas. yet these ideas get washed over by the sheer volume of dross Linklater pours out. even the most hungry mind can become numbed when faced with a shapeless,sound bite heavy piece of eye candy that takes it's self WAY too seriously. the thing that seems to fasinate people most is the animation. i may be jaded but it's not that cool. it's rarely used in an inspired way. it's mainly used to bug out people's eyes and to make the background seem wavy. the constant (and distracting) movement of the animation seems more of gimick than an inovation-a way to divert your attention during the alomst constant lulls in action.the film it's self quickly becomes tedious and crumbles under the weight of it's own premise. making an abstract film is the toughest thing a film maker can do and most realize that the short film is the only way to go with such experiments. stripped of all the hooks that fill "regular" films, an experimental film as this can only get over on it's ideas. the ideas here seem either half baked, boring or laughably goofy. i'm all for stretching the limits of film but if you just give me refried(and mostly kooky) information, new but unspectacular animation and the ghost of a story don't expect me to second the hype found in the trailer. almost every monologue is full of name dropping,catch phrases,repetition of well worn ideas or quotations by popular figures. the dreaming main character is only a device to lauch into these wonkish monologues. that's not much of a loss as he is so poorly drawn and realized that no other film could make him into a focal point(as this one ALMOST does). the conversations are not very interesting, the stories flat, the use of jargon excessive and the ideas did nothing to pull me in. if i wanted to see a professor working from his notes i would sign up for his class. if i wanted to hear the screeds delivered by the others i would persue a documentary. don't give me automatons spouting spring loaded theories and expect me to believe it all. my dreams are mostly incoherent like this film but i thank god that they are free of the boring slogans and didactic characters who fill this film. you should always prepair yourself when too many people toss around the word "trippy" when describing something. i don't know about you but i bet you don't find self-apointed intelecuals and barely developed characters trippy...there are those who say if you wouldn't like this film you should stick to Steven Segal movies or the like but they are mistaken. seek out interesting films but know that sometimes you can come away untouched,as with this film. to you i say seek out the Royal Tennenbaums, Ghost World or even The Man Who Wasn't There. these are recent dvd releases that don't asume their intelegence is bigger than it is or insult yours. plus they are just flat better films. this film, though, ambles it's way through it's own universe and yet you might find that universe too artsy or pretentious as i did. i can't tell you if you can or can't rent or buy it but i can tell you that you are,on the surface, no less intelligent than the people who love it. this film is just too full of ideas that Linklater treats as holy scripture yet i can't buy or find enlightening at all. i know what he was going for here and i give him a 1 and a half for trying but just because something THINKS it's smarter than most is no reason to fall in love. there is nothing new here other than Linklater's total obsession with his own ideas and words but that started in better films of his like dazed & confused and before sunrise. in my humble opinion,i didn't find this film humorous, entertaining or groundbreaking. a real disapointment. still, i don't know if i've gotten this worked up because this film is such a let down(considering the hype,the potential and the creative forces) or because some people believe that not worshiping this film makes you a complete dullard. i think it's both. as one tripped out dreamer says in this film:"Everyone knows fun rules!". for me this film was no fun,and the worst film Richard Linklater has made(i've yet to see his other offering from last year).

Rating:
Summary: What Time Is It?
Review: A stunning film, both visually and philosophically. "Waking Life" takes you into a world where dreams and reality are indistinguishable, and the ideas and concepts proposed are thought-provoking. The animation allows you to view the film in a more abstract way; the ideas flow around you as the images flow over you.

Extras include behind-the-scenes footage of how the animations were produced (yay, Macintosh computers!), as well as come of the unanimated footage.

A brilliant film, and the extras are fantastic.

Rating:
Summary: Inventive and Thought-Provoking
Review: The DVD of this movie does justice to the film that appeared in theaters, albeit there weren't many it appeared in. For some reason this jewel was overlooked for the animation category for the Oscars, which was as bad as many of the oversights that occurred this past year (Memento, Royal Tenenbaums, etc.) The movie was filmed like any other, than the film was illustrated by a group of artists that vary stlistically, from almost hyper-realistic to cartoonish. The characters and the scenery sometimes bob and weave on the screen creating a dream-like feel to the movie. The dialogue is composed mostly of many monologues given to the main character (a wandering Wiley Wiggins-the young kid from Dazed and Confused). Topics run the gamut, sparking philosophy, science, politics, morality nad life in general. Envelope these mind-blowing illustrations and topics in the idea that Wiggins can't tell if he is awake or dreaming and you've got the most original movie I've seen in years.