According to Price, the thematic commonality in Linklater's films is that they all have to do with idleness. He seems to be trying to document daydreamers and idlers in the teen to post-college realms. Price also states that Linklater seems to be interested in the ideas between these characters and how an entire film can based on what they talk about. The reaction that each character has to the conversations also seems to be intriguing to him too.
I think what Wood meant when he wrote “style is the artists means of defining the relationship between the spectator to film,” is how a person feels about the events and conversations that are happening on screen. I think he’s trying to generate unspoken questions that come up within a person while watching these events and hearing these conversations.
After learning about how Linklater made this more of a collaborative film, it became more interesting and ‘real’ to me. I enjoyed learning that this film became personal for him, the actors and his screenwriting partner. I think his collaborative method makes for a more interesting film. The questions and thoughts that the characters have about life and death led me to think about some of my own. I can relate more to it now, though, since I know that these are the thoughts of these individuals outside of the film, too. I think the accidental meeting with the guys in the play about a cow was great and it would have been really interesting to have them actually have attended the play.
Film is the only medium that can capture real time, real moments, at that precise second that you want it. You can see expressions on characters' faces, as well as other events that relay emotion to the viewer. Writing can have the same effect too, but it would take a person much longer to write about a day in Vienna, than it would be to just film it and actually see it. I think being able to see something take place, as opposed to reading it, creates stronger emotion. Also, with film, you cannot miss the details of a certain moment in time.