Waking Life is a risk on any level.

You may spend it's 100 minutes in a self-induced retrospect, or you may spend the first five minutes scowling, up until the point you turn off the DVD player, either way its worth a shot.

First thing is first, if you do in fact wish to give Richard Linklater's film a chance you can more or less determine within the first 10 minutes whether or not it is for you. It doesn't change. It is nothing more then a series of conversations, philosophical arguments, and strange events, some connected, some seemingly having to do with nothing, but all striving towards a unique analysis of dreams.

This is not a film you would expect from the writer/director who brought us Slacker, and Dazed and Confused. This is not even a really a movie as you or I would probably define it. Its more of a series of events, as a young nameless character floats around in a dream world that he cannot seem to get out of.

The most intriguing initial element of Waking Life is its visual style. If you've seen the commercials for the Honda Matrix, where the car switches from reality to animation you have an idea of what I am talking about. Waking Life was in actuality filmed using mini-dv format, an affordable new digital medium. Once finished it was entirely edited and put into the capable hands of animators who drew over ever single frame, allowing the film to take on the nature of the dreams it attempts to define. The interesting aspect is that different segments were handed to diverse teams of animators, leading the film to have four or five distinct visual styles from which it alternates back and forth to. Linklater brings up a good point as to where, if you do not enjoy one visual style you don't have to wait long to move to another.

The animators have diverged this animated world from reality, the backgrounds shake, colors smear, nothing is for certain, and for the most part the result is jaw dropping, although I have heard some complain of getting somewhat dizzy watching the film.

The story follows an unidentified boy who travels from conversation to conversation in his dream. Some conversations he is a part of, some he just listens, sometime he is nothing more then an observer. All of these conversations have to do with perception and reality.

"Dream is Destiny"

"Which is the most universal human characteristic: fear or laziness?"

Waking Life is without a doubt for a very limited audience. Many will find it boring, and repetitive, it is more of an exercise in philosophy and animation then a movie. There is no action, very little suspense, just a lot of talking, but if you are willing to calm down, pay attention and just listen you may hear a few interesting ideas or so.

I'm not going to tell you this is a movie YOU CAN'T MISS, because I can see some serious backlash coming from that, but if dreams and this type of philosophy interest you, then by all means give it a shot.

The DVD has a few interesting animation featurettes, but I was most interested in the live action takes. The DVD includes the actual footage filmed before animation and it is interesting to see how it looked before the animators brought it to a new level.

So anyway if your still interested in this, I brought many of these ideals into a paper I just recently wrote on perception, using Pride and Prejudice (cause I had to), Waking Life, and Memento.

If you'd rather not read the review, then just scroll down beyond it for my closing comments.
____________________________________________________________
Life’s Silhouette: The Color and the Shape

The sky is blue. I need not walk outside to remind myself this. The sun shines above my world; a perfect circle of life and energy, a taintless light that defines and controls the basis for my realm, a reality that is conceived by me, by my perceptions. I see things how I choose to see them because this is my world, my life, not yours. I decide on the colors I find pleasing, the people I enjoy, the lifestyle I lead, the idol I do or do not confide in: this is my existence, and it is based solely on my decisions, as I am the sole dictator. Earth is nothing to me without me, as life is nothing to you without you. In my own mortality everything is empty and meaningless without the decisions I have made. My perception is a paintbrush that strokes on a canvas of being, my discernment can paint the walls that confine me, or design the endless road that summons me to an eternal journey of particular explanations and infeasible questions. In the microcosm that each individual circulates in, he or she is god of their peripheral existence: You make the final decision and no other decision is weighted, what matters to someone is what they have delegated to be of importance. Individual perception is the most essential element of life, it is an ability that defines everything for the individual yet may not factor in the lives of anyone else. Using Jane Austen’s 1813 novel Pride and Prejudice, Richard Linklater’s 2001 film Waking Life, and Christopher Nolan’s 2000 film-noir Memento the individual development and importance of physical and meta-physical perception will be defined, all leading towards a greater realization that nothing is real, and nothing exists without perception.

An age-old question, that reinforces the importance and curiosity of individual perception, is found in an element of perpetual existence as simple as color. Is someone’s visual interpretation of the color green the same as their neighbor’s? Is black as dark to you as it is to me? People often wonder about what is perceived outside the context of their own mind. People rather aimlessly attempt to look through the eyes of other individuals attempting to decipher why they like the music they like, why they drive a red car instead of a blue car. They try to attempt to sway the formation of other ideals in those they disagree with, they endeavor to have them conform to what they have deemed correct in their self-developed universe, ignoring the fact that this attempt is as ludicrous as an American going to Russia and undertaking the Russian government, to change their way of life like it is any of their business. These people are attempting to overthrow the ruler in a place they have no right to be.

Simple practices of basic life-forming perception like this are easily interpreted and defined in Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. The 1813 novel follows the Bennet family and focuses on one of the daughters named Elizabeth. The story is filled with basic assumptions and perceptions of the motifs of life during that time period, as well as the difficult concept of perceiving other individuals outside of one’s own world. The very first line in the novel is an individual perception that is wrongly stated by the narrator, because in the definition of singular perception that I am attempting to formulate nothing is really truth, and nothing can be accepted as universal, “It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife” (Austen 1). While this is an idea that the narrator has decided on as truth, likely based on life experiences and deductive reasoning, since each and every idea and ideal within the individual is conceived and decided on within themselves, to claim anything to be universal is an incorrect assumption. The fact that the narrator believes that wealthy men are constantly seeking wives is a preliminary basic first-level perception that at one point or another the narrator accepted as fact in her own actuality. In essence there are no such thing as universal truths, just individual beliefs, some of these individual beliefs may transcend to many different people but we could never actually consider them universal regardless of how many people shared the same perception. Life elements that I choose to consider first level perception are things that do not necessarily have a place in the large scale establishment of an individual’s world. What someone’s favorite color is, what they think about someone else, what hobbies they enjoy are of course important to that individual, but as far as how these basic views influence one’s mentality on mortality is very slight.

The majority of first-level perceptions are in fact influenced by second-level perceptions; for example if one has decided on a religion based second-level then in conjunction they may enjoy Christian music, and prefer to see Sundays as a day for resting and attending Church due to this acknowledgment. If someone else has formed an angst based second-level then you could possibly see them blaring Marilyn Manson from their car stereo, and choosing the color black as a theme for their clothing. These examples may seem like assumptions or stereotypes, and they are, but it is merely an exercise to show how our second-level views can define and decide on some of our more basic perceptions.

In 2001 Richard Linklater released a film that was cutting edge in both presentation and perception. Waking Life is not really a story in the traditional sense, it is not even really a movie based on the way I have come to define this visual medium, but it deals entirely with perception: perception of dreams, perception of life, perception of reality. It follows a young character trapped in a looping dream filled with philosophical arguments, and conversations. Throughout his journey people share different yet cohesive views on the way they have built their respective worlds, and how they have perceived their life. The film uses dreams as an illusion for explaining actual reality based perception. One of the film’s primary focuses is a key parallel to understanding the basis of self imposed reality. The understanding of one’s ability to shape his or her dreams based on a subconscious perception is the focus that must be dwelled on. This idea is important because it indirectly suggests we can shape our own reality as well, by both talking about controlling dreams, and then continually comparing dreams and life to one another, “They say dreams are only real as long as they last. Couldn’t you say the same thing about life” (Waking Life). So intuitively using the concepts I have begun to attempt to propose if your waking life is based on your own intuition and your dreams are obviously based on your own intuitions, why is it that we put more value into what most consider the real world, then we do within our dream world, and how can you argue that we can’t shape our waking life just as much as we can define our dreams. The only difference is that in the dream world no one else perceives your existence, it is simply you, alone, but considering that how your real life is handled stems from how you have decided to mold your perception shouldn’t they at least be equals? Realistically this idea may seem preposterous but if you look at it on a philosophical and thematic level it makes a surprising amount of sense.

Sometimes reality just doesn’t seem right to us, things just feel like they are out of order from time to time, but in truth there is really no one to blame for this but ourselves. If we feel as if we do not belong it is only because we have perceived and developed a world that we do not fit in, and generally mistakes like this are born from a lack of realization that we are in fact the one’s in charge of our own worlds, that we are molding life by how we perceive everything around us, and failure to acknowledge this may force our perceptions to be defined by accessible views around us, that are undoubtedly not what is best for us because we have not decided on them.

Due to a clever plot and unique chronological technique Christopher Nolan’s film Memento actually allows us to see a character establish his worldviews, and form his separate perceptual life before our very eyes. The story is about a confused man named Leonard who can not form new memories. His wife was raped and murdered and Lenny was hit in the head during the incident, thus leaving him with a rare condition where he can only remember things after his injury for a very short period of time. This interesting concept allows Nolan to put us into Lenny’s shoes by showing us the films events backwards. As we watch, we feel like Lenny as we do not know where we have been or what we are doing, we are forced to perceive the world around us at that exact moment, with no background to make a prepared and accurate decision. Lenny is a perfect example of someone attempting to be his own god. He has nothing left to live for but the motive of revenge, and thus he throws himself in a never-ending loop, constantly changing his perception and lying to himself, but it could be argued that because we make our reality and no one else can take that away from us, if we truly acknowledge this, Lenny’s world, although perceived as a falsified existence to most around him, is nothing but truth to him. He even admits at one point that his purpose, his perception is bogus, but because of his condition it matters not, he will soon forget, he will soon reformulate his world, “Do I lie to myself to be happy” (Memento). Yes he does, but since it does give him a purpose and a definitive explanation to his life, even if everyone else feels his plights are spurious, the simple truth is that if it is reality to him, it is his reality.

These ideals based on perception are not nihilistic in any way, nor are they anti-religious or anti-anything for that matter. I am not saying that nobody but oneself matters, other people can matter, but quite obviously I am saying it is up to the eye of the beholder to decide on these things. Obviously any serial killer has formed his world in the context where others do not matter, it may be a correct assumption for him, but for the majority of society it has been perceived as wrong. As long as the world you have creatively designed allows it, then you can justify your attempt to be a player in the existences of other individuals, as well as allowing their lives to intertwine with yours. In saying that we are the gods of our own reality I am not arguing that there is no god, only us. I am saying that the decision to believe in a god, or not to believe in a god is left to each individuals judgment, and quite obviously since that decision, as well as every other decision made in our microcosm of individuality based lives, is unequivocally ours, then it is hard not to argue that we are god’s of our individuality. We may not be the God of the universe, the macrocosm of existence, but if in our own minds everything we choose to believe and not believe in is made by us, it is difficult to disagree that we are not the supreme being of our own perception. If we weren’t then the God that did control our individuality would choose this perception of worship for us and we would know nothing of freewill.

The inclusion and interaction of other lives and ideals is clearly chronicled in Pride and Prejudice. Sometimes the extreme differences between two person’s definition of reality can cause conflicts, and also false assumptions towards one another. Looking deeper into the perception of others around us, we can begin to see how individual worlds cross on similar ideals as well as contradict. Elizabeth defines Mr. Darby early on without much to go on but initial impressions, “The gentleman pronounced him to be a fine figure of a man, the ladies declared he was much handsomer then Mr. Bingley, and he was looked at with great admiration for about half the evening, till his manners gave a disgust which turned the tide of his popularity; for he was discovered to be proud, to be above his company, and above being pleased” (Austen 6). At this moment this notion is reality to Elizabeth, and to many of those around her. Others may think much less of him after finding this fault within him, while some may not be affected one way or the other, but here Elizabeth misjudges the role of Mr. Darby in her life. Yet can we truly say that here Elizabeth is wrong? At this moment until Darby later proves otherwise Elizabeth believes in this notion of Darby’s excessive pride, and until he shows her otherwise her course of action through the majority of the book will be weighted towards this belief.

The notion here of a perception-based reality is that Elizabeth’s initial assumption may not be wrong. In actuality it is correct for her at the moment because this is the decision she has made, and since it is her world she is developing there is no one to question her but herself, and if she isn’t at the point to realize she must do this then there is no error. What we have here is more of a conflict between Elizabeth and Darby’s perception. Darby has established his perception one way, based on certain ideas and morals, but the world Elizabeth views him from categorizes these ideas as pompous. Elizabeth’s eventual change of heart may not necessarily be an admittance of being wrong, but simply a reformulating of some of her perceptions and then a timely change in her reality as to where Darby’s actions now aren’t as conflicting and better understood.

The fact, can not be ignored, that even if we can justify Elizabeth’s mistake by alluding to her perceptions which she does in fact have the right to establish, can we do the same for Leonard’s actions in Memento. Can we say his murders that give him a purpose in life are justified because they fall in lines with the rules of his actuality? It is a difficult question to pose and articulate, but it all flows together with the inclusion of these worlds apart and their conjunction together. If Leonard has deemed the perspectives of those around him of no importance or maybe simply doesn’t have the time to think about them, then to him yes his actions are right, even if he doesn’t know exactly what he is doing. Actually if he was without his condition he may not approve of what he has partaking in, but the fact that he can’t remember is a loophole for him to constantly justify what he is doing. Here is where the connection of various perspectives factors in. Perspectives are still unique and important because we decide whether or not the views of others matter, and if we do accept this, then we do formulate some of our ideas and actions based around what the general consensus for right and wrong is. The point is I may not justify what Leonard is doing based on how my life has played out, but if Leonard can justify his actions himself then it is right to him, while not necessarily right to me, but that makes little difference to him because he would choose not to let my opinion influence him. Once again our lives overlap one another because of our contrasting perceptions, to him personally, everything he is doing is right. To me it is wrong, and since he has chosen not to include foreign views in his perspective our opinions are mutually exclusive. If he were to somehow realize what he was doing, and have an open understanding of other opinions, he is still the god of his microcosm world, because he has made the decision of what is right and wrong in his actions and he has openly chosen to allow his actions to be influenced by the perspectives of others. In short you are always your own ruler, as you can chose whether or not things other then your own perspective matters. Even if you are influenced by other individual formed perspectives, you willing chose to do so, and you are still in control of you world. If something is right to you, regardless of whether or not you weigh in outside opinions, then it is right.

There is a difference between right and generally accepted, I don’t think murder is right, but obviously the murderer doesn’t see the problem in it, he is right in his world and nothing I can do to convince him otherwise, but murder is obviously not generally accepted, and because of this overall it is closer to wrong then anything else, but once again the murderer cares little about this, murder is right, and the generally accepted views on society were thrown out of his world long ago.

Through Pride and Prejudice the process of establishing basic level-one steps and setting up the ideals that surround us is seen. These are our choices, our decisions, and based on nothing more then our preferences. Then in Waking Life it becomes clearer how deep our perspectives can truly dive. The different ways to look at things and the complex second level analysis we must make to determine our approach to reality is shown to us. The very minuscule differences between our reality and our dreams, is pointed out, as we essentially have the ability to create and define both. The analyzing of Leonard in Memento is an attempt to understand how these individual worlds that each of us inhibit collide. We see the decisions we make on how we interact and to what level we allow others to influence our ideals. Its realized that if it is right to us then it is right, if it is wrong to us, then it is wrong. There is a difference between right and wrong and general consensus. Right and wrong are ever-changing words that have no real definitions, the only actuality is that if something is generally believed in then maybe it is closer to being right then anything else, but once again if your perception is all you believe in, then general consensus is of little value. Basically none of these ideas are completely revolutionary, by thinking more about perception life will not change immensely it is more of a unique way to look at things, then a contradiction of reality.

Maybe someone reading this won’t agree with anything I’ve written. Maybe they will laugh at the idea of perception defining reality, maybe they will scowl at the individual’s ability to dictate the colors and feelings around them, but then maybe they will realize this is only because this paper is divergent from the world they have perceived, and through this acknowledge if the words are right to me, regardless of whether or not they are the general consensus, then their argument against my reality is of little worth, but then again if this paper goes against the reality they have carved then not a word written here means anything to them in the first place. Perception is the key to reality, and as long as an individual is open to the views of their culture, and aware of the definition of the general consensus, then linking perception and reality may not be a bad way of looking at life, at the very least it can be fairly interesting.
____________________________________________________________

So anyway, all in all, if you like to think, and don't mind being bored if its for the nature of thought, then by all means check out waking life. If your a sucker for brilliant animation, give it a look as well.

It didn't change my life or anything but it was a fun analysis of dreams, and a good experiment by Linklater.



Recommended:
Yes

Viewing Format: DVD
Video Occasion: Good for a Rainy Day