Waking Life STARRING: Peter Atherton, Steve Brudniak, John Christensen, Julie Delpy, Ethan Hawke, Steven Prince, Steven Soderbergh |
||
Plot Summary -- Quotes from the Movie |
|
Links |
| “Waking Life” is the first truly IMPORTANT film of the 21st century. It is not the best film of the year, nor is it likely to be one that I purchase and watch often. Still, it is something that should be seen by everyone and experienced by any diehard film lover. Its complex structure does not resemble a film at all, but much more a philosophical journey through the nature of existence. In Roger Ebert’s review, he notes that this film asks questions “we used to ask as students.” He notes that nowadays, these are questions that adults are hesitant to ever discuss. The film’s protagonist, whom is appropriately never named, is first shown as a child gazing up at the stars, staring in amazement at comets as they float by. He starts to float and grabs hold of a door handle to keep him grounded. This first scene is a metaphor for the entire motion picture—a child staring at the wonders of the unknown, but afraid to leave the safety of the familiar. We then follow an older version of the same character as he supposedly dreams his own death and continues from one dream to another. He meets random characters, each with a different take on life and what’s important. There is the right wing fanatic who screams propaganda from his car. There is a man in jail, depicted in red as he rages, talking about the pain he will inflict on those who put him in prison, reciting the bible to justify his thoughts. There is a scientist discussing biological freedom and how rights will change in the future. Since this man is dreaming, each of these people may represent something that he has picked up on from everyday life. There is also a subtle suggestion that he might be dead and is looking for a way to explain his life. Yet each of these people seem somewhat familiar to us—representing someone we have met along our travels. When the angry man in prison makes us uncomfortable, we still realize he is saying things we have thought at one time or another. He represents those in this world we would be happier to forget about. Director Richard Linklater presents this film as a thesis on existence—an experiment never before tried. Accordingly, “Waking Life” does not look like anything ever filmed before. He filmed the movie in a very brief time, and then animated over the digital film with a software program. The result is not a cartoon, not live action, but a strange surrealistic mix. There is even a scene in which Linklater, as writer, self-consciously explains his tactic. This is a film about perception and questioning the reality with which we are presented (Truman Show proves relevant once again). To trap this work within the confines of narrative would have been a grave error. Ultimately, this film is an intellectual exercise. It is Linklater’s confidence in his work and his willingness to manipulate the medium of film that makes this an enlightening motion picture. Most would have never tried to film this, but would have written a book instead. Linklater finds a balance between the two—fascinating prose, fascinating themes, and a unique film style to match. A thought that kept reoccurring to me while watching “Waking Life” was that last year’s “Time Code,” which I heralded, was a great idea that was important for its intentions alone. In retrospect, “Time Code” had a blueprint without a construction plan. “Waking Life” is “Time Code’s” counterpart, completing an idea with elegance and vision. One person on our hero’s journey particularly stands out. It is a man who discusses a theory that all of life is an instant, repeated over and over. Each instant is a constant question from God as to whether we would like to join Him. All our lives we answer no, preferring to go on with our own existence, our own daily worries and passions. This is how our life goes, a constant denial to God, until our final days when we agree to join Him. Regardless of what you believe, if you enjoy questions like this, that dare to question the accepted reality we pass blindly on a daily basis, then this film is for you. If you find such questions distracting, unnerving, and unsettling, Julia Roberts will return soon enough. “Waking Life” is one of the best films of 2001. It is art. It made me think. In that sense, it deserves its own place of recognition among the greatest experiments of film.
Comments by David Johnson Is waking life a well done movie? Yes. Does the movie has a breakthrough style and look? Yes. Does the movie offer anything more than the philosophical drudge that one would learn in a freshman Philosophy course? Nope. Although waking life offers its viewers something exciting and interesting to look at, it doesn't really add anything else to the table. I feel that the movies weakness is that the movie doesn't take any stance on anything. At the very least, the movie would have benefited from being more than a series of monolouges. Movies have to try and empart some feeling and knowledge. They can tell a exciting story, they can put people in a situation of philosophical debate, or any countless things. Waking life pretty much simply presented us with a series of views. It offered no judgement as to the validity of any of these views, and told a story for the sole purposes to facilitate the long series of monolouges. I have to clarify that I did like the movie. It was extremely interesting too look at. The 'animation' gave the movie a interesting feel, and was able to put the movie in a distinctive dream enviroment. I do respect that. I think Linklater has real talent, from a visionary as well as direction stand-point. I hate to disagree with Steve about this movie, but it is not a great movie. It is an example of a movie, excellent in form, but lacking in content. Directorial masterbation if you must.  (out
of 4)
|
|
Other
Reviews |
