Dream Is Destiny: Waking Life

Richard Linklater's latest film has caused quite a stir in the animation community. Is it really animated? Why is it "animated?" Is this just what the animated feature world needs or a sneaky imposter?

Steve Brown compliments the film in its success of going beyond the live-action images that served as reference. He likes that each artist could move away from model sheets, and interpret the characters according to their own perspective. Brown observes, "It's not the normal physics that one thinks of in terms of animation, in terms of squash, stretch and other fluidity of movement ... but it seems appropriate to the film. There were certainly segments where you could almost see the film stock underneath the images; they looked very photographic in a way. But then there were other scenes, where [the artists] were willing to start with the photographic image, but then actually distort the forms, and really think about manipulating the shapes. That's much more in the spirit of animation; that, to me, took it beyond the idea of just rotoscoping."

An angry, red-hot, poker-in-the-eye diatribe, questioning freedom, justice and sanity.
This brings us, therefore, back to the original contention of whether Waking Life should be considered validly animation. Brown suggests, "People are too interested in defending the little piece of ground they have staked out. I wouldn't go so far as to say they feel threatened, but traditional animation needs to be challenged, and to rethink what it is doing, and what it wants to do. Student and professional animators, both, struggle with their own ideas of what animation is, and what it can be, and perhaps they need to think beyond the current commercial paradigm for what theatrical animation generally tends to be."

Bring It Home
Rotoscoping, of course, may not always be the most favored or flattering technique for an animator to pursue, but with Waking Life costing something on the order of $10 million to make, there are certainly arguments supporting it.

In terms of the availability of off-the-shelf technology which made this movie possible, "That's the democratization of the artform," Brown says, "taking it away from just a few powerful producers and opening it up to a much wider range of people." Given the ever-evolving nature of the industry, Brown fully advocates "bringing more fine artists, and people of that sensibility," into animation.

Paul Beck, in his own poetic way, agrees: "This stuff is becoming more available to average, everyday people, and we can do this shit, and make it interesting."

Nathan Jensen adds: "Now you can do so much with a $1500 machine in your home, without a lot of extra things."

"On especially romantic nights with myself, I like to go Salsa dancing with my confusion."
Steve Brown expands on this notion of an evolving and growing animation community: "I'm excited to know that there is this active animation going on in Austin, or really just outside of Hollywood in general. I think the whole digital evolution of art also means a decentralization. It's an exciting thing to think that maybe there are these nexuses of animation appearing in other areas besides within the industry; and probably that is where new ideas will come from -- fortunately or unfortunately -- outside of the traditional Hollywood film business."

Brown continues, musing, "Part of the reason the animation industry is in trouble is that people [audiences] are just being given the same old things all the time."

Inagro Lazarre, director of Creative Puzzle Development, which is hosting and showcasing some of the fine art of the animators who worked on Waking Life, says, "The hope and idea is to create commercial art that still maintains its artistic integrity."

Brown concludes, "I think we have to at least be open to seeing what is possible, especially with the economics of the market."

Gregory Singer is an independent animation producer and freelance writer. He currently resides in Los Angeles, California.








Comments


I was interested to see Waking Life because I had seen Bob Sabiston's previous work, and his new program was similar to one I wrote myself... This film was experimental on a number of fronts: - the artists in most cases didn't know anything about animating and didn't really need to. - each scene was handled by different artists (although I wish more of them had strayed from the original visual material more) - the film was extremely talky and philisophical, which I think did not go well with the idea of animating it. I hope Linklater's actual dreams are not this talky. So I see this film as a good experiment, and a harbinger of much better films to come. Films that perhaps don't have much in the way of dialogue, but express themselves in dynamic imagery. Animated work that neither looks like "reality" nor like the same hardlined characters we've seen for decades. Films that may not even have "characters" or any licensable material in them.
Henry Lowengard (not verified) | Wed, 01/16/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
I saw this film at the London Film Festival. Not being aware it was animation before going in, let alone what it was about, I was completely stunned by the visual style and story/concept. After 10 minutes I was worried if I would get nauseaus sitting through for 90 mins or so, but the graphics changed frequently enough to overcome this. I also wondered if I could cope with the variation of style during that time. It really goes to show that the medium is so symbiotic to the content. If this had been shown live action the story would have fallen flat. Likewise if the story was anything but an exploration of every meta-physical conversation and debate we had in college then the visuals would have left people lost and confused. This film was an excellent achievement of both and as to the debate to whether it qualifies as animation? It only goes to support my view that now we are entering an era of digital animation as well as drawn, we need to understand that the term 'Animation' is too limited. 3D Motion-Capture animation is as valid as 2D Drawn Classical Animation, they're just different. "The act, process, or result of imparting life, interest, spirit, motion, or activity." is a great explanation of the word 'Animation', it's not exclusive to one method or another. As we see this industry expand, we'll all have to think a little more about what we call the visual style of animation. Game Animation, Feature Animation & Televisual Animation are just 3 types that refer to the medium and represent fundamentally different styles. I am sure this debate will rage and I'd like to hear anyone's opinion ... ;-) Whatever you think though, go and see this film Ben Lock Head of Digital Production
Ben Lock (not verified) | Fri, 12/14/2001 - 01:00 | Permalink
Reading about this film has thrilled me beyond description (of course I haven't seen it; I doubt anyone in South Africa has). In my country the animation industry is barely fledgeling. There is immense potential for new forms of animation to emerge from our embattled culture...but I am constantly frustrated by the industry's (such as it is) slavish adherence to "standard" animation forms and trends. Companies as well as the few independent projects constantly cite the need for "international marketing", and then proceed to produce crass imitations of well-established, mostly American work. Waking Life sounds like a project that has broken free of these kind of constrictive "correctness" worries. If it is difficult to classify, it has my fullest admiration. Despite my pessimism about the SA animation industry as it stands, the signs are there that very interesting things are about to emerge from this quarter of the world...it would do prospective animators here a world of good to be exposed to films like Waking Life. What are the chances of a South African release? And is there any way to get hold of the film on tape?
MJ va Veuren (not verified) | Tue, 11/27/2001 - 01:00 | Permalink
Well this topic of rotoscoping has not really been brought up in a classroom discussion, just the technique. Therefore the idea of rotoscoping being a cheat of traditional animation techniques seems a little bold to say. I feel that rotoscoping techniques or for us 3D animators, motion capture systems should be considered another form of medium. These methods still need creative ideas and skilled artists to accomplish a sense feeling and realism for the viewer. Besides, animated feature films are not for the critques so to speak, but for the audiences that will be viewing them. These are the people that need the realism and realtionship with the character. If using rotoscoping to give greater sense of this, then so be it. As an animator I feel that creating new methods and making the impossible, possible, keeps us above the rest, as different mediums become more excessible and more user friendly to the outside world. I say go with it!!
Meredith Rodgers (not verified) | Sat, 11/24/2001 - 01:00 | Permalink

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.