Slacker

Richard Linklater is simply unique in his ability to tell stories. It doesn't really matter what he tells, but the techniques he finds in the film medium... That is simply unique. He is incredibly innovative, yet still true to himself. It doesn't matter if he films two characters after ten years, or if he films a movie for several long years to capture aging, or in this case, lets people go through and play short scenes just because it could have happened that way. In his execution, it always works and usually doesn't even get boring. (25.02.2016)

A very peculiar comedy by Richard Linklater in which the camera is going from one character to another and narrates a bunch of stories that are unrelated to each other, yet offer their own interesting specifics and styles. Each episode renders to the viewer one, two or several slackers and their escapades around Austin, Texas. Some of the dialogues are beautifully built, while others simply delight by their quirkiness – it’s impossible to get bored. And the silent, almost grotesque conclusion is flawless! Right after the viewing, I want to watch it all over again. [KVIFF 2018] (08.07.2018)

Slacker is a well-thought-out narrative experiment that does not bind the story to a single protagonist, but rather to the overall mood of paranoia (reminiscent of Rivetto's debut, Paris nous appartient) and several leitmotifs (media manipulation of reality, mistrust of public opinion). Just as the film’s characters do not live according to standard social norms, Linklater seeks an alternative to mainstream storytelling through his chosen structure comprising a sort of narrative relay (which he starts himself). Unlike his characters, who are either sociopaths conducting bizarre rituals (cutting photos out of a yearbook, throwing away things left behind by an ex-girlfriend) and carrying on paranoid conversations about a major conspiracy, or stoned slackers discussing Smurfs and Krishna, Linklater is relatively successful in his effort to capture the postmodern zeitgeist. By combining numerous different stories (which differ in the lightness of their themes and the characters’ degree of sanity) and many different media and formats (video, Super 8, 16mm), he succeeds in expressing the unfocused perception of Generation X, whose members flit among a tremendous number of stimuli, but are unable to dedicate themselves to any one thing. The film is thus constructed as a succession of diversions from a particular topic or someone’s story. The viewer’s desire for a coherent plot is thus never fulfilled, but our attention never falters nonetheless, because we have to get acquainted with other characters over and over again. Though human characters are used in a utilitarian manner (as bearers of meanings and functions) in every story, their subordination to the narrative is accentuated in Slacker by the fact that they are used like any other narrative means, such as editing or camera movement. Instead of obscuring the narrative structure and inducing the impression of documentary immediacy, multiple perspectives and the randomness in choosing what we will see next, the formulas that we have adopted by watching films with a traditional narrative force us to be more sensitive to how Slacker unfolds. From this perspective, its main content is not a portrait of a generation, but rather the very act of storytelling with all of its fixed (cause-effect model) and variable elements (independence from the main protagonist and the main storyline). 80% (20.06.2018)