RICHARD LINKLATER

a very erratic filmmaker but always dear to my heart for A Scanner Darkly and Dazed and Confused

wow this is kinda tough.

guess I'll go with before sunset, edging out dazed.

He's only gotten erratic lately actually. This is tough. There are a lot of good movies on this list, but there isn't one that just pops out at me as okay that's the BEST.

Can safely eliminate FFN, WL, BNB though.

Slacker. or,

slacker

he achieved everything he couldve wanted to with dazed & confused & he'd probably admit as much under influence of truth serum

I wish they'd release subUrbia out on DVD.

i kinda wish he had ended up doing Friday Night Lights.

wow i really dont like most of his movies. never seen them all in a list together like that but ugh, just not for me.

ok with the exception of SubUrbia, which i have a bizarre soft spot for.

A few years ago I would have called him my favorite working director (because of Dazed and the Before movies, mostly), but I just don't have much interest in seeing whatever he comes out with now.

i wrote a chapter about him a few years ago and limited it to his original screenplays, which makes him seem a lot more coherent. (i included scanner darkly because he adapted it by himself and i think the finished thing feels very linklater-y in its methods and content.) anyway, i think dazed and confused really is his best. i really like the sunrise/sunset movies, and slacker and waking life have a bunch of great moments. scanner darkly is kind of a mess, but the woody harrelson/robert downey jr. scenes are good. woodshock is pretty entertaining, but it's impossible to learn to plow... is a great big student-film bore.

http://www.popmatters.com/images/film_art/s/slacker.jpg

dazed and confused, but i love sunrise/sunset.

Haven't seen some of the well-thought of ones here (Waking Life, Before Sunset) but look, barely anybody ELSE has ever made a movie as good as Dazed and Confused so I figure Linklater hasn't either.

i think the politics of dazed and confused get overlooked a little, it tends to get talked about like it's just a feel-good period piece. it's really about that moment, the total collapse of authority in america, the particular kind of freedom it promised, the reactionary pushback. all in 24 hours.

you just convinced me that I need to rewatch it.

it's also about that gto easing into the parking lot and "sweet emotion"...

Oh, and how many times the one kid touches his brow in the course of that one single scene.

dazed & confused, slacker, the before movies, all pretty much untouchable. school of rock quite good. scanner darkly major letdown and pretty lame. bad news bears and everything else pretty much whatever. but fast food nation i liked a lot.

Tape is as good as Waking Life is terrible.

I'm torn in great part between D&C and Waking Life and Slacker on historical grounds but actually my vote is going toward underdog School of Rock on behalf of the rare category of Favorite Movies My Son And I Share.

fast food nation i liked a lot.

it was better than i expected. the immigrant storyline was really good, i sort of wish the whole movie had been that. the anomic high school kids and morally conflicted corporate lackey seemed more pro forma.

fast food nation was prety weak, i thought the kinnear/willis part could have been the basis for a good comedy if fleshed out a lot. the ethan hawke part was one of the most embarassing things i've ever seen.

I really admire his erraticness. I'll go with Before Sunset

D&C, but a vote for anything but the Befores is OK with me. Even The Newton Boys.

Tape has Ethan Hawke's best performance. Voted for D&C over Before Sunrise.

i'm surely way out on my lonesome here, but I've never understood the hard-on people have for this dude. Slacker and D&C had a couple of chuckles in them, and he's uh, technically competent...
but really?

I really enjoyed Tape; would screen again.

And Slacker is just one of my favorite films ever, art's best defense of Texas -- but I D&C never clicked for me, at all.

How busy was he 2001-2006? Wow, didn't realise he was that productive then. Well, I did, but I've never looked at titles and dates and considered it before.

Arguably a little too busy.

D&C did click for me, in part, cuz apparently Texas was just like how I remember New Jersey being in 1976.

D&C is the only movie yet made that I can watch ad infinitum. Such a fun, easy-going flick.

Before Sunset, easily.

PARTY AT THE MOON TOWWER

Dazed and Confused is one of my favourite movies ever. So, um, yeah.

I haven't seen very many of his films. A Scanner Darkly was extraordinary, though.

I wish they'd release subUrbia out on DVD.

Oh yes. Warners were supposed to have it out last fall.

Linklater came down to Houston last year to introduce a screening of Minnelli's Some Came Running at the MFA. He did a Q & A about the film afterward. After that he signed some autographs and chatted with fans. Nice fellow. There was funny moment during Q & A when this one prick kept asking about A Scanner Darkly and his usage of Keanu Reeves. A real pain in the ass. Linklater finally told him that Keanu was a good guy and easy to work with.

Before Sunrise. Obv.

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Waking Life is a mess, but I love it.

D&C is very good, but I don't really love it.

Before Sunrise is his best and I like it a lot.

Voted Waking Life.

saw part of FFN today. BO RING.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Waking Life (2001) 4

!!!

nono

The School of Rock (2003) 4

!!!

The School of Rock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Waking Life

I want to like totally revolt in this poll thread omg

Worthiest winner ever.

most accurate poll results ever

Waking Life is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. (BOGUS is the worst.)

I liked glen powell as tilda Swinton

Tilda Swinton could totally play Glen Powell.

Josh O'Connell should play every Hot Guy imo

*O'Connor too!

My wife says Powell reminds her intensely of some other performer but she can't think who. I get that especially from his smirk, feels very familiar but can't place it.

It's that smirk I can't stand. Was his British guy specifically an Alan Cumming parody? I had just finished rewatching Battle of the Sexes so maybe the proximity gave me that impression.

He was, I should point out, pure scuzzy charm in Everybody Wants Some!!.

glen powell reminds me of george w bush somehow

about halfway through i thought he was drawing from the matthew mcconaughey well which would make sense given his similar texas/linklater background.

xps Aidan Gillen maybe?

i see it

His eyes seem too small for his face?

The little American Psycho impression was good, I assume all the characters were movie references but didn't catch them all.

Powell looks like a conventionally handsome person seen in a funhouse mirror, face stretched strangely long. I watched Hit Man last night and thought..."ehh, ok..."

A friend pointed out to me yesterday, when I told them that Glen Powell feels like a scam thought up by Hollywood bizzers who think millennials and Gen Z don’t understand sex appeal or get enough sex, that Powell is a psyop.

― the talented mr pimply (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, June 11, 2024 5:33 AM bookmarkflaglink

he actually had four eyes in this role, so uh no

― close encounters of the third knid (darraghmac), Tuesday, June 11, 2024 6:09 AM bookmarkflaglink

lmao

Was Maddy a real person or a composite? I ask because, though not nearly as egregious as American Graffiti's coda, I felt a twinge of unfairness in making Hit Man's coda entirely about Johnson. But if she's fictionalized, that's all you can really do.

That character and story was complete fiction. There was a woman he was sympathetic to who wanted her husband killed, but it's only a superficial resemblance. She went through with "the deal" at their one meeting even though she actually had no money, and when she was put on trial, Johnson testified for leniency, but the jury was unmoved and sentenced her to 80 years in prison. (And nothing remotely like a romance happened between two.)

I did not feel sickly or partic troubled, have rooted for far more morally compromised characters in the past. Did feel "none of this would go down like this in real life", but that's what I think every time I watch a romantic comedy?

As I mentioned before, what I found potent about this film is what it says about real life and the whole fictional romance is commenting on the real life elements that are shown in the other half of the film. It's not just about "hey none of this would happen in real life" because that becomes irrelevant if you're talking about a romantic comedy that's focused on creating a fantasy - that's to the case here. You can see it in Linklater's interviews where he's really focused on the implications of [real life] Gary's work and the people he meets, and that's what makes this movie for me.

There's arguably a whole other discussion about rooting for far more morally compromised characters, but that could take forever and put a long line of characters under a microscope. (It would probably even encompass what you mean by "rooting" - even that could be complicated, especially with a film like Psycho where Hitchcock actually examines the audience's allegiances in terms of who they're "rooting" for and how that can change.)

As for the characters Gary makes up, a lot of them aren't done with the greatest finesse, but much more important for me was what they were alluding to: movies. As I said, the film is a piece of film criticism, and those moments help establish what these people are buying into. It's done broadly, yes, but it's a salient point about how these dark fantasies about killing someone (in real life) are reflected in what people may see (or even want to see) in movies. It probably goes back to your original point about "rooting" for morally compromised people.

*that's not the case here

Thanks. So I can't complain--you can't really mix a fictional coda with a real one (fictional-fictional would be okay, which is why American Graffiti's is so jarring).

You're welcome. Also I should amend one point:

"a romantic comedy that's focused on creating a fantasy" should really be "a romantic comedy that's creating a fantasy for the sake of indulging in one."

Gary's work actually involves creating a fantasy. When you look at how some people here are responding to the film based on how they dislike Powell or how they feel about him, Gary's work is based on the same principle. The real life Gary didn't explicitly recall famous films or film roles when he prepared for a meeting, but it doesn't matter, it's still role playing that's conscious of how the potential client will respond to him. It's apiece with what movies generally do when they cast people and how actors may even think of their roles or their performances. Even if Gary doesn't seem to do much with his appearance (could be a case where it's last minute as he goes as is, which we do see in the film), he's still creating a role and self-consciously performing in how he carries himself and what he says. So it's pretty natural that Linklater and Powell would portray his work and its implications as being very reflective of movies itself.

*and he goes as is

Glenn Powell looks like a weird transporter accident between Trip and Malcolm from ST Enterprise. I dont find him all that attractive tbh. The big square military head with the weird small mouth.

im not at all sure this was clever or deep enough for all this analysis tbh- im not even sure its trying to be

its much more of a throwback to an 80s/90s movie than a multilayered take-bearing 2024 effort imo

All the details are there in the movie. If you ever listen or read to Linklater talk about his films, he puts a lot of thought into them, even in the commercial work.

the universe is in a grain of sand, im sure

but im so sure that barring some really light almost beulleresque intro voiceover this was pretty much as surface as it seems on first glance (and again not a criticism i think it aims for and hits that mark, in itself quite a distinct approach in 2024)

Well, here's a remark Linklater made at TIFF last year when he was promoting the film:

I was just at the Venice film and there were like three hitman movies there. I'm like, “I'm in a little category.” We're kind of deconstructing the hitman myth, but we're all pretty bought into it. I think films invented the hitman. It's a great character. It's a great idea. But the more interesting area for me that has developed over the years is, “Well, *why* are we invested in the hitman?” Is it because we like the idea that, you know, if someone screwed me over, “*I* don't want to kill anyone, I'm a pacifist, but you screw me over enough, I might just reach into my savings account and have you killed. You're only alive because I'm deciding not to do that.” Is it an empowering thing? I don't know, I'm just spitballing, but why are we invested in this notion?

And he just filmed a video clip for a Vanity Fair interview where he talks about getting the surveillance tapes during research:

The idea of "Hitman" as a movie originates in 2001 with a Skip Hollandsworth article in Texas Monthly. At that point, I've been friends with Skip for a number of years. Skip's brilliant. He's got this incredible nose for a true crime story. And Gary Johnson, in this case, the undercover hitman. He's just letting you kind of have your fantasy. He's your fantasy of what a hitman is, and he lets you play out. He's somehow able to persuade people who are rich and not so rich, successful and not so successful, that he's the real thing. He fools them every time. And by the time you're really sitting down with who you think is a hitman, you're ready to be fooled. You've already, in the movie we say crossed that psychotic Rubicon. You're ready to believe. And I've seen enough of these surveillance tapes and listened to enough audio. I got Skip's entire file. And writing the script, it was fascinating to go through all this material and see how people are almost playing like they're in a movie. I realized not everyone fantasized about the same hitman. Every sting operation was a performance.

Just watched this movie and I don't know what movie the critics (even Vern, the one critic I generally agree with) have been talking about, but it wasn't the one I saw. Powell is neither hot nor charming, the script is never great and completely falls apart in the final 1/4... this thing was awful in just about every way.

That character and story was complete fiction. There was a woman he was sympathetic to who wanted her husband killed, but it's only a superficial resemblance. She went through with "the deal" at their one meeting even though she actually had no money, and when she was put on trial, Johnson testified for leniency, but the jury was unmoved and sentenced her to 80 years in prison. (And nothing remotely like a romance happened between two.)

I just read the original Texas Monthly article, which ends this way:

But not long ago Johnson did something out of character for him. He got a call about a young woman who had been spending mornings at a Starbucks in Houston’s Montrose area, talking to an employee there about the cruel way her boyfriend had been treating her. There was no way to escape him, she said. Her only hope was to find someone to kill him. She asked the Starbucks employee if he knew someone who could help. The employee called the police, who put him in touch with Johnson.

But before Johnson contacted her, he did some research into her case. He learned that she really was the victim of abuse, regularly battered by her boyfriend, too terrified to leave him because of her fear of what he might do if he found her.

Instead of setting up a sting to catch the woman and send her off to jail, he decided to help her. He referred her to social service agencies and a therapist to make sure she got proper help so she could leave her boyfriend and get into a women’s shelter.

“The greatest hit man in Houston has just turned soft,” I tell Johnson at the Mexican restaurant.

“Just this once,” he says, giving me his same enigmatic smile. Then his eyes glance around one more time at the room, at various people picking up forks and knives and stabbing at their food. “Just this once,” he says again.

That's it. So Madison is clearly based on that woman, and the movie is imagining what if their encounter had been a meet-cute.

YES, forgot the end of that article. It's probably too late to know unless Gary told Skip before he died, but I wonder if his experience with the other woman influenced how he handled the second since the first one went to prison.

(i.e. DON'T meet up for a sting)

I'm kinda with darra but otoh I find birdistheword's interpretations interesting and will try to keep them in mind when rewatching

yeah i should note im all for delving tbf

liked this a good deal, coen comparisons are otm, tho i don’t think they would’ve been so kind to their characters

No worries - to be clear, I understand if you don't like the film, that's totally fine. All I'm saying is, don't sell Linklater short, he's a very thoughtful filmmaker and as relaxed as his films can be, he puts a lot in them. It's even fine if you don't like the ideas - if I wanted to play devil's advocate, I could argue there's nothing here that hasn't been explored already by filmmakers like Godard (and as much as I like Linklater, there are very few directors who are as inventive and impressive as Godard in the way they use film language). And I know Linklater's films are famously filled with talk (he's great at it), but he's still a filmmaker at heart and doesn't spell out all his ideas in dialogue or narration. (And I do see that happen with a lot of poor and mediocre films and television shows.) Good films usually dramatize the bulk of their ideas or put them over in some cinematic way, or at least develop them that way which is great because it tends to open them up a bit. If you spell everything out in words, it turns into an essay, which may be what you want, but probably not in a narrative film.

As I said, I liked it okay, but I'm basically where darraghmac is: "its much more of a throwback to an 80s/90s movie." This, Drive-Away Dolls, and at least a couple of other recent films strike me very much as variations on the Tarantino kind of film that took over American independents for a while. Which seems kind of weird...if the new ones are supposed to be deconstructions of the old ones, that's not the most interesting thing in the world to me that the guy who made Boyhood could be doing.

But, I know, the realities of making film in 2024; he does what he has to do.

on that note, look for his adaptation of Merrily We Roll Along in....the summer of 2039, give or take a few years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrily_We_Roll_Along_(film)

No worries - to be clear, I understand if you don't like the film, that's totally fine. All I'm saying is, don't sell Linklater short,

woah, hang on now- delving (beyond what is possibly there) is fine, but i gotta stop you right here and note that this isnt what ive said nor what i think too many others have said at all, tbh its a bald misrepresentation imo

what ive said and clemenza puts well above is that if you see all that you are seeing, then great, thats part of the fun of discussing anything i guess, but im not seeing it and ive been pretty explicit about not selling the director short at all.

i dont think i missed anything and i dont think ive misread the tone of the movie at all tbh

its a nifty little romcom with a knowing edge and a good hook, overrated for certain and probably overanalysed for what it actually says and does but i think its doing exactly what its trying to do and thats fine with me.

i rather feel as is you are insisting a bit now, which is where ill dig my heels in (which is fine these are grand things to argue over)

has anyone been more interested in how obvious a femme fatale our leading lady character is, i havent read the thread but that was the most interesting thing for me- shes out to use our hitman from minute one and failing in love with him is a mere by-product

its played about as deeply as a chevy chase comedy from 1990 but it is interesting to see it written and put out there today and im surprised it hasnt gotten more attn tbh

>> has anyone been more interested in how obvious a femme fatale our leading lady character is, i havent read the thread but that was the most interesting thing for me- shes out to use our hitman from minute one and failing in love with him is a mere by-product

I was definitely waiting for her to turn on him, which was what made HIS heel turn so dramatically unsatisfying (that and the fact that he utterly failed to sell it).

All the attention this is getting makes me really not want to see it

helpful contribution!

If I wanted to over analyze this I would focus on the contrast of the conversation he has with his ex vs his vibe with the femme fatale. I don’t really feel like it though

has anyone been more interested in how obvious a femme fatale our leading lady character is, i havent read the thread but that was the most interesting thing for me- shes out to use our hitman from minute one and failing in love with him is a mere by-product

He's actually talked about this when interviewers brought up genre - this was one of his responses:

"I started to sense the genre I was operating in, kind of a film noir...then we made the big decision, 'Okay, she's not a black widow, we've seen that in all these other movies. What if they're really meant for each other?' I thought it was kind of a great love story...So then it's a screwball comedy."

it swoops in and out for sure

but again- id agree that its never unknowingly

Yeah, tbc if I think it's a more straightforward piece of work than what birdistheword believes it's not because I think Linklater is incapable of anything more sophisticated - if anything I'd rate the capacity to say "ok now I'm just doing a romantic comedy and it will have little bits to glom onto but not to the extent that it overshadows its value as an entertainment" as a sign of intelligence.

exactly imo

All the attention this is getting makes me really not want to see it

fuck on, sweet Ringo!

My wife says Powell reminds her intensely of some other performer but she can't think who. I get that especially from his smirk, feels very familiar but can't place it.

Screening The Mule rn, and I think the answer to this is "Less-Smug Bradley Cooper."

I will rep for finding Powell attractive!
-normcore attractive- is my qualifier though

He’s excellent in Everybody Wants Some and i dind his naturalistic affability, esp in Hit Man, to be a throwback to 70’s leading men who sell you on their attractiveness with their charm. i can’t think who, just more a general handwavey sentiment

anyway i enjoyed this! nice to have a popcorn movie with a bit of meat on the bone. i dug the rom-com surface layer with the chewy film noir centre… she’s a great pseudo-femme fatale

i had no problem with the ending, not all noirs are about getting caught. sometimes you get away with it!

Screening The Mule rn, and I think the answer to this is "Less-Smug Bradley Cooper."

Powell could have done the Leigh Whannell role, I guess.

https://mediacdn.aent-m.com/prod-img/500/18/3262918-3000408.jpg

bill pullman or young jeff bridges maybe

can’t see Bridges managing the accent