Waking Life

Year: 2001
Country: United States
Director: Richard Linklater
Watched through: Netflix

The scenario: An unnamed young man is hit by a car, then is trapped in a frustratingly long dream sequence where pretentious thinkers bombard him with dreary, self-indulgent monologues on topics including evolution, the question of free will, and the imprecise nature of language.

First impressions: Having been looking forward to seeing this film for quite some time, I have to say it was a huge letdown. The synopses I read in various places made it sound interesting; a man has a series of quirky conversations with various people, while not knowing if he is conscious or dreaming. Well, the film isn’t like that. Nowhere in the 100 minute running time does the protagonist actually “converse” with anyone. People just chatter at him endlessly, in one boring, overwrought talking head sequence after another. The people who love this film claim it is eye-opening, thought-provoking, worldview-changing. Its detractors say it’s a load of pretentious twaddle. I am in the latter category.

Plot and story: At first, I thought I would have to leave this category out and score the film out of 80 instead of my usual 100, because there didn’t really seem to be any story to critique. Well, there is sort of a story thread, but it’s barely there and doesn’t affect anything that happens. Wait, maybe I should take that back. There’s a story, but nothing happens. The protagonist is hit by a car, listens to some boring monologues, learns some stuff about lucid dreaming, and continually wakes up only to find that he’s still in a dream. After a while, he begins to wonder if he is actually dead and will never wake up. If this is what death is really like, then I plan to stay alive for a very, very long time. Oh, and there’s no conclusion. Don’t you just love that? 3/20

Characters: Well, the people in this film are definitely “characters” in the sense of being eccentric, but none of them are the least bit interesting. Most of them just come across as self-important twits or blowhards. Beyond that, there’s really not that much to say. Though they talk a lot, the monologue-givers have no characterization, and the protagonist is bland beyond belief. He has barely any dialogue, and most of what he does say contains the phrase, “hey, man.” Fascinating. Not. 5/20

Voices: The only remotely famous actor cast in this film is Ethan Hawke, who gets passing marks for his role as a chatty boyfriend. In spite of the boring-ness of the characters, most of the voice deliveries are pretty good. Since this film is supposed to feel like a candid conversation, most of the performances sound very relaxed and natural, rather than sound like “acting.” So, this category rates highly in comparison to the rest of the film. 10/20

Music: Let’s see, music. . . there’s barely any. Most of it is dull, just like the story and the people. There is some pleasant and fitting ukulele music during the scene that pertains to lucid dreams, though. 6/20

Visuals: Oh, good god. Rotoscoping. This process is one of the dirty little secrets of animation; it’s always there as an option, but it’s rarely used. And when it is used, it’s hardly ever used well. The rotoscoped animation in this film alternated between looking pixilated and sloppy, and being so unnaturally, off-puttingly “right” that it entered the Uncanny Valley. Some of the characters were creatively distorted, but most of them were either ugly or were so realistic it was hard to look at them. Worse than the character designs was the frequency with which the backgrounds moved. Yes, most of the film is supposed to be a dream, but the moving backgrounds were distracting and even made me feel nauseous in places. What were they thinking?? In fact, this whole film is just one big “what were they thinking?” I think I’ll leave it at that. 4/20

Overall grade: 28/100 (D)