Evidently, narratives in the early films of Richard Linklater don't exist either. Slacker is a meditative film that, though it has a very discernible forward momentum, lacks a discernible story. Slacker is concerned with a certain group of people in a certain place at a certain time. It's philosophical and an interesting satire of a particular sub-group wandering through a post-Reagan haze. These people are rootless and aimless; consequently, the narrative is as well. It's a perfect representation of form following function.
It's also incredibly anthropological. As I mentioned, the film has no pretensions of plot and is not really concerned with the lives of the people the camera encounters. It is more concerned with what they believe and how they act. A vignette is a large enough canvas on which to sketch the dimensions of these lives: the conspiracy theorists, the musicians, the artists, and the celebrity-obsessed can be made real with only a few minutes of our time. The multitude of people walking through this film give us a more complete sense of a time and place and type of person than could ever be achieved with a traditional narrative style. We see the variations on this type and the sub-types within the slacker sub-type itself. This film, though artful and amusing, would live on if it were not so well done--it's pitch-perfect rendition of Austin in the late-1980s and early 1990s depicts immaculately Generation X before it discovered the Internet and made something of themselves. It's a time-capsule of a film and should be watched for that reason.
It should also be watched because, frankly, it's terribly droll. It's not riotous and its humor doesn't grab you by the lapels (like Linklater's School of Rock), but it is subtly amusing and has a nice satirical edge to it. Linklater likes these characters and understands them, but he's not above nudging us in our ribs when they become too esoteric, too self-indulgent, or too inane.
Slacker is a great film and among the finest of the 1990s's independent revolution. Like Metropolitan or Pulp Fiction, it's a unique movie and one many people will enjoy.
It's also incredibly anthropological. As I mentioned, the film has no pretensions of plot and is not really concerned with the lives of the people the camera encounters. It is more concerned with what they believe and how they act. A vignette is a large enough canvas on which to sketch the dimensions of these lives: the conspiracy theorists, the musicians, the artists, and the celebrity-obsessed can be made real with only a few minutes of our time. The multitude of people walking through this film give us a more complete sense of a time and place and type of person than could ever be achieved with a traditional narrative style. We see the variations on this type and the sub-types within the slacker sub-type itself. This film, though artful and amusing, would live on if it were not so well done--it's pitch-perfect rendition of Austin in the late-1980s and early 1990s depicts immaculately Generation X before it discovered the Internet and made something of themselves. It's a time-capsule of a film and should be watched for that reason.
It should also be watched because, frankly, it's terribly droll. It's not riotous and its humor doesn't grab you by the lapels (like Linklater's School of Rock), but it is subtly amusing and has a nice satirical edge to it. Linklater likes these characters and understands them, but he's not above nudging us in our ribs when they become too esoteric, too self-indulgent, or too inane.
Slacker is a great film and among the finest of the 1990s's independent revolution. Like Metropolitan or Pulp Fiction, it's a unique movie and one many people will enjoy.