Talk:Waking Life

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
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)

References to use

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



Macs?
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
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)

wp
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)

Glover Gill
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
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 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)

(Voice)?
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)

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)


 * 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)

Transcript?
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)
 * 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)
 * 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)

Scene with Steven Prince
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)

LOUIS Black vs. LEWIS Black
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)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Waking Life. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add 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).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:56, 28 February 2016 (UTC)