MovieChat Forums > SlackerĀ (1990) Discussion > Not a Masterpiece, But a Noble Attempt t...

Not a Masterpiece, But a Noble Attempt to Create One

If this film had been shot with a $100,000 or more budget, I'd call it a nobly-intentioned artistic failure.

With only a $20,000 budget, though, and being only Linklater's second feature-length effort, I'll just say "semi-failure." I think I have a pretty good sense of what he was trying to accomplish in making this film, and I definitely don't think he succeeded completely, but I do think his intentions were partially fulfilled.

"Waking Life" is a stone-cold masterpiece, but besides a few obvious surface similarities, just under the surface this is a very different movie, and resembles "Waking Life" only in that with a little more time, effort, serious thought about how to accomplish his goals, and of course a bigger budget, "Slacker" could have been a masterpiece.

6 out of 10. On the Petronius Scale, 5 and 6 stand for "worth seeing at least once," with 6 being the better half of that group.

"I don't deduce, I observe."


What do you think his intentions were with Slacker?

Howard Hughes was Italian?


I think 'Slacker' absolutely stomps 'Waking Life'---its earthier, grittier setting, and no matter how out there the ideas become, they're still always anchored in something. 'Waking Life' is Rick's worst film, the only time he goes utterly pretentious and trivial. But long live 'Slacker!'


I second this reply.

Waking Life is for pseudo-intellect snobs. There's no denying the awesome blend of humor, life, realism and philosophic topics all explored within Slacker.