'I think I got really lucky with Slacker. That was a film that probably shouldn't have been seen.' - Richard Linklater
'Slacker' is a film formed from a series of vignettes that weave and blend in and out of mostly nameless, insignificant citizens of Austin, Texas. The entire premise of 'Slacker' ties in with Richard Linklater's character's (named 'Should Have Stayed at Bus Station') idea of realities separating off into alternate tangents depending on the decisions we make. 'Slacker' plays on this, with the film wondering down the alternate paths of other characters, rather than focusing on just one of them.
'Slacker', although interesting, has left me feeling just as lethargic as all of its "slacker" characters. The film encompasses the feeling of lazy sunny days and has a distinct lack of energy in its camera movements, aesthetic and in its characters. The film highlights the mundanity of these "everyday" lives, losing touch of reality in both a profound sense and literal, psychological sense in some cases. The distinct lack of a soundtrack causes 'Slacker' to seem hyper-realistic and completely grounded, with the only music being diegetic sounds from speakers (bar the ending) and live performances, giving the film a super-8, documentary feel. The live music features dead-end lyrics and furthers the frustration of the characters who are trying to find some kind of meaning in their lives. The script is full of characters spewing out profound drivel that is meaningless in the grand scheme of things but helps give the "slacker" lives more meaning. The entire film is juxtaposed with eccentricity and lethargy and Linklater captures the bizarre yet drowsy mundanity of Austin.
The final scene, however, is full of energy and music but this is bittersweet. The characters on screen are seemingly younger than the film's other characters. To me, it seems like a statement about the naivety of youth and the blissful nature of their lack of awareness about their "slacker" fates.
Whilst Linklater's 'Boyhood' is more to my taste, I found 'Slacker' a very interesting watch and felt like it would be right at home if it was playing in a gallery.
'Bowling for Columbine' runs deep with subtle humour but the film's content is far from humorous. Instead, this comedy serves to highlight the shocking normality and mundane nature of gun violence in America, as well as the immune attitudes that American citizens appear to have towards it. Whilst the documentary's satire helps Michael Moore to deliver his agenda with a punch, the film also tackles several very serious issues about gun crime.
One scene that particularly stood out to me when watching 'Bowling for Columbine' was the one in which Moore pulls together a collection of old footage portraying a multitude of victims of weapon-based violence all around the world and across the history. These images of dead bodies and victims being shot would be harrowing enough on their own, but Moore plays Louis Armstrong's 'What a Wonderful World' over the top of them with cruel sarcasm, similar to the shots of poverty in 'Roger & Me' with the Beach Boys' 'Wouldn't It Be Nice' playing over the top. The juxtaposition between the music and the violent footage is brutal, making the footage seem ever more appalling and chilling.
Moore's interview style resembles that of an interrogation in many cases, portraying the people that he interviews as "villains". However, in more vulnerable moments, Moore eases up and demonstrates a more reassuring, human nature to those that he believes deserve sympathy, such as when he speaks to a teacher about the Buell Elementary school shooting.
What stands out the most about Moore's style is that he uses subtle humour, sarcasm, irony and satire to drive his points into the audience, as well as subtly ridiculing some of his interviewees like an inside joke that Moore and the audience are in on. Without this style, maybe 'Bowling for Columbine' would be just another documentary about gun crime and it wouldn't be quite as hard hitting and subtly manipulative as it is.
After having a little wander around the internet, I realised that Palo Alto has come under a lot of criticism, mainly for its somewhat vapid depiction of teenagers and its drifting plot. I, however, think that's the charm. The teenagers in the film are exactly that: people crossing the unstable and aimless bridge bridge between childhood and being a young adult; experiencing their first everything and allowing themselves to be consumed by the most seemingly unimportant aspects of their lives. The weightless plot furthers this idea and captures that sense of how significant moments and significant people float out of the teenagers' lives as quietly as as quickly as they float in. Maybe the adults behind Palo Alto's criticisms are simply writing with a strong, jealous sense of nostalgia for those long-lost years.
Palo Alto is based on a collection of short stories written by James Franco and is centred around 4 specific characters and the way in which their lives interweave. The first is April - she is an introverted character with a distant and detached family, a somewhat poetic smoking habit and an inappropriate relationship with her soccer coach (Franco) borne out of her distinct lack of attention and established worth elsewhere in her life. She is also incredibly set apart from her friends because of their destructive and competitive attempts at friendship. Next comes Teddy, the similarly introverted love interest of April with an unfortunate tendency to release his emotions through alcohol, drugs and wild mistakes, despite his caring nature. Teddy's closest friend is the unstable and unpredictable Fred. Fred is an incredibly interesting character because he seems to have a series of layers in his personality. The brash and careless yet fun layer, the violent, cruel sad and manipulative layer beneath that and, finally, the rarely-seen layer of sadness and fear. There is someone like Fred in every friendship group you might come across. The fourth character is the less featured Emily who is disregarded and abandoned throughout the whole film by many characters due to her sexual reputation but pensive shots give the insight into her loneliness and sadness.
Whilst Palo Alto's ending is stunning in every sense of the word and there are some really thought-provoking parallels in the film, I'd have to say that my favourite part is the 10 minute long party scene close to the start. It kick-starts through Palo Alto's fog and it makes use of a really dreamy and surreal soundtrack. The first shots in the part are of April's "friends" playing 'never have I ever', where they all find distorted pleasure in embarrassing each other through a series of incredibly specific 'never have I evers'. April is physically and emotionally distant from them and can be seen wandering through the party aimlessly with a slight air of boredom and discontent. She sits next to Teddy, who lights a cigarette for her, whilst Fred is sprawled on the floor drinking out of a vase. Despite Fred's melodramatic disapproval of April's company, the three decide to leave the party for a while in such a way that furthers the "outsider" focus of the film, screaming out that teen angst/not like other teenagers attitude. It is a wonderful blend of both 'absorbing' and 'cliche'.
The three run past the game of 'never have I ever' as our 4th character, Emily, claims 'I've never been in love'. Using a lampshade as a megaphone, yet speaking calmly, Fred responds to her statement with 'I think that's bullshit', before the three continue to run past in a lethargic yet fleeting movement. They run outside, laughing, as Fred yells 'I stole your lampshade'. They run through faint rain in slow motion and Teddy reaches out to take April's hand in a moment that really drives their fluctuating love forward. Passing time in a graveyard and carving hearts into trees, the three of them smoke and exchange vaguely painful overly-profound comments whilst the party begins to become out of control. When they finally return, the film's soundtrack kicks in even more and consumes the on-screen action whilst the three are instantly separated from the moment they walk through the door. From this point onwards, cue a series of preoccupied and subtly anguished gazes from April and Teddy as they watch each other find drunken comfort in other people and cue Fred hinting at his hidden emotional depth as he sings and plays the piano. A lovely little detail in the film is the nameless teenage boy leaning at the bottom of the staircase in a heavy, drunken mess. The entire party scene is thoughtful and explorative, very pitiful and all so consuming.
The film is incredibly interesting in many other ways, especially with such a controversial and inappropriate relationship between April and the soccer coach and the way her character has an emphasised air of youth around him. April's superficial and insecure friends are another point of interest, as well as her preoccupied mother and Fred's father's ambiguous sexuality and inappropriate actions. As well as having so many aspects that can be explored deeply, the film's cinematography is beautiful and surreal and it really mirrors the narrative.
Palo Alto is a striking film, but not one for people who are bored easily because the empty, lethargic and aimless atmosphere of Palo Alto is its beauty.
.jpg)
