To me, this movie is perfection.

best movie i've ever seen.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Richard Linklater is a director well known for making films revolving around personal relationships, philosophy, and how people are affected by the passage of time. For this, he has made some of very memorable movies in the past including the coming-of-age comedy 'Dazed and Confused', the romantic trilogy starring Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy, and the critically acclaimed masterpiece 'Boyhood'. Rewinding back to the early 90s, Richard Linklater directed his first film centering on the social politics of citizens in Austin, Texas during the the Post-Baby boom period. This movie follows various unnamed characters and scenes dealing with seemingly random events around the city of Austin, including a young passenger (played by Richard Linklater) in a taxi car yattering about philosophy of dreams and reality, a young woman wandering around town trying to sell Madonna's Pap lipstick, a man lecturing on the existence of UFOs, a group of friends chatting about the conspiracy of John F. Kennedy's assassination, an elderly man who bonds with a criminal after thwarting him from robbing his house, and many other social misfits. The film focuses on each of these characters for a few minutes and their actions, and then cuts away to a new cast of characters, never showing them again.This film is a highly unique movie with an interest that is incredibly difficult to describe, even for fans of Richard Linklater's other works. The concept of this film is that it doesn't necessarily have a plot of any sort, but basically explores different aspects of a society and creates interest through the intriguing and thought-producing topics of their conversations. Topics such as philosophy, terrorism, conspiracy theories, and politics are placed in the institutions of the conversations. As we listen to their thoughts on the topics, the character development comes how the conversations flow and how the characters interact with each other, to make viewers engage with the characters. Some of the conversations warrant some laughter, while other tackles on more subtle material such as in one scene with the man chatting on the existence of extra terrestrial life, or the scene with the teenagers talking about their beliefs dealing with JFK's assassination. The acting works quite well and the cinematography stays solid. The whole movie plays like a mockumentary about society functions. The movie is an interesting work of art, but can only interest those who understand the direction Linklater is taking this film. The only major flaw with the film is definitely the abandoned possibilities that Linklater could have done with the concept to make the film capture better interest.Slacker is very unique and inspiring piece of work, but one that will definitely not appeal to everyone. Those who go into this expecting a plot will be significantly disappointed. But those who are able to understand the direction of this movie may enjoy this movie. This is a movie that doesn't tell a story, but rather explores aspects of societal and social satire.

Linklater has an immediately noticeable style; those long takes that hold their composition, the winding, philosophical musings, the oddballs that are full of ideas. In Slacker, his debut feature, it is never the more evident and never the more effective - the camera glides effortlessly from one conversation to another, linking the events by the thinnest of threads to sketch a living breathing canvas of 90s Austin, Texas. Linklater was only a fresh-faced thirty year old at the time of release, certainly fitting into the age range of the so- dubbed 'slacker', something a dictionary would define as one who evades or shirks from their due responsibilities. It is here however that they take on a more positive connotation; we feel that many of these rambling characters have the skills or knowledge to succeed, but do not necessarily want to be shackled to that definition of success, or even feel that is is unattainable. Linlater's aptly named 'Should have stayed at bus station' sums it up in curiously thought-provoking monologue in which the taxi driver says not a word - how could anyone live their life the fullest and snap at every chance when there are so many minute, seemingly-innocuous choices to face that result in an unlimited range of outcomes? Linklater is not entirely pessimistic about the question. It would be easy to provoke these youthful characters, to demean their ideals and laugh at their choices (or lack of choices). The film does not descend to that level, but rather walks along with them, listening like that taxi driver, or that friend that is subjected to a convoluted conspiracy theory on UFOs, or the girl who bumps into a former schoolmate and is bombarded with suggestions on the best books covering the JFK assassination conspiracies. They do not ridicule or snicker, but nod thoughtfully, if not politely, as if each of these ideas should be given their due screen-time. And there is a ease in the way that humour is incorporated too. A man is prophetically declared to be dead within a fortnight, and inexplicably starts to jaywalk a moment later. John Slate casually answers the age-old question of "What have you been up to?" with "Oh you know me, just been keeping up with my JFK assassination theories." An elderly man befriends his would-be burglar, showing a remarkable and affable knack for disarming and grabbing his attention, finding common ground, and then makes an offhand comment about Charles Whitman's massacre as the "city's finest hour". And for all the attention that Linklater gives to the 'slacker' generation, he does afford some impartiality. There's the student that manages to invoke Freud while debating his choice to refuse to give change to a beggar, and is thoroughly scolded by his companion. And there is a genius moment where two youths talk about the futility of travelling overseas, as if the blossoming of TV culture makes such a pursuit pointless since it can be accessed from the comfort of your couch. The camera then smoothly switches to a passing pair, noticeably older, one of whom is describing an experience with a "great wall of incense and spices" on the coast of Bombay so vividly that it could not have been experienced from a TV screen, but in person right there on the ship. With a neat little metaphoric renewal sequence, a group convinces one of their friends that maybe, just maybe that girl wasn't 'the one'. It's increasingly rare to find a film so honest, so willing to expose a culture for more than just it seems. At times it will feel dated, but the stereotypes have grown along with age, and sprouted new facets. People are still haggling bogus products, still rattling on about conspiracies, still pondering the complexities of the universe like they are the first ones to pose such questions. But Slacker doesn't mind at all; it sits down for a while, and lends a listening ear.

I'm a slacker by definition. At least, director Richard Linklater's stunningly sympathetic definition which is, "people who are ultimately being responsible to themselves and not wasting their time in a realm of activity that has nothing to do with who they are or what they might be ultimately striving for." I find that definition to be a pleasantly original one to a word often used to demonize those seemingly directionless and useless in the world.This is one of the many signs that Richard Linklater doesn't pretend to resonate with the adolescent community, but really does resonate and understand them, much like famous auteurs John Hughes and Kevin Smith. All three men know what it was like growing up geeky in suburbia, and all of them seem to have an instant pipeline to the minds and thoughts of adolescence and young adults. It's also no coincidence why Hughes greatly owned the teen movie demographic in the 1980's, and Linklater and Smith would go on to greatly define the nineties independent cinema by pioneering it and creating characters with meaning, opinions, and dialog that was sharp and gripping.Richard Linklater's Slacker occupies a structure that is primitive, unique, and relatively quiet. It involves a day in the life of random twentysomethings in the quiet, college town of Austin, Texas through a rhythmic and refreshing lens of cinematic poetry. We start out by seeing Linklater's character catch a cab and go off on a tangent, rambling to the uninterested cab driver about how he feels that every time we are faced with a decision, we have the opportunity to go off into a separate reality and some more convoluted scenarios he'll preach for the next two or three minutes. This is the taste of the elegance in the dialog we are about to endure for one hundred minutes.After we spend a few minutes with this guy, he gets out of the cab and walks a little before someone spots a woman who has just been hit and run. The camera pans back further and further, going in a circle, and then we see the same hit and run driver pull into his flat and sit in front of a few candles in a form of prayer or meditation, before he is eventually nabbed and arrested. The screenplay then sees two men walk by, one older and one younger, as the older one forces conversation with the younger one about how one must question everything they're told and rambles on for a few minutes about conspiracy theories, the moon landing being fake, etc. We then pick up someone else in the streets and the journey unfolds.The catch here is that the people we meet and focus on for a brief amount of time are talking about subjects we're surprised they even know about. "Slackers," themselves, are viewed as out of touch, lazy, careless, unimportant, and indifferent on many issues, but Linklater depicts them to be very knowledgeable people, possibly more informed than the talking heads on TV, who don't want to waste time bothering themselves with people or things that won't further them in life. They are far too smart for that.The screenplay, penned by Linklater as well, doesn't forcefully connect these stories, but ostensibly gets sidetracked when focusing on one. When the time is up for a person, the camera will swing around to someone else in the same shot. The film is simply in love with people and their thoughts, and subtly asks itself just before focusing on them for a minute or two, "I wonder what he is thinking?" This method could seem to birth issues such as laziness in writing, lack of ideas, or whatever, but I feel when a film is inherently plot less, it can sometimes accomplish more than a story that is locked down on a grid of clichés or story odds and ends.While the film seems to lack any and all themes or morals, one of the ones I cautiously picked up along the way was not only the love for the everyman, but the love for the opinions of the everyman. We often pass people, whether it be on the street, waiting in line at the grocery store, or simply strolling on a path we don't usually take. Sometimes, we may think to ourselves when we seem someone, what are these people's story? How did they get here, what do they do, what are their opinions, what have they accomplished, and simply, are they satisfied with life? Linklater knows how to accumulate this idea into a very well constructed film that, even if a little long, still doesn't manage to abuse the idea of human interest, pureness, and the importance of clever, engaging dialog in cinema.NOTE: Director Kevin Smith has gone on record saying that it was Linklater's Slacker that served as the direct influence for his directorial debut, Clerks (my self-proclaimed favorite film). Both films have a plethora of heart and intelligence, but I find Clerks to be a bit more focused and a bit more easier to endure. Slacker might need a few more viewings on my part.Starring: Richard Linklater, Kim Krizan, Marc James, Stella Weir, John Slate, Louis Mackey, and Teresa Taylor. Directed by: Richard Linklater.

I enjoyed watching this film ~ as if it were a rougher form of Waking Life, but still intriguing. It's almost a mix between Waking Life and reality TV... in that you are opened in a series of snippets of various individuals lives as they walk down the streets of this all American town in the 90s.I would have loved to see a plot tie in more. Perhaps, looping back around to old characters and seeing how they were all interconnected, or what they were up to later in the day. But it's clear that wasn't Linklater's vision and that's OK. As it stands, some of the clips are not that interesting, or persist on too long. Some are very similar in concept to Waking Life, and if you were only going to see one of the two, Waking Life would be my definite recommendation.All in all, it was an interesting experiment.