量子
缺集或无法播，更换其他线路.剧照
剧情介绍
半梦半醒的人生电影免费高清在线观看全集。
青年学生维利•维金斯（Wiley Wiggins 饰）童年时曾从小伙伴那里得到这样一个预言：“梦即命运”。长大后，他在恍恍惚惚间来到了一座陌生的城市。维利走街串巷，经历各种各样的神奇体验，仿佛穿梭于不同的梦中。在此期间，他还遇到了各色人等：从开着船形汽车的司机到大学教授，从性感的金发美女到癫狂的眼睛男，从引火自焚的金发男子再到留着雷鬼头的四人团体……每个人都喋喋不休，谈论着人生、理想和哲学。而维利不发一言，俨然一个极具耐心的聆听者。
本片由导演兼编剧理查德•林克莱特（Richard Linklater）采用DV真人拍摄，并用软件将其“动画化”。导演史蒂文•索德伯格（Steven Soderbergh）亦在片中出现。
长篇影评
1 ) 庄周梦蝶，抑或蝶梦庄周
摇晃的城市，虚浮的建筑，或明或暗的灯光，漂浮的桌子，抽象化的人物，带着魔幻色彩与不真实感，构成了半梦半醒的人生。
想要传达的主题大概是人生如一梦，人生便是由迷离的梦与清醒构成的，人行于世，相逢即是有缘，我们的主角没有姓名，姓名又有何用，的确，在浮生一梦的状态下，姓名只是一个代号，而真正有意义的是人本身，我们跟着主角走过一个又一个真实或虚幻的场景，不断的做梦，清醒，做梦复又清醒，陷入奇妙的循环。
形式是表达思想的一种手段，动画化的人物，粗犷的线条，不加细修，大块粗糙的色彩，不甚精细的细节，与日常稳固相反的摇晃，不完美的效果反而是这部电影的完美，也是魅力所在。
跟着主角踏上梦的旅程，遇到奇怪的人和事，然后由梦中的危险情景一下子醒来，采取的是典型的由梦中清醒的模式。清醒片刻，不知何时就又进入一个又一个的梦境，梦境中出现最多的场景是与人交谈，交谈对象是哲学家，历史学家，人类学家，而这些人讲述的道理能够听懂却理解不了，让人云里雾里的。或者是非主角的两个人在谈话，设计的大多是人生、生命之类的大问题。一度以为是现实的时候，主角又从梦中清醒。
电影的后半部分与心理学家关于梦的解析有异曲同工之妙：梦与死亡的密切关系，梦境中的情境与现实生活中发生的尤其相似，梦境的联结等都让人思考。
让我冷汗涔涔的是关于解释如何从梦中清醒的那一部分，主角与人会面，谈到梦境中的开关是不起作用的，主角临走前，随手动了一下门边的开关，明亮的灯光不变，证实这是一个梦境。梦中有梦，无穷无尽，让我想到盗梦空间。
梦境曲折离奇，或关于自己，或关于他人，梦的频繁出现让人难以区分梦境与现实，如庄周梦蝶，不知是庄周在蝶的梦中，还是蝶在庄周的梦中。
人生如梦，太过匆匆，你我皆过客，若庄周，若蝶。
2 ) 剧本结构的一点脑洞
电影很有趣
关于社会的人类的人性的哲学思考的语言流尽管内容平庸，和男主身处其中的梦一样有水的流动质感。
我想这个电影并不是想借以梦的形式传达严肃的哲学思考，反而是脱出理性思辨的限制后，语言的无意识特性，片中大段大段对话语法正确，风格流畅，但是细纠就会发现其实这些话架空于事实和逻辑上，语言的内容与正在发生的事情之间产生互文，互为所指，就像两滴颜料融合在水中。
关于这一点，最明显的是男主在电影院看电影的一段。电影的内容是两个人在讨论电影，电影的神圣性瞬间，有点像两个说相声的人，一个逗哏一个捧哏，逗哏的人不断将对话引向电影的叙事性，瞬间的神圣，而在他的语言之下，两个人所构成的电影画面正好成为非常恰当的说明，最后两个人在镜头前表演了这一神圣瞬间，语言与画面融合为一。
通篇男主遇到的所有人，听到和说出的所有语言，发生的所有事件都具有梦的这一不受理性控制的现实结构之下的超现实性，在每一个微妙不引起注意的地方形成断裂和超越的逻辑结构。
由此产生的梦境内容虚假与现实性的交互其实也可以类推到电影剧本写作中，即情节超越于故事框架而与写作行为或者拍摄的创作行为本身发生关系。
关于社会的人类的人性的哲学思考的语言流尽管内容平庸，和男主身处其中的梦一样有水的流动质感。
我想这个电影并不是想借以梦的形式传达严肃的哲学思考，反而是脱出理性思辨的限制后，语言的无意识特性，片中大段大段对话语法正确，风格流畅，但是细纠就会发现其实这些话架空于事实和逻辑上，语言的内容与正在发生的事情之间产生互文，互为所指，就像两滴颜料融合在水中。
关于这一点，最明显的是男主在电影院看电影的一段。电影的内容是两个人在讨论电影，电影的神圣性瞬间，有点像两个说相声的人，一个逗哏一个捧哏，逗哏的人不断将对话引向电影的叙事性，瞬间的神圣，而在他的语言之下，两个人所构成的电影画面正好成为非常恰当的说明，最后两个人在镜头前表演了这一神圣瞬间，语言与画面融合为一。
通篇男主遇到的所有人，听到和说出的所有语言，发生的所有事件都具有梦的这一不受理性控制的现实结构之下的超现实性，在每一个微妙不引起注意的地方形成断裂和超越的逻辑结构。
由此产生的梦境内容虚假与现实性的交互其实也可以类推到电影剧本写作中，即情节超越于故事框架而与写作行为或者拍摄的创作行为本身发生关系。
3 ) 梦者（dreamer）
回溯人类历史，
我们只重于人类的进化和它与环境的相互作用。
生物的进化伴随着人类的进化，
从原始人到现代人类的进化，
尼安德特人、克鲁马努人。
现在，有趣的是，你在这里所看到的有三个主干：
生物学，人类学，文明的发展，
和作为文化的人类表达。
这时你所看到的是种群的进化，而非个体的进化。
另外，如果你看看相关的时间表。
生命有二十亿年的历史，
原始人类有六千万年历史，
我们所了解的现代人类有十万年历史，
你就会慢慢了解到浓缩了的人类进化模式的本质。
然后当我们说到农业，科学，工业革命，
也只是一万年，四百年和一百五十年的历史。
你会看到更加浓缩了的进化过程。
于是我们进入了一个新的进化历程。
这个过程会浓缩到我们都能发觉它的存在的程度，
在我们一生之内，在我们这一代之内。
新的进化起源于两种信息：
数码与拟仿，
数码就是人工智能，
而由分子生物学和生物克隆技术产生了拟仿技术，
而神经生物学把二者紧密结合。
在旧的进化模式面前，
物竞天择，适者生存。
而在新的进化模式下，
他们会作为互助的非竞争性群体自主于外界而独立存在。
有趣的是，进化现在变成以个体自主的过程
发自作为自主的个体，而不是被动的被集体臆想支配下的个体。
因此作为新的个性和新的理念的新人类出世了。
但这只是新的进化循环的开始。
因为在下个循环进行时
输入了新智慧。
智慧不断积累，能力不断积累，
速度就会改变，直到某种意义上的高潮。
可以把它想象为人的瞬间巨大的满足感，
想象为新人类的潜能瞬间大量的释放。
那可能是个体的扩张，个体的繁殖，
和个体共生，不再有时间空间的限制。
而这些新人类进化的展现，将戏剧性的大出所望。
旧的进化已经冷却，贫瘠，但还有效。
它表现在社会对其的适应性上。
当你说到寄生，统治，道德，战争，掠夺。
这些会成为次要，
这些将会退化。
新的进化模式给予我们新的特微
真理，忠诚，正义和自由的人类特征
这些将成为这次进化所表现的，
那将是我们最期待的。
To look at human development
Look at the organism’s evolution……and his environmental interaction.
Evolution of the organism begins with evolution through the hominid…
…coming to the evolution of man.
Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon.
Now, what you’re looking at here are three strings:
Biological, anthropological, development of cultures…
…and cultural, which is human expression.
What you’ve seen is the evolution of populations, not individuals.
Then look at the time scale involved.
Two billion years for life, six million for hominid…
…100,000 years for mankind as we know it.
You see how the evolutionary paradigm telescopes.
Then when you get to agriculture, scientific and industrial revolution…
…you’re looking at 10,000 years, 400 years, 150 years.
You see a further telescoping of evolutionary time.
As we go through the new evolution…
…it will telescope to the point where we see it within our lifetime.
The new evolution stems from two types of information:
Digital and analog.
Digital is artificial intelligence.
Analog results from molecular biology and cloning.
You knit the two with neurobiology.
Under the old paradigm, one would die, the other would dominate.
Under the new paradigm, they exist as a supportive…
…non-competitive grouping, independent from the external.
So evolution now becomes an individually centered process…
…emanating from the individual…
…not a passive process with the individual at the collective’s whim.
So you produce a neo-human…
…with a new individuality, a new consciousness.
That’s only the beginning of the cycle.
As it proceeds, the input is this new intelligence.
As intelligence piles on intelligence, ability on ability…
…the speed changes until you reach a crescendo.
Imagine it as an instant fulfillment of human and neo-human potential.
It could be the amplification of the individual…
…the multiplication of individual, parallel existences…
…with the individual no longer restricted by time and space.
And the manifestations of this neo-human evolution…
…could be dramatically counterintuitive.
The old evolution is cold, it’s sterile. It’s efficient.
Its manifestations are those of social adaption.
You’re talking about parasitism, dominance, morality…
…war, predation.
These will be subject to de-emphasis and de-evolution.
The new paradigm would give us the traits…
…of truth, loyalty, justice and freedom.
These would be manifestations of this evolution. That’s what we hope.
新的进化，强调共生，不否定现状。对于腐败政治，道德，战争，丰功伟绩，城市规划等等都没有敌意。革命，颠覆，解放，改朝换代这些词汇将不再是于新的进化历程中的座右铭。旧的进化继续存在，就像农田继续存在，工厂继续存在一样。新的世界是新的进化和旧的进化的非敌对竞争性的共生，互补建构新的秩序，共同重组为明天新的系统。
随着数字技术和拟像技术进步，以及神经学的后天完善，产生了诸如电影，电子游戏，网络，google，虚拟现实，AI的普及，使得新人类的生存空间可以独立于原有的现实空间（城市的，农业的）之外而存在，而且更加丰富精彩。这是无数个无边无际空间，就像实数轴线外面无数的虚数的存在一样。在新的世界里，我们可以瞬间经历一切原有世界几代人积累下来的文化情感，可以即刻感触几千年人类旧文明的历史风骨，可以迅速认知旧进化历程里的每一种知识经验。同样，可以在同一时刻“身首异处”，身体赞存某地，而大脑和意识可以各个世界空间里各个角落自由驰骋。一切来得如此轻而易举，一切也就变得如此无足轻重。
并且，这个生存空间是完完全全属于个人属性的，个人的体验，个人的认知。每一个存在的人，既是终端，又是主角；既是那里的奴隶，又是那里的神。那里不是虚幻的，而是真实存在的。因为我们在那里感动着，兴奋着，满足着，想象着，创造着。因此，我们存在着。同时，新的空间是自由的，无生死的，传统意义上的经验时间在这里失效。黄粱一梦，不，是无数个不同时代（唐朝，清朝，中世纪，纽约，极乐净土等等，单选的或者多选的），不同地域（玛雅，巴黎，长安，淮海路，木卫二等等，单选的或者多选的），不同风格（歌特的，朋克的，洛可可的，工业的，禅的，单选的或者多选的）的黄粱梦，没有高潮，没有剧终。
“拟仿”是这个进化初期的主要表现形式，虚拟现实，重现。但是，通过对旧文明的选取，剪辑，重组，再现，呈现给我们的将是新的世界景观。而且，最重要的是作为个人而存在的新的个体将是新世界的新生物。
如何作一个“新人类”？
首先，让我们记住一个乐队的名字：joy division。享受分裂。如同新的进化和旧的进化共生共栖一样，我们必须学会将自身的多重人格共时分裂，并且享受这一分裂的过程。现实世界，为了维系我们的肉身，必须尊重现实旧秩序下的生存之道。找一份简单的工作，养活自己，找一个贤惠的妻子，繁衍后代。孝敬老人，依法纳税，不闯红灯，不随地吐痰… …当我们进入新的世界里面，我们的元神出壳，内心的多重人格开始显现，随心所欲。你可以是一个怨天尤人的老者，可以是一个天真无猜的童子，可以是思维缜密的统帅，可以是个欲求不满的荡妇；可以是希特勒，可以是甘地，可以是孙悟空，可以是鱼玄机，单选的或者多选的。不会有人来限制你的演出，不会有谁来戳穿你的骗局，只要你演的出色，只要你编的过瘾。你得到了释放，得到了满足。这个世界没有维系旧进化的伦理道德的。尽情的分裂，尽情的享受分裂所带来的快感吧。
其次，再让我们记住一部小说的名字，Neoromancer（神经漫游者），在新的世界里，我们的主要活动就是“漫游”，没有目的，没有理想，没有奋斗，没有鞠躬尽瘁，死而后已。我们的生存空间已经足够复杂庞大。我们生活在一个“后”的时代。无为而为。逍遥漫游。足以。不要担心迷失，分裂是为了更整体的实现自我。因为你得到了自由，你将会感到更加的孤独。同时，你将有机会去深深的思考到作为存在的本质。
化作一个蝴蝶，在这里采摘你的五彩花朵吧。
（写于05年10月20日）
我们只重于人类的进化和它与环境的相互作用。
生物的进化伴随着人类的进化，
从原始人到现代人类的进化，
尼安德特人、克鲁马努人。
现在，有趣的是，你在这里所看到的有三个主干：
生物学，人类学，文明的发展，
和作为文化的人类表达。
这时你所看到的是种群的进化，而非个体的进化。
另外，如果你看看相关的时间表。
生命有二十亿年的历史，
原始人类有六千万年历史，
我们所了解的现代人类有十万年历史，
你就会慢慢了解到浓缩了的人类进化模式的本质。
然后当我们说到农业，科学，工业革命，
也只是一万年，四百年和一百五十年的历史。
你会看到更加浓缩了的进化过程。
于是我们进入了一个新的进化历程。
这个过程会浓缩到我们都能发觉它的存在的程度，
在我们一生之内，在我们这一代之内。
新的进化起源于两种信息：
数码与拟仿，
数码就是人工智能，
而由分子生物学和生物克隆技术产生了拟仿技术，
而神经生物学把二者紧密结合。
在旧的进化模式面前，
物竞天择，适者生存。
而在新的进化模式下，
他们会作为互助的非竞争性群体自主于外界而独立存在。
有趣的是，进化现在变成以个体自主的过程
发自作为自主的个体，而不是被动的被集体臆想支配下的个体。
因此作为新的个性和新的理念的新人类出世了。
但这只是新的进化循环的开始。
因为在下个循环进行时
输入了新智慧。
智慧不断积累，能力不断积累，
速度就会改变，直到某种意义上的高潮。
可以把它想象为人的瞬间巨大的满足感，
想象为新人类的潜能瞬间大量的释放。
那可能是个体的扩张，个体的繁殖，
和个体共生，不再有时间空间的限制。
而这些新人类进化的展现，将戏剧性的大出所望。
旧的进化已经冷却，贫瘠，但还有效。
它表现在社会对其的适应性上。
当你说到寄生，统治，道德，战争，掠夺。
这些会成为次要，
这些将会退化。
新的进化模式给予我们新的特微
真理，忠诚，正义和自由的人类特征
这些将成为这次进化所表现的，
那将是我们最期待的。
To look at human development
Look at the organism’s evolution……and his environmental interaction.
Evolution of the organism begins with evolution through the hominid…
…coming to the evolution of man.
Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon.
Now, what you’re looking at here are three strings:
Biological, anthropological, development of cultures…
…and cultural, which is human expression.
What you’ve seen is the evolution of populations, not individuals.
Then look at the time scale involved.
Two billion years for life, six million for hominid…
…100,000 years for mankind as we know it.
You see how the evolutionary paradigm telescopes.
Then when you get to agriculture, scientific and industrial revolution…
…you’re looking at 10,000 years, 400 years, 150 years.
You see a further telescoping of evolutionary time.
As we go through the new evolution…
…it will telescope to the point where we see it within our lifetime.
The new evolution stems from two types of information:
Digital and analog.
Digital is artificial intelligence.
Analog results from molecular biology and cloning.
You knit the two with neurobiology.
Under the old paradigm, one would die, the other would dominate.
Under the new paradigm, they exist as a supportive…
…non-competitive grouping, independent from the external.
So evolution now becomes an individually centered process…
…emanating from the individual…
…not a passive process with the individual at the collective’s whim.
So you produce a neo-human…
…with a new individuality, a new consciousness.
That’s only the beginning of the cycle.
As it proceeds, the input is this new intelligence.
As intelligence piles on intelligence, ability on ability…
…the speed changes until you reach a crescendo.
Imagine it as an instant fulfillment of human and neo-human potential.
It could be the amplification of the individual…
…the multiplication of individual, parallel existences…
…with the individual no longer restricted by time and space.
And the manifestations of this neo-human evolution…
…could be dramatically counterintuitive.
The old evolution is cold, it’s sterile. It’s efficient.
Its manifestations are those of social adaption.
You’re talking about parasitism, dominance, morality…
…war, predation.
These will be subject to de-emphasis and de-evolution.
The new paradigm would give us the traits…
…of truth, loyalty, justice and freedom.
These would be manifestations of this evolution. That’s what we hope.
新的进化，强调共生，不否定现状。对于腐败政治，道德，战争，丰功伟绩，城市规划等等都没有敌意。革命，颠覆，解放，改朝换代这些词汇将不再是于新的进化历程中的座右铭。旧的进化继续存在，就像农田继续存在，工厂继续存在一样。新的世界是新的进化和旧的进化的非敌对竞争性的共生，互补建构新的秩序，共同重组为明天新的系统。
随着数字技术和拟像技术进步，以及神经学的后天完善，产生了诸如电影，电子游戏，网络，google，虚拟现实，AI的普及，使得新人类的生存空间可以独立于原有的现实空间（城市的，农业的）之外而存在，而且更加丰富精彩。这是无数个无边无际空间，就像实数轴线外面无数的虚数的存在一样。在新的世界里，我们可以瞬间经历一切原有世界几代人积累下来的文化情感，可以即刻感触几千年人类旧文明的历史风骨，可以迅速认知旧进化历程里的每一种知识经验。同样，可以在同一时刻“身首异处”，身体赞存某地，而大脑和意识可以各个世界空间里各个角落自由驰骋。一切来得如此轻而易举，一切也就变得如此无足轻重。
并且，这个生存空间是完完全全属于个人属性的，个人的体验，个人的认知。每一个存在的人，既是终端，又是主角；既是那里的奴隶，又是那里的神。那里不是虚幻的，而是真实存在的。因为我们在那里感动着，兴奋着，满足着，想象着，创造着。因此，我们存在着。同时，新的空间是自由的，无生死的，传统意义上的经验时间在这里失效。黄粱一梦，不，是无数个不同时代（唐朝，清朝，中世纪，纽约，极乐净土等等，单选的或者多选的），不同地域（玛雅，巴黎，长安，淮海路，木卫二等等，单选的或者多选的），不同风格（歌特的，朋克的，洛可可的，工业的，禅的，单选的或者多选的）的黄粱梦，没有高潮，没有剧终。
“拟仿”是这个进化初期的主要表现形式，虚拟现实，重现。但是，通过对旧文明的选取，剪辑，重组，再现，呈现给我们的将是新的世界景观。而且，最重要的是作为个人而存在的新的个体将是新世界的新生物。
如何作一个“新人类”？
首先，让我们记住一个乐队的名字：joy division。享受分裂。如同新的进化和旧的进化共生共栖一样，我们必须学会将自身的多重人格共时分裂，并且享受这一分裂的过程。现实世界，为了维系我们的肉身，必须尊重现实旧秩序下的生存之道。找一份简单的工作，养活自己，找一个贤惠的妻子，繁衍后代。孝敬老人，依法纳税，不闯红灯，不随地吐痰… …当我们进入新的世界里面，我们的元神出壳，内心的多重人格开始显现，随心所欲。你可以是一个怨天尤人的老者，可以是一个天真无猜的童子，可以是思维缜密的统帅，可以是个欲求不满的荡妇；可以是希特勒，可以是甘地，可以是孙悟空，可以是鱼玄机，单选的或者多选的。不会有人来限制你的演出，不会有谁来戳穿你的骗局，只要你演的出色，只要你编的过瘾。你得到了释放，得到了满足。这个世界没有维系旧进化的伦理道德的。尽情的分裂，尽情的享受分裂所带来的快感吧。
其次，再让我们记住一部小说的名字，Neoromancer（神经漫游者），在新的世界里，我们的主要活动就是“漫游”，没有目的，没有理想，没有奋斗，没有鞠躬尽瘁，死而后已。我们的生存空间已经足够复杂庞大。我们生活在一个“后”的时代。无为而为。逍遥漫游。足以。不要担心迷失，分裂是为了更整体的实现自我。因为你得到了自由，你将会感到更加的孤独。同时，你将有机会去深深的思考到作为存在的本质。
化作一个蝴蝶，在这里采摘你的五彩花朵吧。
（写于05年10月20日）
4 ) 转我朋友写的“《半梦半醒的人生》的29段谈话与自白”
《半梦半醒的人生》的29段谈话与自白 by idletalk
《半梦半醒的人生》Waking Life——这是一部2001年拍摄的动画片。导演兼编剧理查德林克莱特用DV在奥斯汀拍摄了这部影片，然后使用“interpolated翻拍”程序将图像转换，使得实景增加了程序化的外观看上去象是动画片。就是这样一部看起来不像是动画片的动画片，在当年也没引起什么反响；我却反复看5遍，因为在我看来这可能是21世纪前期最为伟大的影片。
影片的故事非常的简单，主人公一个大学生，他来到了一个超现实的幻境中。他身处的这座城市好象是奥斯汀，但日常生活的规律和秩序似乎完全被打破了。
他从一个地方游荡到另一个地方，不断遇到稀奇古怪的人。最有意思的是他遇见的这些人都在谈论一些宏大高深的话题：从量子论到语言的起源，从存在主义到人的转世再生，从自由意志的荒谬到电影作为一种叙事工具，他陷入一场接着一场的对话中。
他极力想知道自己究竟处在梦境中，还是处于清醒中。但最终他只是发现自己不断苏醒，又不断重新坠入梦境中。他无法摆脱这接二连三地涌现的梦，开始逐渐理解梦的含义，并试着控制梦和周围的环境，分辨苏醒的人生与梦中人生的区别……
大量对话也正是林克莱特作品的一个标志性元素。不同于伍迪艾伦纽约知识分子神经质式的喋喋不休，也不同于埃里克侯麦法国中产阶级长篇大论的交谈，林克莱特呈现的是美国年轻人鲜活而具有时代特色的语言。而且他的不少影片还不是几个人的谈话，而是规模庞大。不过相对于过去的作品，此片中的对话要显得“知识分子气”浓重得多，那些晦涩抽象的哲学命题对观众可绝对是个考验。
在这些繁杂的谈话中我把它切割成了29个片段，并努力以自己的理解诠释其内容。虽然它的丰富我只看到了一角。但时间会证明它的伟大值得我去这样做。
1、船型车司机———任何的事物你都可以不赞同，但重要的是他存在的事实。随大流是大多数人的共性，可最终你会发现你必须去找到自己的非共性所在。
2、大学教授————排除集体共性的过程中，并不一定能找到自我的个性，问题的重点乃在于思考的过程。
3、金发女子————语言所具有的不可沟通性，言语在每个人的心中有着不同的深层含义，也即联系物和凭借物的不同导致人类即使使用的是同一种语言，也存在永远无法沟通的盲点。
4、黑白发男子————望远镜似的人类进化过程（物质——精神）。不同智慧间质与量的转化（毁灭——重生）
5、自焚的男子————人类自毁性与人类社会自毁性存在着共通点。（个人的自杀、病痛和人类社会的战争、自然灾害）。媒体对社会丑恶面的频繁揭露，并无法消灭它，只能迫使人们对其麻木并接受。
6、交欢中的男女————人类记忆与经验在一代一代的遗传着。途径并非来自言语和书籍，而是DNA中的深层存在。
7、监狱中的男子————用复仇的幻想来填补时间。（许许多多的人都在用欲望实践的梦想来填补日常生活的时间）
8、戴眼镜的中年男子————人类的自由很大程度建立在物理规则上。但同时又存在一些不规则的元素来动摇原始的物理规则。可恰恰在某种意义上，不规则的元素也可能是物理规则中的一环。（上帝的决定——人类的自由意志——其中的界限）问题在于外延与内延的边界在哪？
9、宣传车上的男子————突破即定的规则，世界便是即定规则的框架，政治则是即定规则的核心动力。革命的问题不在于是否毁灭，而在于毁灭之后建立什么？
10、戴眼镜的老者————如若中心为“无”，既是空。对任何一个存在说是，既是对所有的存在说是。
11、黑人男子————现有的分类是对知识最大的束缚。我们必须将其解脱重整，使之聚合。在知识的共同领域寻求新知。
12、咖啡厅里的两位女子————人体的细胞在七年的过程里会全部更新。新我的产生，迫使我们肯定不同于旧我，但在认知上我们还是保持着自己与旧我的认同。问题在于延续性。人不可能缺乏延续性的不断的与自我重新认同。
13、播电影的猴子————人在困苦中可以获得的唯一有益知识是：任何事情都有可能发生，有困苦也必有欢乐。
14、白发老者————人类的痛苦有两种，或物质过于缺乏，或物质过于丰富。但在精神层面，人类却一直没有进步，问题在于人类的特性：恐惧和懒惰。
15、写作的男子————伟大的小说不在于其的故事，或者表现形式，而在于人、思想、时间。
16、留大胡子的胖子————梦境与现实，虚幻或真实之间的转化，有时非常简单。特别是当表现物为暴力时，
17、长发男子————梦是自我认同的一种过程，在一定意义上，它与现实没有根本区别。
18、弹琴的男子————梦的意义在于超越自我的存在形式。你可以是任何的一种存在形式，不一定是人类，甚至不一定是物体。
19、穿皮衣的长发男子————有些人醒着也在做梦，因为他们没有梦的意识，他们并不想在梦中得到思想的解放，他们的梦是现实的延续，也就是说是对物质渴望的梦想。
20、卷发男子————沉默……沉默……在这出看来喋喋不休的电影中此时出现了一个沉默看着你的男子。这种手法让我想起国画里的“留白”。人生是需要静默的，那时便是反观自身的时刻。
21、留着“雷鬼”头的四人帮————行动在很多时候只是理念自然而然的放映，但并不能因此就界定它具有明确的目的性。
22、背着背包的男子————梦在于自我感性的存在，寻找一切新的可能性。像旅行一般，向往所有的未知。
23、白衣男子————太阳底下无新事？不。梦具有发掘“新事”的可能性。
24、红发女子————交谈在很多时候只是人类远离孤独与表达礼貌的手段。而交流思想往往却居于其次。
25、爆炸头男子————记忆比忘却需要更大的力量，所以梦中的事情我们便经常遗忘。这与现实何其的相似。
26、光头男子————梦中的自己始终还是无法摆脱现实的投射，所以更多的时候梦中的本体也只不过是现实占优势的复制品。当然，个体存在着差异，但这种差异到底在多大程度上影响着我们？
27、售货员————人类的死亡与植物的枯死一样，都需要进行包裹。死亡是需要进行隐蔽的，因为大多数的人们不想看到这些。但这并不妨害到它们的存在。
28、束发的女子————人与人最终还是需要以某种联系作为纽带。但这种联系究竟应该是一种什么方式。现代人的联系的弱化是否可以用娱乐取代？
29打弹珠的男子————时间想让我们忘记上帝的存在。而永恒也因为时间的存在而变得可惧。但永恒之后还存在时间吗？
《半梦半醒的人生》Waking Life——这是一部2001年拍摄的动画片。导演兼编剧理查德林克莱特用DV在奥斯汀拍摄了这部影片，然后使用“interpolated翻拍”程序将图像转换，使得实景增加了程序化的外观看上去象是动画片。就是这样一部看起来不像是动画片的动画片，在当年也没引起什么反响；我却反复看5遍，因为在我看来这可能是21世纪前期最为伟大的影片。
影片的故事非常的简单，主人公一个大学生，他来到了一个超现实的幻境中。他身处的这座城市好象是奥斯汀，但日常生活的规律和秩序似乎完全被打破了。
他从一个地方游荡到另一个地方，不断遇到稀奇古怪的人。最有意思的是他遇见的这些人都在谈论一些宏大高深的话题：从量子论到语言的起源，从存在主义到人的转世再生，从自由意志的荒谬到电影作为一种叙事工具，他陷入一场接着一场的对话中。
他极力想知道自己究竟处在梦境中，还是处于清醒中。但最终他只是发现自己不断苏醒，又不断重新坠入梦境中。他无法摆脱这接二连三地涌现的梦，开始逐渐理解梦的含义，并试着控制梦和周围的环境，分辨苏醒的人生与梦中人生的区别……
大量对话也正是林克莱特作品的一个标志性元素。不同于伍迪艾伦纽约知识分子神经质式的喋喋不休，也不同于埃里克侯麦法国中产阶级长篇大论的交谈，林克莱特呈现的是美国年轻人鲜活而具有时代特色的语言。而且他的不少影片还不是几个人的谈话，而是规模庞大。不过相对于过去的作品，此片中的对话要显得“知识分子气”浓重得多，那些晦涩抽象的哲学命题对观众可绝对是个考验。
在这些繁杂的谈话中我把它切割成了29个片段，并努力以自己的理解诠释其内容。虽然它的丰富我只看到了一角。但时间会证明它的伟大值得我去这样做。
1、船型车司机———任何的事物你都可以不赞同，但重要的是他存在的事实。随大流是大多数人的共性，可最终你会发现你必须去找到自己的非共性所在。
2、大学教授————排除集体共性的过程中，并不一定能找到自我的个性，问题的重点乃在于思考的过程。
3、金发女子————语言所具有的不可沟通性，言语在每个人的心中有着不同的深层含义，也即联系物和凭借物的不同导致人类即使使用的是同一种语言，也存在永远无法沟通的盲点。
4、黑白发男子————望远镜似的人类进化过程（物质——精神）。不同智慧间质与量的转化（毁灭——重生）
5、自焚的男子————人类自毁性与人类社会自毁性存在着共通点。（个人的自杀、病痛和人类社会的战争、自然灾害）。媒体对社会丑恶面的频繁揭露，并无法消灭它，只能迫使人们对其麻木并接受。
6、交欢中的男女————人类记忆与经验在一代一代的遗传着。途径并非来自言语和书籍，而是DNA中的深层存在。
7、监狱中的男子————用复仇的幻想来填补时间。（许许多多的人都在用欲望实践的梦想来填补日常生活的时间）
8、戴眼镜的中年男子————人类的自由很大程度建立在物理规则上。但同时又存在一些不规则的元素来动摇原始的物理规则。可恰恰在某种意义上，不规则的元素也可能是物理规则中的一环。（上帝的决定——人类的自由意志——其中的界限）问题在于外延与内延的边界在哪？
9、宣传车上的男子————突破即定的规则，世界便是即定规则的框架，政治则是即定规则的核心动力。革命的问题不在于是否毁灭，而在于毁灭之后建立什么？
10、戴眼镜的老者————如若中心为“无”，既是空。对任何一个存在说是，既是对所有的存在说是。
11、黑人男子————现有的分类是对知识最大的束缚。我们必须将其解脱重整，使之聚合。在知识的共同领域寻求新知。
12、咖啡厅里的两位女子————人体的细胞在七年的过程里会全部更新。新我的产生，迫使我们肯定不同于旧我，但在认知上我们还是保持着自己与旧我的认同。问题在于延续性。人不可能缺乏延续性的不断的与自我重新认同。
13、播电影的猴子————人在困苦中可以获得的唯一有益知识是：任何事情都有可能发生，有困苦也必有欢乐。
14、白发老者————人类的痛苦有两种，或物质过于缺乏，或物质过于丰富。但在精神层面，人类却一直没有进步，问题在于人类的特性：恐惧和懒惰。
15、写作的男子————伟大的小说不在于其的故事，或者表现形式，而在于人、思想、时间。
16、留大胡子的胖子————梦境与现实，虚幻或真实之间的转化，有时非常简单。特别是当表现物为暴力时，
17、长发男子————梦是自我认同的一种过程，在一定意义上，它与现实没有根本区别。
18、弹琴的男子————梦的意义在于超越自我的存在形式。你可以是任何的一种存在形式，不一定是人类，甚至不一定是物体。
19、穿皮衣的长发男子————有些人醒着也在做梦，因为他们没有梦的意识，他们并不想在梦中得到思想的解放，他们的梦是现实的延续，也就是说是对物质渴望的梦想。
20、卷发男子————沉默……沉默……在这出看来喋喋不休的电影中此时出现了一个沉默看着你的男子。这种手法让我想起国画里的“留白”。人生是需要静默的，那时便是反观自身的时刻。
21、留着“雷鬼”头的四人帮————行动在很多时候只是理念自然而然的放映，但并不能因此就界定它具有明确的目的性。
22、背着背包的男子————梦在于自我感性的存在，寻找一切新的可能性。像旅行一般，向往所有的未知。
23、白衣男子————太阳底下无新事？不。梦具有发掘“新事”的可能性。
24、红发女子————交谈在很多时候只是人类远离孤独与表达礼貌的手段。而交流思想往往却居于其次。
25、爆炸头男子————记忆比忘却需要更大的力量，所以梦中的事情我们便经常遗忘。这与现实何其的相似。
26、光头男子————梦中的自己始终还是无法摆脱现实的投射，所以更多的时候梦中的本体也只不过是现实占优势的复制品。当然，个体存在着差异，但这种差异到底在多大程度上影响着我们？
27、售货员————人类的死亡与植物的枯死一样，都需要进行包裹。死亡是需要进行隐蔽的，因为大多数的人们不想看到这些。但这并不妨害到它们的存在。
28、束发的女子————人与人最终还是需要以某种联系作为纽带。但这种联系究竟应该是一种什么方式。现代人的联系的弱化是否可以用娱乐取代？
29打弹珠的男子————时间想让我们忘记上帝的存在。而永恒也因为时间的存在而变得可惧。但永恒之后还存在时间吗？
5 ) 剧本
"Dream is destiny."
Rock out.
Rock and roll.
Go, strings. Begin.
Sara, will you try that, the thing you asked me about?
- Yeah. - Will you try it a little more subdued?
- Okay. - Vibrato. Just try it and see what you think.
But what I want--
I mean, I want it to sound rich and maybe almost a little wavy...
due to being slightly out of tune.
- Do you want it, um-- - I think it should be slightly detached.
That's what I was wondering.
Yeah, yeah, you got it.
Snazzy.
Okay, pick up to 20 please.
- Erik, this is a pickup to 20. - Okay.
1, 2, 3.
Hey, man, it's me. Um, I just got back into town.
I thought maybe I could bum a ride off you or something, but that's cool.
I could probably just take a cab, something like that. Um--
Yeah, I guess I'll hang out with you later, something like that.
Ahoy there, matey! You in for the long haul?
You need a little hitch in your get-along, a little lift on down the line?
Oh, um, yeah, actually, I was waiting for a cab or something, but if you want to--
All right. Don't miss the boat.
- Hey, thanks. - Not a problem.
Anchors aweigh!
So what do you think of my little vessel?
She's what we call "see-worthy." S-E-E. See with your eyes.
I feel like my transport should be an extension of my personality.
Voila. And this? This is like my little window to the world,
and every minute, it's a different show.
Now, I may not understand it. I may not even necessarily agree with it.
But I'll tell you what, I accept it and just sort of glide along.
You want to keep things on an even keel I guess is what I'm saying.
You want to go with the flow. The sea refuses no river.
The idea is to remain in a state of constant departure while always arriving.
Saves on introductions and good-byes.
The ride does not require an explanation.
Just occupants. That's where you guys come in.
It's like you come onto this planet with a crayon box.
Now, you may get the 8-pack, you may get the 16-pack.
But it's all in what you do with the crayons,
the colors that you're given.
Don't worry about drawing within the lines or coloring outside the lines.
I say color outside the lines. Color right off he page.
Don't box me in. We're in motion to the ocean.
We are not landlocked, I'll tell ya that.
So where do you want out?
Uh, who, me? Am I first?
Um, I don't know. Really, anywhere is fine.
Well, just--just give me an address or something, okay?
Tell you what, go up three more streets,
take a right, go two more blocks,
drop this guy off on the next corner.
- Where's that? - I don't know either, but it's somewhere,
and it's gonna determine the course of the rest of your life.
All ashore that's going ashore.
Toot toot!
The reason why I refuse to take existentialism...
as just another French fashion or historical curiosity...
is that I think it has something very important to offer us for the new century.
I 'm afraid we're losing the real virtues of living life passionately,
the sense of taking responsibility for who you are,
the ability to make something of yourself and feeling good about life.
Existentialism is often discussed as if it's a philosophy of despair.
But I think the truth is just the opposite.
Sartre once interviewed said he never really felt a day of despair in his life.
But one thing that comes out from reading these guys...
is not a sense of anguish about life so much as...
a real kind of exuberance of feeling on top of it.
It's like your life is yours to create.
I've read the post modernists with some interest, even admiration.
But when I read them, I always have this awful nagging feeling...
that something absolutely essential is getting left out.
The more that you talk about a person as a social construction...
or as a confluence of forces...
or as fragmented or marginalized,
what you do is you open up a whole new world of excuses.
And when Sartre talks about responsibility,
he's not talking about something abstract.
He's not talking about the kind of self or soul that theologians would argue about.
It's something very concrete. It's you and me talking.
Making decisions. Doing things and taking the consequences.
It might be true that there are six billion people in the world and counting.
Nevertheless, what you do makes a difference.
It makes a difference, first of all, in material terms.
Makes a difference to other people and it sets an example.
In short, I think the message here is...
that we should never simply write ourselves off...
and see ourselves as the victim of various forces.
It's always our decision who we are.
Creation seems to come out of imperfection.
I t seems to come out of a striving and a frustration.
And this is where I think language came from.
I mean, it came from our desire to transcend our isolation...
and have some sort of connection with one another.
And it had to be easy when it was just simple survival.
Like, you know, "water." We came up with a sound for that.
Or, "Saber-toothed tiger right behind you." We came up with a sound for that.
But when it gets really interesting, I think,
is when we use that same system of symbols to communicate...
all the abstract and intangible things that we're experiencing.
What is, like, frustration? Or what is anger or love?
When I say "love,"
the sound comes out of my mouth...
and it hits the other person's ear,
travels through this Byzantine conduit in their brain,
you know, through their memories of love or lack of love,
and they register what I'm saying and say yes, they understand.
But how do I know they understand? Because words are inert.
They're just symbols. They're dead, you know?
And so much of our experience is intangible.
So much of what we perceive cannot be expressed. It's unspeakable.
And yet, you know, when we communicate with one another,
and we--
we feel that we have connected,
and we think that we're understood,
I think we have a feeling of almost spiritual communion.
And that feeling might be transient, but I think it's what we live for.
If wee looking at the highlights of human development,
you have to look at the evolution of the organism...
and then at the development of its interaction with the environment.
Evolution of the organism will begin with the evolution of life...
perceived through the hominid...
coming to the evolution of mankind.
Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon man.
Now, interestingly, what youe looking at here are three strings:
biological, anthropological--
development of the cities, cultures--
and cultural, which is human expression.
Now, what youe seen here is the evolution of populations,
not so much the evolution of individuals.
And in addition, if you look at the time scales that's involved here--
two billion years for life,
six million years for the hominid,
years for mankind as we know it--
you're beginning to see the telescoping nature of the evolutionary paradigm.
And then when you get to agricultural,
when you get to scientific revolution and industrial revolution,
you're looking at years, years, years.
You're seeing a further telescoping of this evolutionary time.
What that means is that as we go through the new evolution,
it's gonna telescope to the point we should be able to see it manifest itself...
within our lifetime, within this generation.
The new evolution stems from information,
and it stems from two types of information: digital and analog.
The digital is artificial intelligence.
The analog results from molecular biology, the cloning of the organism.
And you knit the two together with neurobiology.
Before on the old evolutionary paradigm,
one would die and the other would grow and dominate.
But under the new paradigm, they would exist...
as a mutually supportive, noncompetitive grouping.
Okay, independent from the external.
And what is interesting here is that evolution now becomes an individually centered process,
emanating from the needs and the desires of the individual,
and not an external process, a passive process...
where the individual is just at the whim of the collective.
So, you produce a neo-human with a new individuality and a new consciousness.
But that's only the beginning of the evolutionary cycle...
because as the next cycle proceeds,
the input is now this new intelligence.
As intelligence piles on intelligence,
as ability piles on ability, the speed changes.
Until what? Until you reach a crescendo in a way...
could be imagined as an enormous instantaneous fulfillment of human,
human and neo-human potential.
It could be something totally different.
It could be the amplification of the individual,
the multiplication of individual existences.
Parallel existences now with the individual no longer restricted by time and space.
And the manifestations of this neo-human-type evolution,
manifestations could be dramatically counter-intuitive.
That's the interesting part. The old evolution is cold.
It's sterile. It's efficient, okay?
And its manifestations are those social adaptations.
You're talking about parasitism, dominance, morality, okay?
Uh, war, predation, these would be subject to de-emphasis.
These would be subject to de-evolution.
The new evolutionary paradigm will give us the human traits of truth, of loyalty,
of justice, of freedom.
These will be the manifestations of the new evolution.
That is what we would hope to see from this. That would be nice.
A self-destructive man feels completely alienated, utterly alone.
He's an outsider to the human community.
He thinks to himself, "I must be insane."
What he fails to realize is that society has, just as he does,
a vested interest in considerable losses and catastrophes.
These wars, famines, floods and quakes meet well-defined needs.
Man wants chaos.
In fact, he's gotta have it.
Depression, strife, riots, murder, all this dread.
We're irresistibly drawn to that almost orgiastic state...
created out of death and destruction.
It's in all of us. We revel in it.
Sure, the media tries to put a sad face on these things,
painting them up as great human tragedies.
But we all know the function of the media has never been...
to eliminate the evils of the world, no.
Their job is to persuade us to accept those evils and get used to living with them.
The powers that be want us to be passive observers.
Hey, you got a match?
And they haven't given us any other options...
outside the occasional, purely symbolic,
participatory act of voting.
You want the puppet on the right or the puppet on the left?
I feel that the time has come to project my own...
inadequacies and dissatisfactions...
into the sociopolitical and scientific schemes,
Let my own lack of a voice be heard.
I keep thinking about something you said.
- Something I said? - Yeah.
About how you often feel like you're observing your life...
from the perspective of an old woman about to die.
- You remember that? - Yeah. I still feel that way sometimes.
Like I'm looking back on my life.
Like my waking life is her memories.
Exactly.
I heard that Tim Leary said as he was dying...
that he was looking forward to the moment...
when his body was dead, but his brain was still alive.
They say that there's still to minutes of brain activity after everything is shut down.
And a second of dream consciousness, right,
well, that's infinitely longer than a waking second.
- You know what I'm saying? - Oh, yeah, definitely.
For example, I wake up and it's :
and then I go back to sleep and I have those long, intricate,
beautiful dreams that seem to last for hours,
and then I wake up and it's... : .
Exactly. So then to minutes of brain activity,
I mean, that could be your whole life.
I mean, you are that woman looking back over everything.
Okay, so what if I am? Then what would you be in all that?
Whatever I am right now.
I mean, yeah, maybe I only exist in your mind.
I'm still just as real as anything else.
Yeah.
- I've been thinking also about something you said. - What's that?
Just about reincarnation and where all the new souls come from over time.
Everybody always say that they've been the reincarnation...
of Cleopatra or Alexander the Great.
I always want to tell them they were probably some dumb fuck like everybody else.
I mean, it's impossible. Think about it.
The world population has doubled in the past years, right?
- So if you really believe in that ego thing of one eternal soul, - Mm-hmm.
then you only have a % chance of your soul being over .
And for it to be over years old, then it's only one out of six.
So what are you saying then? Reincarnation doesn't exist...
or that we're all young souls like where half of us are first-round humans?
No, no. What I'm trying to say is that somehow I believe...
reincarnation is just a--
a poetic expression of what collective memory really is.
There was this article by this biochemist that I read not long ago,
and he was talking about how when a member of a species is born,
it has a billion years of memory to draw on.
And this is where we inherit our instincts.
I like that. It's like there's, um,
this whole telepathic thing going on that wee all a part of,
whether wee conscious of it or not.
That would explain why there's all these, you know,
seemingly spontaneous, worldwide, innovative leaps in science, in the arts.
You know, like the same results poppin' up everywhere independent of each other.
Some guy on a computer, he figures something out,
and then almost simultaneously, a bunch of other people all over the world...
- figure out the same thing. - Mm-hmm.
They did this study. They isolated a group of people over time,
and they monitored their abilities at crossword puzzles...
in relation to the general population.
And then they secretly gave them a day-old crossword,
one that had already been answered by thousands of other people.
Their scores went up dramatically, like percent.
So it's like once the answers are out there,
you know, people can pick up on 'em.
It's like we're all telepathically sharing our experiences.
I'll get you motherfuckers if it's the last thing I do.
Oh, you're gonna pay for what you did to me.
For every second I spend in this hellhole,
I'll see you spend a year in living hell!
Oh, you fucks are gonna beg me to let you die.
No, no, not yet.
I want you cocksuckers to suffer.
Oh, I'll fix your fuckin' asses, all right.
Maybe a long needle in your eardrum.
A hot cigar in your eye.
Nothin' fancy.
Some molten lead up the ass.
Ooh!
Or better still,
some of that old Apache shit.
Cut your eyelids off. Yeah.
I'll just listen to you fucks screamin'.
Oh, what sweet music that'll be.
Yeah. We'll do it in the hospital.
With doctors and nurses so you pricks don't die on me too quick.
You know the best part?
The best part is you dick-smokin' faggots will have your eyelids cut off,
so youl have to watch me do it to you, yeah.
You'll see me bring that cigar closer and closer...
to your wide-open eyeball...
till you're almost out of your mind.
But not quite...
'cause I want it to last a long, long time.
I want you to know that it's me,
that I'm the one that's doin' it to you.
Me!
And that sissy psychiatrist?
What unmitigated ignorance!
That old drunken fart of a judge!
What a pompous ass!
Judge not lestye be judged!
All of you pukes are gonna die the day I get out of this shithole!
I guarantee youl regret the day you met me!
In a way, in our contemporary world view,
It's easy to think that science has come to take the place of God.
But some philosophical problems remain as troubling as ever.
Take the problem of free will.
This problem's been around for a long time,
since before Aristotle in B.C.
St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas,
these guys all worried about how we can be free...
if God already knows in advance everything you're gonna do.
Nowadays we know that the world operates according to some fundamental physical laws,
and these laws govern the behavior of every object in the world.
Now, these laws, because they're so trustworthy,
they enable incredible technological achievements.
But look at yourself. We're just physical systems too.
We're just complex arrangements of carbon molecules.
We're mostly water,
and our behavior isn't gonna be an exception to basic physical laws.
So it starts to look like whether it's God setting things up in advance...
and knowing everything you're gonna do...
or whether it's these basic physical laws governing everything.
There's not a lot of room left for freedom.
So now you might be tempted to just ignore the question,
ignore the mystery of free will.
Say, "Oh, well, it's just an historical anecdote. It's sophomoric.
It's a question with no answer. Just forget about it."
But the question keeps staring you right in the face.
You think about individuality, for example, who you are.
Who you are is mostly a matter of the free choices that you make.
Or take responsibility. You can only be held responsible,
you can only be found guilty or admired or respected...
for things you did of your own free will.
The question keeps coming back, and we don't really have a solution to it.
It starts to look like all your decisions are really just a charade.
Think about how it happens. There's some electrical activity in your brain.
Your neurons fire. They send a signal down into your nervous system.
It passes along down into your muscle fibers.
They twitch. You might, say, reach out your arm.
Looks like it's a free action on your part,
but every one of those-- every part of that process...
is actually governed by physical law:
chemical laws, electrical laws and so on.
So now it just looks like the Big Bang set up the initial conditions,
and the whole rest of our history,
the whole rest of human history and even before,
is really just sort of the playing out of subatomic particles...
according to these basic fundamental physical laws.
We think wee special. We think we have some kind of special dignity,
but that now comes under threat.
I mean, that's really challenged by this picture.
So you might be saying, "Well, wait a minute. What about quantum mechanics?
"I know enough contemporary physical theory to know it's not really like that.
"It's really a probabilistic theory.
There's room. It's loose. It's not deterministic."
And that's gonna enable us to understand free will.
But if you look at the details, it's not really gonna help...
because what happens is you have some very small quantum particles,
and their behavior is apparently a bit random.
They swerve. Their behavior is absurd in the sense that it's unpredictable...
and we can't understand it based on anything that came before.
It just does something out of the blue, according to a probabilistic framework.
But is that gonna help with freedom?
Should our freedom just be a matter of probabilities,
just some random swerving in a chaotic system?
That just seems like it's worse. I'd rather be a gear...
in a big deterministic, physical machine...
than just some random swerving.
So we can't just ignore the problem.
We have to find room in our contemporary world view for persons,
with all that that it entails; not just bodies, but persons.
And that means trying to solve the problem of freedom,
finding room for choice and responsibility...
and trying to understand individuality.
You can't fight city hall, death and taxes.
Don't talk about politics or religion.
This is all the equivalent of enemy propaganda rolling across the picket line.
" Lay down, G.I. Lay down, G.I."
We saw it all through the th Century.
And now in the st Century, it's time to stand up and realize...
that we should not allow ourselves to be crammed into this rat maze.
We should not submit to dehumanization.
I don't know about you, but I'm concerned with what's happening in this world.
I'm concerned with the structure.
I'm concerned with the systems of control,
those that control my life and those that seek to control it even more!
I want freedom! That's what I want!
And that's what you should want!
It's up to each and every one of us to turn loose and just shovel the greed,
the hatred, the envy and, yes, the insecurities...
because that is the central mode of control-- make us feel pathetic, small...
so we'll willingly give up our sovereignty, our liberty, our destiny.
We have got to realize that we're being conditioned on a mass scale.
Start challenging this corporate slave state!
The st Century is gonna be a new century,
not the century of slavery, not the century of lies and issues of no significance...
and classism and statism and all the rest of the modes of control!
It's gonna be the age of humankind...
standing up for something pure and something right!
What a bunch of garbage-- liberal Democrat, conservative Republican.
It's all there to control you. Two sides of the same coin.
Two management teams bidding for control!
The C.E.O. job of Slavery, Incorporated!
The truth is out there in front of you, but they lay out this buffet of lies!
I'm sick of it, and I'm not gonna take a bite out of it! Do you got me?
Resistance is not futile. We're gonna win this thing.
Humankind is too good! We're not a bunch of underachievers!
We're gonna stand up and we're gonna be human beings!
We're gonna get fired up about the real things, the things that matter:
creativity and the dynamic human spirit that refuses to submit!
Well, that's it! That's all I got to say! It's in your court.
The quest is to be liberated from the negative,
which is really our own will to nothingness.
And once having said yes to the instant,
the affirmation is contagious.
It bursts into a chain of affirmations that knows no limit.
To say yes to one instant...
is to say yes to all of existence.
The main character is what you might call "the mind."
It's mastery, it's capacity to represent.
Throughout history, attempts have been made...
to contain those experiences which happen at the edge of the limit...
where the mind is vulnerable.
But I think we are in a very significant moment in history.
Those moments, those what you might call liminal,
Limit, frontier, edge zone experiences...
are actually now becoming the norm.
These multiplicities and distinctions and differences...
that have given great difficulty to the old mind...
are actually through entering into their very essence,
tasting and feeling their uniqueness.
One might make a breakthrough to that common something...
that holds them together.
And so the main character is, to this new mind,
greater, greater mind.
A mind that yet is to be.
And when we are obviously entered into that mode,
you can see a radical subjectivity,
radical attunement to individuality, uniqueness to that which the mind is,
opens itself to a vast objectivity.
So the story is the story of the cosmos now.
The moment is not just a passing, empty nothing yet.
And this is in the way in which these secret passages happen.
Yes, it's empty with such fullness...
that the great moment, the great life of the universe...
is pulsating in it.
And each one, each object, each place, each act...
Leaves a mark.
And that story is singular.
But, in fact, it's story after story.
Time just dissolves into quick-moving particles that are swirling away.
Either I'm moving fast or time is. Never both simultaneously.
It's such a strange paradox. I mean, while, technically,
I 'm closer to the end of my life than I've ever been,
I actually feel more than ever that I have all the time in the world.
When I was younger, there was a desperation, a desire for certainty,
&nb
Rock out.
Rock and roll.
Go, strings. Begin.
Sara, will you try that, the thing you asked me about?
- Yeah. - Will you try it a little more subdued?
- Okay. - Vibrato. Just try it and see what you think.
But what I want--
I mean, I want it to sound rich and maybe almost a little wavy...
due to being slightly out of tune.
- Do you want it, um-- - I think it should be slightly detached.
That's what I was wondering.
Yeah, yeah, you got it.
Snazzy.
Okay, pick up to 20 please.
- Erik, this is a pickup to 20. - Okay.
1, 2, 3.
Hey, man, it's me. Um, I just got back into town.
I thought maybe I could bum a ride off you or something, but that's cool.
I could probably just take a cab, something like that. Um--
Yeah, I guess I'll hang out with you later, something like that.
Ahoy there, matey! You in for the long haul?
You need a little hitch in your get-along, a little lift on down the line?
Oh, um, yeah, actually, I was waiting for a cab or something, but if you want to--
All right. Don't miss the boat.
- Hey, thanks. - Not a problem.
Anchors aweigh!
So what do you think of my little vessel?
She's what we call "see-worthy." S-E-E. See with your eyes.
I feel like my transport should be an extension of my personality.
Voila. And this? This is like my little window to the world,
and every minute, it's a different show.
Now, I may not understand it. I may not even necessarily agree with it.
But I'll tell you what, I accept it and just sort of glide along.
You want to keep things on an even keel I guess is what I'm saying.
You want to go with the flow. The sea refuses no river.
The idea is to remain in a state of constant departure while always arriving.
Saves on introductions and good-byes.
The ride does not require an explanation.
Just occupants. That's where you guys come in.
It's like you come onto this planet with a crayon box.
Now, you may get the 8-pack, you may get the 16-pack.
But it's all in what you do with the crayons,
the colors that you're given.
Don't worry about drawing within the lines or coloring outside the lines.
I say color outside the lines. Color right off he page.
Don't box me in. We're in motion to the ocean.
We are not landlocked, I'll tell ya that.
So where do you want out?
Uh, who, me? Am I first?
Um, I don't know. Really, anywhere is fine.
Well, just--just give me an address or something, okay?
Tell you what, go up three more streets,
take a right, go two more blocks,
drop this guy off on the next corner.
- Where's that? - I don't know either, but it's somewhere,
and it's gonna determine the course of the rest of your life.
All ashore that's going ashore.
Toot toot!
The reason why I refuse to take existentialism...
as just another French fashion or historical curiosity...
is that I think it has something very important to offer us for the new century.
I 'm afraid we're losing the real virtues of living life passionately,
the sense of taking responsibility for who you are,
the ability to make something of yourself and feeling good about life.
Existentialism is often discussed as if it's a philosophy of despair.
But I think the truth is just the opposite.
Sartre once interviewed said he never really felt a day of despair in his life.
But one thing that comes out from reading these guys...
is not a sense of anguish about life so much as...
a real kind of exuberance of feeling on top of it.
It's like your life is yours to create.
I've read the post modernists with some interest, even admiration.
But when I read them, I always have this awful nagging feeling...
that something absolutely essential is getting left out.
The more that you talk about a person as a social construction...
or as a confluence of forces...
or as fragmented or marginalized,
what you do is you open up a whole new world of excuses.
And when Sartre talks about responsibility,
he's not talking about something abstract.
He's not talking about the kind of self or soul that theologians would argue about.
It's something very concrete. It's you and me talking.
Making decisions. Doing things and taking the consequences.
It might be true that there are six billion people in the world and counting.
Nevertheless, what you do makes a difference.
It makes a difference, first of all, in material terms.
Makes a difference to other people and it sets an example.
In short, I think the message here is...
that we should never simply write ourselves off...
and see ourselves as the victim of various forces.
It's always our decision who we are.
Creation seems to come out of imperfection.
I t seems to come out of a striving and a frustration.
And this is where I think language came from.
I mean, it came from our desire to transcend our isolation...
and have some sort of connection with one another.
And it had to be easy when it was just simple survival.
Like, you know, "water." We came up with a sound for that.
Or, "Saber-toothed tiger right behind you." We came up with a sound for that.
But when it gets really interesting, I think,
is when we use that same system of symbols to communicate...
all the abstract and intangible things that we're experiencing.
What is, like, frustration? Or what is anger or love?
When I say "love,"
the sound comes out of my mouth...
and it hits the other person's ear,
travels through this Byzantine conduit in their brain,
you know, through their memories of love or lack of love,
and they register what I'm saying and say yes, they understand.
But how do I know they understand? Because words are inert.
They're just symbols. They're dead, you know?
And so much of our experience is intangible.
So much of what we perceive cannot be expressed. It's unspeakable.
And yet, you know, when we communicate with one another,
and we--
we feel that we have connected,
and we think that we're understood,
I think we have a feeling of almost spiritual communion.
And that feeling might be transient, but I think it's what we live for.
If wee looking at the highlights of human development,
you have to look at the evolution of the organism...
and then at the development of its interaction with the environment.
Evolution of the organism will begin with the evolution of life...
perceived through the hominid...
coming to the evolution of mankind.
Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon man.
Now, interestingly, what youe looking at here are three strings:
biological, anthropological--
development of the cities, cultures--
and cultural, which is human expression.
Now, what youe seen here is the evolution of populations,
not so much the evolution of individuals.
And in addition, if you look at the time scales that's involved here--
two billion years for life,
six million years for the hominid,
years for mankind as we know it--
you're beginning to see the telescoping nature of the evolutionary paradigm.
And then when you get to agricultural,
when you get to scientific revolution and industrial revolution,
you're looking at years, years, years.
You're seeing a further telescoping of this evolutionary time.
What that means is that as we go through the new evolution,
it's gonna telescope to the point we should be able to see it manifest itself...
within our lifetime, within this generation.
The new evolution stems from information,
and it stems from two types of information: digital and analog.
The digital is artificial intelligence.
The analog results from molecular biology, the cloning of the organism.
And you knit the two together with neurobiology.
Before on the old evolutionary paradigm,
one would die and the other would grow and dominate.
But under the new paradigm, they would exist...
as a mutually supportive, noncompetitive grouping.
Okay, independent from the external.
And what is interesting here is that evolution now becomes an individually centered process,
emanating from the needs and the desires of the individual,
and not an external process, a passive process...
where the individual is just at the whim of the collective.
So, you produce a neo-human with a new individuality and a new consciousness.
But that's only the beginning of the evolutionary cycle...
because as the next cycle proceeds,
the input is now this new intelligence.
As intelligence piles on intelligence,
as ability piles on ability, the speed changes.
Until what? Until you reach a crescendo in a way...
could be imagined as an enormous instantaneous fulfillment of human,
human and neo-human potential.
It could be something totally different.
It could be the amplification of the individual,
the multiplication of individual existences.
Parallel existences now with the individual no longer restricted by time and space.
And the manifestations of this neo-human-type evolution,
manifestations could be dramatically counter-intuitive.
That's the interesting part. The old evolution is cold.
It's sterile. It's efficient, okay?
And its manifestations are those social adaptations.
You're talking about parasitism, dominance, morality, okay?
Uh, war, predation, these would be subject to de-emphasis.
These would be subject to de-evolution.
The new evolutionary paradigm will give us the human traits of truth, of loyalty,
of justice, of freedom.
These will be the manifestations of the new evolution.
That is what we would hope to see from this. That would be nice.
A self-destructive man feels completely alienated, utterly alone.
He's an outsider to the human community.
He thinks to himself, "I must be insane."
What he fails to realize is that society has, just as he does,
a vested interest in considerable losses and catastrophes.
These wars, famines, floods and quakes meet well-defined needs.
Man wants chaos.
In fact, he's gotta have it.
Depression, strife, riots, murder, all this dread.
We're irresistibly drawn to that almost orgiastic state...
created out of death and destruction.
It's in all of us. We revel in it.
Sure, the media tries to put a sad face on these things,
painting them up as great human tragedies.
But we all know the function of the media has never been...
to eliminate the evils of the world, no.
Their job is to persuade us to accept those evils and get used to living with them.
The powers that be want us to be passive observers.
Hey, you got a match?
And they haven't given us any other options...
outside the occasional, purely symbolic,
participatory act of voting.
You want the puppet on the right or the puppet on the left?
I feel that the time has come to project my own...
inadequacies and dissatisfactions...
into the sociopolitical and scientific schemes,
Let my own lack of a voice be heard.
I keep thinking about something you said.
- Something I said? - Yeah.
About how you often feel like you're observing your life...
from the perspective of an old woman about to die.
- You remember that? - Yeah. I still feel that way sometimes.
Like I'm looking back on my life.
Like my waking life is her memories.
Exactly.
I heard that Tim Leary said as he was dying...
that he was looking forward to the moment...
when his body was dead, but his brain was still alive.
They say that there's still to minutes of brain activity after everything is shut down.
And a second of dream consciousness, right,
well, that's infinitely longer than a waking second.
- You know what I'm saying? - Oh, yeah, definitely.
For example, I wake up and it's :
and then I go back to sleep and I have those long, intricate,
beautiful dreams that seem to last for hours,
and then I wake up and it's... : .
Exactly. So then to minutes of brain activity,
I mean, that could be your whole life.
I mean, you are that woman looking back over everything.
Okay, so what if I am? Then what would you be in all that?
Whatever I am right now.
I mean, yeah, maybe I only exist in your mind.
I'm still just as real as anything else.
Yeah.
- I've been thinking also about something you said. - What's that?
Just about reincarnation and where all the new souls come from over time.
Everybody always say that they've been the reincarnation...
of Cleopatra or Alexander the Great.
I always want to tell them they were probably some dumb fuck like everybody else.
I mean, it's impossible. Think about it.
The world population has doubled in the past years, right?
- So if you really believe in that ego thing of one eternal soul, - Mm-hmm.
then you only have a % chance of your soul being over .
And for it to be over years old, then it's only one out of six.
So what are you saying then? Reincarnation doesn't exist...
or that we're all young souls like where half of us are first-round humans?
No, no. What I'm trying to say is that somehow I believe...
reincarnation is just a--
a poetic expression of what collective memory really is.
There was this article by this biochemist that I read not long ago,
and he was talking about how when a member of a species is born,
it has a billion years of memory to draw on.
And this is where we inherit our instincts.
I like that. It's like there's, um,
this whole telepathic thing going on that wee all a part of,
whether wee conscious of it or not.
That would explain why there's all these, you know,
seemingly spontaneous, worldwide, innovative leaps in science, in the arts.
You know, like the same results poppin' up everywhere independent of each other.
Some guy on a computer, he figures something out,
and then almost simultaneously, a bunch of other people all over the world...
- figure out the same thing. - Mm-hmm.
They did this study. They isolated a group of people over time,
and they monitored their abilities at crossword puzzles...
in relation to the general population.
And then they secretly gave them a day-old crossword,
one that had already been answered by thousands of other people.
Their scores went up dramatically, like percent.
So it's like once the answers are out there,
you know, people can pick up on 'em.
It's like we're all telepathically sharing our experiences.
I'll get you motherfuckers if it's the last thing I do.
Oh, you're gonna pay for what you did to me.
For every second I spend in this hellhole,
I'll see you spend a year in living hell!
Oh, you fucks are gonna beg me to let you die.
No, no, not yet.
I want you cocksuckers to suffer.
Oh, I'll fix your fuckin' asses, all right.
Maybe a long needle in your eardrum.
A hot cigar in your eye.
Nothin' fancy.
Some molten lead up the ass.
Ooh!
Or better still,
some of that old Apache shit.
Cut your eyelids off. Yeah.
I'll just listen to you fucks screamin'.
Oh, what sweet music that'll be.
Yeah. We'll do it in the hospital.
With doctors and nurses so you pricks don't die on me too quick.
You know the best part?
The best part is you dick-smokin' faggots will have your eyelids cut off,
so youl have to watch me do it to you, yeah.
You'll see me bring that cigar closer and closer...
to your wide-open eyeball...
till you're almost out of your mind.
But not quite...
'cause I want it to last a long, long time.
I want you to know that it's me,
that I'm the one that's doin' it to you.
Me!
And that sissy psychiatrist?
What unmitigated ignorance!
That old drunken fart of a judge!
What a pompous ass!
Judge not lestye be judged!
All of you pukes are gonna die the day I get out of this shithole!
I guarantee youl regret the day you met me!
In a way, in our contemporary world view,
It's easy to think that science has come to take the place of God.
But some philosophical problems remain as troubling as ever.
Take the problem of free will.
This problem's been around for a long time,
since before Aristotle in B.C.
St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas,
these guys all worried about how we can be free...
if God already knows in advance everything you're gonna do.
Nowadays we know that the world operates according to some fundamental physical laws,
and these laws govern the behavior of every object in the world.
Now, these laws, because they're so trustworthy,
they enable incredible technological achievements.
But look at yourself. We're just physical systems too.
We're just complex arrangements of carbon molecules.
We're mostly water,
and our behavior isn't gonna be an exception to basic physical laws.
So it starts to look like whether it's God setting things up in advance...
and knowing everything you're gonna do...
or whether it's these basic physical laws governing everything.
There's not a lot of room left for freedom.
So now you might be tempted to just ignore the question,
ignore the mystery of free will.
Say, "Oh, well, it's just an historical anecdote. It's sophomoric.
It's a question with no answer. Just forget about it."
But the question keeps staring you right in the face.
You think about individuality, for example, who you are.
Who you are is mostly a matter of the free choices that you make.
Or take responsibility. You can only be held responsible,
you can only be found guilty or admired or respected...
for things you did of your own free will.
The question keeps coming back, and we don't really have a solution to it.
It starts to look like all your decisions are really just a charade.
Think about how it happens. There's some electrical activity in your brain.
Your neurons fire. They send a signal down into your nervous system.
It passes along down into your muscle fibers.
They twitch. You might, say, reach out your arm.
Looks like it's a free action on your part,
but every one of those-- every part of that process...
is actually governed by physical law:
chemical laws, electrical laws and so on.
So now it just looks like the Big Bang set up the initial conditions,
and the whole rest of our history,
the whole rest of human history and even before,
is really just sort of the playing out of subatomic particles...
according to these basic fundamental physical laws.
We think wee special. We think we have some kind of special dignity,
but that now comes under threat.
I mean, that's really challenged by this picture.
So you might be saying, "Well, wait a minute. What about quantum mechanics?
"I know enough contemporary physical theory to know it's not really like that.
"It's really a probabilistic theory.
There's room. It's loose. It's not deterministic."
And that's gonna enable us to understand free will.
But if you look at the details, it's not really gonna help...
because what happens is you have some very small quantum particles,
and their behavior is apparently a bit random.
They swerve. Their behavior is absurd in the sense that it's unpredictable...
and we can't understand it based on anything that came before.
It just does something out of the blue, according to a probabilistic framework.
But is that gonna help with freedom?
Should our freedom just be a matter of probabilities,
just some random swerving in a chaotic system?
That just seems like it's worse. I'd rather be a gear...
in a big deterministic, physical machine...
than just some random swerving.
So we can't just ignore the problem.
We have to find room in our contemporary world view for persons,
with all that that it entails; not just bodies, but persons.
And that means trying to solve the problem of freedom,
finding room for choice and responsibility...
and trying to understand individuality.
You can't fight city hall, death and taxes.
Don't talk about politics or religion.
This is all the equivalent of enemy propaganda rolling across the picket line.
" Lay down, G.I. Lay down, G.I."
We saw it all through the th Century.
And now in the st Century, it's time to stand up and realize...
that we should not allow ourselves to be crammed into this rat maze.
We should not submit to dehumanization.
I don't know about you, but I'm concerned with what's happening in this world.
I'm concerned with the structure.
I'm concerned with the systems of control,
those that control my life and those that seek to control it even more!
I want freedom! That's what I want!
And that's what you should want!
It's up to each and every one of us to turn loose and just shovel the greed,
the hatred, the envy and, yes, the insecurities...
because that is the central mode of control-- make us feel pathetic, small...
so we'll willingly give up our sovereignty, our liberty, our destiny.
We have got to realize that we're being conditioned on a mass scale.
Start challenging this corporate slave state!
The st Century is gonna be a new century,
not the century of slavery, not the century of lies and issues of no significance...
and classism and statism and all the rest of the modes of control!
It's gonna be the age of humankind...
standing up for something pure and something right!
What a bunch of garbage-- liberal Democrat, conservative Republican.
It's all there to control you. Two sides of the same coin.
Two management teams bidding for control!
The C.E.O. job of Slavery, Incorporated!
The truth is out there in front of you, but they lay out this buffet of lies!
I'm sick of it, and I'm not gonna take a bite out of it! Do you got me?
Resistance is not futile. We're gonna win this thing.
Humankind is too good! We're not a bunch of underachievers!
We're gonna stand up and we're gonna be human beings!
We're gonna get fired up about the real things, the things that matter:
creativity and the dynamic human spirit that refuses to submit!
Well, that's it! That's all I got to say! It's in your court.
The quest is to be liberated from the negative,
which is really our own will to nothingness.
And once having said yes to the instant,
the affirmation is contagious.
It bursts into a chain of affirmations that knows no limit.
To say yes to one instant...
is to say yes to all of existence.
The main character is what you might call "the mind."
It's mastery, it's capacity to represent.
Throughout history, attempts have been made...
to contain those experiences which happen at the edge of the limit...
where the mind is vulnerable.
But I think we are in a very significant moment in history.
Those moments, those what you might call liminal,
Limit, frontier, edge zone experiences...
are actually now becoming the norm.
These multiplicities and distinctions and differences...
that have given great difficulty to the old mind...
are actually through entering into their very essence,
tasting and feeling their uniqueness.
One might make a breakthrough to that common something...
that holds them together.
And so the main character is, to this new mind,
greater, greater mind.
A mind that yet is to be.
And when we are obviously entered into that mode,
you can see a radical subjectivity,
radical attunement to individuality, uniqueness to that which the mind is,
opens itself to a vast objectivity.
So the story is the story of the cosmos now.
The moment is not just a passing, empty nothing yet.
And this is in the way in which these secret passages happen.
Yes, it's empty with such fullness...
that the great moment, the great life of the universe...
is pulsating in it.
And each one, each object, each place, each act...
Leaves a mark.
And that story is singular.
But, in fact, it's story after story.
Time just dissolves into quick-moving particles that are swirling away.
Either I'm moving fast or time is. Never both simultaneously.
It's such a strange paradox. I mean, while, technically,
I 'm closer to the end of my life than I've ever been,
I actually feel more than ever that I have all the time in the world.
When I was younger, there was a desperation, a desire for certainty,
&nb
6 ) 离开把手，我就会飘起来
有些道理就是很难传播——因为人们只传递自己认同的东西。有些道理就是不大可能被大多数人认同，于是，即便它再有道理，再怎么有用，也不是很容易传播。
所以这个电影也被埋没，因为它涉及的观点太多太泛乱，每个人滔滔不绝，像拿着一大桶水对着男主角泼洒着他们的论点，但论据却很少，这样的谈话很难让局外的人产生认同感。大多数人只不过看着整部电影里多数是不太感兴趣的对白，看完就完全忘记，继续他们半梦半醒的人生。
但是抛开观点不算，电影的表现手法真的打动了我。导演的这个想法是开创性的，真希望会有新的作品能向这个电影致敬，这个手法真的值得再用。
所以这个电影也被埋没，因为它涉及的观点太多太泛乱，每个人滔滔不绝，像拿着一大桶水对着男主角泼洒着他们的论点，但论据却很少，这样的谈话很难让局外的人产生认同感。大多数人只不过看着整部电影里多数是不太感兴趣的对白，看完就完全忘记，继续他们半梦半醒的人生。
但是抛开观点不算，电影的表现手法真的打动了我。导演的这个想法是开创性的，真希望会有新的作品能向这个电影致敬，这个手法真的值得再用。
7 ) 。
林克莱特目前的三部动画片，几乎都在视觉层面达成了混沌感——线条笔触的抽动、变形、扭曲，以致人物形态的变异。初始观看很容易被绘画转换形式吸引，但大部分观众应该很快疲劳——场景大都简易得似乎缺乏想象力，更多地是在重复不太流畅感的画面。所以，是否视觉的建构并非林克莱特的主要侧重？（但也不可否认部分的视效也是奏效的。）
相较之下，《阿波罗》有明确主题、呈现内容清晰直白，故《半梦半醒》与《黑暗扫描仪》构思创作的出发点要更为接近：它们没有实质的内容表达，只有语气片段的构成（也在影片中直接坦白）。
细分其中主导观看的对话语气，大致有两类：第一种，有意地让对话陈列产生沉浸感，像是kramer电影中的访谈片段，引导性地创建舒适的对话氛围进而触动观众，机制比较基础。第二种，随性的、不带有表现性的语气输出，它更接近人物日常状态下语音的发出，看似没有什么特别的，但在这样对话强度较高的听觉式电影中，它便变得突出（《黑暗扫描仪》相对更多。）第二种对话语气使得观看某种程度上高于第一种的沉浸式，它让电影变得更加，更加随性自由。
“也许我们对时间的感知只是一种幻觉。事实上，我们的整个人生和历史只是一个永恒的瞬间”。又是Richard Linklater的标志性哲理对话性独立电影。我发觉在我看过的这三部他作品里面，他在国内最负盛名的那部《Before Sunrise》是最差的。也许是《Slacker》和《Waking Life》的对白太过深奥，一般人看不懂吧。这个人已经开始逐渐变成我最饭的独立导演。
竟能听懂全部人所说的，并且还有机会嘲笑其中至少三分之一.这些并非极深的哲理，使用了演讲的方式来料理，虽然有时也跟不上他们的节奏，但其中深意却已为我们所理解：就是观念而已.关于自由意志、灵魂转生、量子理论、社会结构和进化论等的观点无触动，倒是自焚的人、开船车的人和监狱诅咒最得我心
按车轨边青年的说法，lucid dream大概不算梦？但是像我现在，就已经很少做那些没法控制，完全沉溺的梦了。通常梦开始没多久就会被意识到是在做梦，直接导演剧情，甚至都不用学主人公找个开关来验证。按照弗洛伊德引用Vaschide的说法，大概就是，想睡觉的愿望被其他愿望（比如说观察和享受自己的梦境）取代, wish-fulfilment以另一种方式进行。片里萨满是把lucid dream看作珍惜想象力的一种方式，但应该还有一方面是恐惧吧，恐惧失去控制，被卷入无法左右的梦域和情绪（Melanie Klein也有类似观点）。另外一点，主角穿越各种场景的floating是弗洛伊德的典型梦境之一，除了性行为暗示（erections or emission），还是一种退到童稚状态的，无干扰的愉悦感
林克莱特你真会玩儿，这你都能拍。基本上可以当成初级哲学的动画解说，人存在吗，现实存在吗，你怎么知道自己不是身处梦中。跟上片中人物的思考速度应该不是难事，那样就会发现我们以为理所当然的东西其实都很难站得住脚。
扯淡的路上，林克莱特走得很远
我不该在困乏的时候看它……
非常特别的片子，将拍好的真人场景再由动画制作室改成动画。全片充满荒诞又不乏现实感的诗意，以及大量关于梦与现实、生活、存在主义、死亡、自由意志、社会规则、电影与文学、集体记忆的对白。虽然中间差点也“半梦半醒”了，但还是要强力推荐！爱思考人生、钟爱哲学的友友必看！
喝杯浓茶，打起精神，继续再看。年度奇片，哲学教材 ！7.3
大概根据实际影像处理的动画，看不下去
真人拍摄，动画呈现，形式非常独特；哲学电影，梦的解析，内容非常深刻。
每晚梦境灾难大片奇异考夫曼，一醒来过的跟劣质自我中心白水欧洲片似的，情愿活在关不掉开关的世界里。
说实话，最初我对这部电影没太多好感，虽然这种真人拍摄转制动画的方式我一直挺喜欢的，但一轮接一轮的梦，一轮接一轮的大道理，就算再有意思的话题也会让人心生烦闷的。但到了最后，还是打脸喜欢上了，尤其是PKD一出来，想表达的主题突然立体了，也好理解了，亲切了。
感觉这是林克莱特的精神呓语，生活中总是会有各种困惑、各种稀奇古怪的想法，难得的是林克莱特将它具象出来了。信息量好大，每次低头咬一口西瓜都错过很多内容---足见话唠程度---
我不明白为什么要选择CG动画的方式来处理这个题材，在我看来，片中大多数场景和画面甚至可以忽略掉，光听一下那些谈话就足够了。也许读读剧本更有感觉，不觉得画面起到了很大作用。这个题材用真人电影或者真人动画可能会更有感觉，那样才有超现实主义的味道。本片我猜是前期真人拍摄然后再CG重新绘图。
爱在系列隐藏的第1.5部。我也好想找人每天跟我神侃一些有的没的不着边际的话题啊，什么文学艺术科学哲学，大家每天一起瞎逼逼多开心啊，再不然每天聊八卦也好啊，昨天文章马伊琍，今天奶茶刘强东，明天单位狗男女。（ps.大头，这对你来说就是不知所云的话痨电影，请勿观赏）
探戈搭配对话，片头说的演奏上slightly detached, a little wavy, slightly out of tune也正是影像的质地。电影用frame启发观众发现holy moment, boat司机说的那番话挺阿巴斯的，无论是从电影还是人生的角度。无尽的梦是死亡，还是，无梦的睡眠是死亡？片中的梦境神神叨叨得令人羡慕，个人经验是梦中一般不这么话痨，也不会在梦里看到自己，train yourself to recognize a dream还是挺难的
很多地方看不懂，所以就不便評分了。總的來說，這是一部非常非常深奧，可是又很睿智的電影，探究人生、我、夢還有生活等等。問題是，我們有必要對自己的人生進行如此的嚴肅的審視嗎？也許。只是我覺得每個人對自己的人生都有不同方式的挖掘，這是其中一個方向而已。我純粹是沖著J和C的結局而來。
大型新媒介云吸毒，花60块飞99分钟，上天入地，叨念人生。
大概世界上最沉闷的动画片，除了梦中梦的结构，剩下的全是“哲学课式”的对话。但是这片子倒是让我想起了刚上大学那会儿的情形，就像片中那个主人公一样，我每天都几乎一言不发地听别人讲一大堆理论（一套一套的，听起来都很有道理，但是仔细想一下，又好像什么也没讲），然后在夜里做各种奇怪的梦。
I keeps waking up while watching this