Talk:Waking Life

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Animated films task force.

Animation: American / Films Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Animated films work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Philosophy: Social and political / Continental Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Social and political philosophy
	Continental philosophy

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2020 and 10 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Acw5507. Peer reviewers: Mmh65, Shengchieh Lee.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References to use[edit]

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.

King, Mike (2008). "Waking Life". The American Cinema of Excess: Extremes of the National Mind on Film. McFarland. pp. 158–161. ISBN 0786439882.

Macs?[edit]

I thought Linklater handed out clips of the film to animators and let them animate. Was it still rotoscoped on a Mac despite this? -crynyd

What is the relevance of animating on Macs? If there is any, it's not clear and should be elaborated in it's own subsection.

One reason it is relevant is that the animation was done on relatively inexpensive "off-the-shelf" computers as opposed to supercomputers costing tens of thousands of dollars as Pixar and such use. I'll elaborate on this in the article.

"fan site" link[edit]

The link called "Fan Site" appears to be only very loosely, if at all, related to the film. I didn't remove it because I thought I might be missing something. ThreeDee 07:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wp[edit]

The annoying thing about Wikipedia is that every article imparts a distinct approval or despising of its subject. Here, the editors pull no punches as to their opinion on the film. Look:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/waking_life/

Why has Wikipedia sided with the fans? Not everyone is a fan. The intellectual snobbery shines. Listen up; you're not right or wrong. Stop calling things "interesting" (is it okay to say "uninteresting" too?), "innovative" (how about "hackneyed"?), "unsurprisingly" (how can we say that when we cannot prove what constitutes actual "surprise"?) and stacking comparisons to prove your argument, for example: The animators used relatively inexpensive "off-the-shelf" Apple Macintosh computers (as opposed to the expensive supercomputers and computer clusters used by Pixar and DreamWorks). Encyclopedias should not contain arguments for or against anything, nor ANY comparisons. The reader is the ONLY ONE who should be comparing things. He, not the encyclopedia, should write the editorial and conclude a point from the facts. The burden of comparison, evaluation and interpretation should be upon him alone. The ideal, objective reference article should be pointless and inconclusive.

Drop the POV, please. Don't balance it with another bullshit "criticism" section. State what the movie is, not what you, your dog, your girlfriend think or what Ebert, Jesus Christ and Adolf Hitler believe. It is not encyclopedic, reference-worthy content to restate other people's opinions. Stop it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.238.180 (talk • contribs)

While I agree with what you're saying (minus the part about the use of "off-the-shelf" computers, as I believe that's relevant even though there may or may not be better wording), why not just change it? This is a wiki after all. This article is pretty short, so it wouldn't take you too long. Unfortunately, it seems to be human nature for people to want to spread their opinions as facts, and as such, you're right that every page has POV. It's impossible to completely get rid of it. But for a short page like this one, it doesn't take much. -67.163.21.39 01:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glover Gill[edit]

Does the link to Glover Gill's site belong here, or on the entry for Gill (which currently does not exist)? - 20, April 2007

Fair use rationale for Image:Waking Life DVD Cover.jpg[edit]

Image:Waking Life DVD Cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Voice)?[edit]

I'm removing the "(voice)" tags from the names of the actors. The film was rotoscoped from live action footage, meaning they *are* actually there on film, just with some effects applied. This certainly doesn't make them voice actors and nothing else. 72.195.158.180 (talk) 18:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful- I know of at least one scene where the actor was changed to a chimpanzee, so his credit should remain "voice." 172.135.97.91 (talk) 20:49, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But that's just animation they did over the actor's performance. I don't think it should have a voice tag. No-genius (talk) 15:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Transcript?[edit]

The transcript was, for a long period of time, linked from the main article. Is there a valid reason not to include a link to it, if it's available? Yes, I host it, but I'm not sure that's relavant. :) Strivinglife (talk) 03:48, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A transcript of the film, created by a fan, is not adequate as a source nor does it meet the criteria for an external link. It is the very definition of original research. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 04:32, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original research? Really? I can see commentary being original research, but if the transcript is taken directly off of the film, it's not an adaptation, or conversion from one language to another, but a word-for-word transcription, in the original language ... that's not original research. Heck, I wish it was original :D Strivinglife (talk) 14:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scene with Steven Prince[edit]

I made an edit to this page last night that has been deleted. I pointed out that the scene where the man talks about having to shoot a man stealing tires is a story taken directly from Martin Scorcese's documentary "American Boy". It has been deleted but Steven Prince's name has been added to the list of cast members. While I didn't realize that it was Steven Prince reprising the role, I still think that it is pertinent to add that it is a scene reprised from another film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunmer63 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOUIS Black vs. LEWIS Black[edit]

I changed the spelling of Louis to Lewis Black, the comedian. The reference that shows he was in Waking Life also spelled his name wrong, but the reference clearly refers to a comedian. Unless there is a comedian named LOUIS Black that I am unaware of, it is spelled Lewis. 06:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Lewis Black, the comedian, is NOT in the movie. The Louis Black in "Waking Life" is somebody else. Look up 'Louis Black' and you'll find out who he is. 76.91.12.233 (talk) 22:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Waking Life. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100507095817/http://www.nytimes.com:80/2001/10/12/movies/12WAKI.html to http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/12/movies/12WAKI.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:56, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]