“I
can see why people are asking me about a generation I happen to be a part of,
but to me Slacker owes more allegiance to cinema than to a generation.” –
Richard Linklater
“It
was disturbing to me that an idea or a song could become something so different
from what you originally intended. It’s like if a friend took a stupid picture
of you at a party on their phone, and the next thing you knew, it was on every
billboard.” – Beck on the surprise success of “Loser”
Even though I know they came out years apart, I always
associate Beck’s hit song “Loser” with Richard Linklater’s film Slacker (1990). The former came out in
1993 and the latter had its premiere three years prior, but both took their
time finding their audience. They also were touted by the media as defining
what would be known as Generation X, a term popularized by Douglas Coupland’s
1991 novel of the same name, and used to describe people born in the early
1960s to the early 1980s. Also rather interestingly, both Beck and Linklater
felt uncomfortable with being heralded as voices of their generation.
Despite being released years apart, “Loser” and Slacker have much closer inception dates
than one would imagine and both came out of experiences that Beck and Linklater
had in the late ‘80s. There was definitely something in the air in the early
1990s and these two artists were able to tap into it. The song and the film
both feature fractured narratives with random observations about life. As
Linklater said in an interview, his generation was the first “to have the T.V.
remote … to begin creating our own narratives by watching five minutes of this
and then one minute of that and then seven minutes of this … That was in my
head as a narrative possibility.” It is that kind of channel-surfing mentality
that “Loser” and Slacker tap into.
It’s as if Linklater is controlling the remote, flipping around to see what
various people from Austin are doing in a 24-hour period in which the film
takes place.
Slacker
opens with a fascinating scene. A young man (Linklater) has just gotten off a
bus and is now en route to somewhere in a taxi. He begins telling the cabbie
about a weird dream he had while riding on the bus, which leads into his theory
concerning alternate realities. It's a clever little monologue that has become
a staple of Linklater's films. It is also a fantastic way to start the film as
this first scene acts as an introduction of sorts with Linklater himself
kicking everything off by setting the tone. His films are wonderful
non-narrative gems that appear at first glance to be about nothing in
particular, but by their conclusion, reveal a lot about the big themes of life:
love, sex, death, and the real meaning behind The Smurfs.
Made for only $23,000, Slacker
is an aimless day in the life of the city of Austin, Texas, showcasing its more
eccentric characters. The camera follows an individual, one pair of characters
or a group until it gets bored and moves on to the next interesting
conversation. This approach works well because as soon one segment runs too
long we’re off on another tangent. Some people get several minutes of screen
time, some only a few seconds. The segments vary tonally from amusing (the Moon
conspiracy guy) to cryptic (the guy who mysteriously disappears, leaving a
collection of postcards that explain what happened for his roommates to
discover) to bizarre (the Madonna pap smear girl) to thought-provoking (the
elder anarchist). It is this ingenious entropic structure — enhanced by Lee Daniel's excellent camerawork with long, uninterrupted takes — that really sets
Slacker apart from other independent
films.
Linklater’s film invites repeated viewings because there is
so much going on — both in the foreground and the background. Slacker presents an interesting,
annoying and funny assortment of characters: obsessive types, like the man who
believes that we’ve been on the Moon since the 1950s with the aid of
anti-gravity drives (“A lot of truth in the Late
Late Show.”) and a JFK conspiracy buff who rambles on obsessively about the
minutiae of various theories (not surprisingly he has written his own book tentatively
titled, Profiles in Cowardice or Conspiracy A-Go-Go). Unlike a lot of
films, Slacker requires the viewer to
be active as opposed to being passive by presenting all of these seemingly
disparate vignettes with little to no context. And so we are left wondering,
for example, why the son hit his own mother with a car and then let himself get
arrested.
There are also more poignant characters like an aging
anarchist who surprises a would-be robber at his house and instead of turning
him in, talks to him at length about the city’s rich history of anarchism. There
is a strong pop culture vibe that informs several segments, from a girl enthusiastically
trying to sell a sample of Madonna’s pap smear (“Getting down to the real
Madonna,” she gushes) to a guy who deconstructs Scooby Doo as a tool for
teaching bribery. All of these characters come across as everyday (in their own
way) people in between jobs and often relegated to the margins of life. As they
appear and disappear you begin to realize that the film is not as random as it
seems but in fact is very structured with links between encounters becoming
more apparent upon subsequent viewings. The film’s title is somewhat ironic in
the sense that a lot of the characters are hardly idle, from the guy on his way
to band practice to the guy working on getting his book of JFK assassination
theories published, or the two grease monkeys that go scavenging for parts at a
junkyard. A lot of people in this film are hustling towards some end, trying to
achieve something.
Born in Houston, Texas, Richard Linklater studied literature
in college with aspirations of becoming a writer. He left midway through his
stint in school to work on an off-shore oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico. During
that time, he read lots of literature, but on land he developed a love of film
through repeated visits to a repertory theater in Houston. It was at this point
that Linklater realized he wanted to be a filmmaker, first and foremost.
"It took me a while," Linklater remembers, "and seeing a lot of
movies, to realize that I wasn't really a writer: I had a visual thing, I could
see films in my head." After his job on the oil rig, Linklater used the
money he had saved to buy a Super-8 camera, a projector, some editing
equipment, and moved to Austin. It was here that the aspiring cineaste founded
a film society at the University of Texas and grew to appreciate such stylized
auteurs like Robert Bresson, Yasujiro Ozu, Nagisa Oshima, and Josef Von
Sternberg.
For several years Linklater made many short films that were,
more than anything, exercises and experiments in film techniques. "I knew
it was important not to try to say anything in my first couple of years, as I
would probably get really frustrated and quit, because I wouldn't have the
formal skill to achieve that thought." Finally, the young filmmaker
completed his first feature, the rarely seen It's Impossible to Learn to Plow by Reading Books (1988), an
89-minute Super-8 feature that took him a year to shoot and another year to
edit. Described by Linklater as a "kind of prequel to Slacker and a forerunner of Before
Sunrise," the film is all about the "mind-set of travel"
with more than half of the screen time taking place on an Amtrak train
traveling around the United States. The rest of the film depicts the main
character (Linklater) getting off in a town and wandering around for a while. It's Impossible to Learn to Plow by Reading
Books is significant in the sense that it establishes most of Linklater's
preoccupations. Stylistically, the film contains his trademark minimal camera
movements and lack of narrative, while thematically it examines the notions of
traveling with no real particular direction in mind. These idiosyncrasies would
be explored in greater detail in future projects.
Linklater first thought of the idea for Slacker in the early ‘80s and played around with it for five years
before he felt it was the right time to make it. The content that would make up
the film came from “conversations, crazy ideas, and actual experiences” that
Linklater had, while also drawing inspiration from or adapting “bookish ideas
or pre-existing texts.” For years, he had written down “weird little ideas,”
and observations while also cutting out articles. At the time, he remembered
that there was “a loose film scene” in Austin with “a lot of people sitting
around wanting to make movies.” Linklater had managed to get 50 brand-new rolls
of 16mm film stock and enough money to get half of it processed. To cut costs,
he planned to hire a group of actors to work for one day. He ended up getting a
lot of actors from local bands because they usually only worked a couple of
nights a week or were unemployed.
Linklater raised the $23,000 budget with help from family,
friends, and credit cards. He sold things and got donations of all sorts, from
food to dolly tracks. Many of the people that appear in front of the camera
were his friends or crew members, but most came from cards that were given out
around town inviting people to be interviewed on video. “From there it was
matching people to parts they seemed to embody the essence of … These were not
only interesting, creative and courageous people, but also the ones serious
enough to approach the rehearsal and shooting process in a professional
manner,” Linklater said in a 1991 interview. After the cast had been selected,
he wrote the dialogue and then rewrote it with the actors. During the rehearsal
period, they made the material their own. Linklater spent years training as an
actor and was confident that he could create a productive atmosphere and was
amazed by the coming together of “witty and intelligent people” with a “common
purpose in a playful atmosphere.”
Principal photography began in July 1989 after month of
pre-production and casting. For daily costs, Linklater used a Shell card for
anything from Gatorade to gasoline, “including snacks, because we didn’t have
catering or meals – and signed it with a forged signature,” remembers the
film’s cinematographer Lee Daniel. By the fall of 1989, Linklater had a rough
cut that ran two hours and forty-five minutes. After he got the film down to a
105-minute running time, he was able to book two showings a day at the
now-defunct Dobie Theatre in 1990. On the first weekend, it sold out every
screening with large lines out front. Linklater and his crew had gone around
town putting up posters and handing out flyers and stickers. Slacker continued to sell out for
months, but it was rejected after being submitted to the Sundance Film
Festival. Then, every major and minor film festival in the United States and
Europe rejected it until finally it got accepted at the 1990 Seattle Film
Festival where it was a big hit.
After becoming a sensation on the film festival circuit,
Orion Classics blew up the original 16mm print to 35mm and began to distribute
it. Slacker was released officially
and nationally on July 5, 1991. Word of mouth, coupled with glowing reviews
resulted in Slacker being heralded –
along with Douglas Coupland’s book, Generation
X – as a manifesto for a generation. Roger
Ebert gave the film three out of four stars and wrote, “We are listening in on
a whole stratum of American life that never gets paid attention to in the
movies … In a sense, Linklater has invented his whole style in order to listen
to these people.” In his review for The
New York Times, Vincent Canby called the film, “a 14-course meal composed
entirely of desserts or, more accurately, a conventional film whose narrative
has been thrown out and replaced by enough bits of local color to stock five
years’ worth of ordinary movies.” Entertainment
Weekly gave the film an “A-“ rating and Owen Gleiberman wrote, “Slacker has a marvelously low-key
observational cool … the movie never loses its affectionate, shaggy-dog sense
of America as a place in which people, by now, have almost too much freedom on
their hands.” In his review for the Washington
Post, Hal Hinson called it, “a work of scatterbrained originality, funny,
unexpected and ceaselessly engaging.” The Austin
Chronicle’s Chris Walters wrote, “it is one of the first American movies
ever to find a form so apropos to the themes of disconnectedness and cultural
drift.” Finally, in his review for the Chicago
Reader, Jonathan Rosenbaum found the film to be “delightfully different and
immensely enjoyable.”
Slacker
became synonymous with Gen-X and vice versa with Linklater suddenly catapulted
into the position of spokesperson for a generation – something that he did not
feel comfortable with. Slacker also
paved the way for countless Hollywood clones like Reality Bites (1993), which tried in vain to capture the essence of
Gen-X, but came across more like an episode of the T.V. series, Friends. Slacker presented realistic settings with realistic people, warts
and all, while Reality Bites
introduced perfect looking people with perfect problems. Slacker inadvertently became one of the signature films for a
generation of disaffected young people who were over-educated and underemployed.
For better or for worse, the moniker “slacker” defined said generation.
For one summer, a college buddy and I were obsessed with Slacker and must’ve watched it countless
times. It was quite unlike anything we’d ever seen before and really felt like
not just a cinematic game changer, but a pop culture one as well. It was the
same summer that we got into Beck’s debut album, Mellow Gold and in its own way that felt like a game changer as
well, which is another reason why “Loser” and Slacker are linked together in my mind. For me, when I think of the
early ‘90s, I think of them and they really provide a snapshot for where my
head was at.
SOURCES
Dombal, Ryan. “Beck: 15 Years.” Pitchfork. August 17,
2011.
Linklater, Richard. “The Art of the Interview:
Self-Revelation or Self-Torture?” Austin Chronicle. September 20, 1991.
Linklater, Richard. “Q&A with Richard Linklater.” Slacker.
St. Martin’s Press. New York: 1992.
Lyons, Donald. Independent Visions. Ballantine. New
York: 1994.
Raftery, Brian. “Slacker:
15 Years Later.” Austin Chronicle. July 5, 2006.
No comments:
Post a Comment