Skip

Open casting call for "Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back"
January 22, 2001 1:18 PM   Subscribe


 
Now everyone can have the chance to star in pure cinema dynamite a la Chasing Amy and Dogma!

Ugh. I loathe Kevin Smith's "work."

posted by Skot at 1:22 PM on January 22, 2001


Guess you're not a fan then.
posted by srw12 at 1:46 PM on January 22, 2001


I loved both of those movies. I watched Dogma again last night. Highly recommended.
posted by y6y6y6 at 1:57 PM on January 22, 2001


Dogma struck me as a bit amateurish from a technical standpoint, but I really liked it anyway. I thought the script was great.
posted by kindall at 2:09 PM on January 22, 2001


Yeah...Dogma didn't seem quite as polished as Chasing Amy.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:17 PM on January 22, 2001


I wish terribly that I understood the demographic that enjoys Smith's "films" as none of them have ever appealed to me. It would shed great light if I could pinpoint the audience for which they are intended. Even though my brother was an extra in Dogma, I was so underwhelmed I wasn't able to sit through it until the crowd scene in which he appears, and five minutes into my recent rental of Clerks I had to give up and press "stop." I'm eluded by Smith's vision.
posted by Dreama at 2:21 PM on January 22, 2001


Dreama: Give Clerks at least 15 minutes, if you're ever in close proximity to it again. It takes a while to warm up. I'm not telling you to go out of your way to see it, but it's a rather different movie than Dogma. Dogma kind of has a point. Clerks (and Mallrats and, apparently, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back) doesn't even come close to having a point.

As for the demographic? I don't think there really _IS_ one. I've yet to find a truly common string among the people that like his work. People I assumed off the bat would kill themselves laughing have just as often opted to kill themselves rather than watch anymore, and vice versa.

Yes, I'm exaggerating. No one I've introduce a Kevin Smith movie to has, to my knowledge, killed themselves as opposed to watching any more.
posted by cCranium at 2:27 PM on January 22, 2001


cC, I have to agree... some people get the joke and others don't... just different senses of humor I guess... (however,I still cringe whenever I hear "Snootchie Bootchies" That, was horrible).

I personally think that Clerks was overpraised.. it was a great movie, but not the "indie sensation" that it was often talked up to be. Part of the charm of Clerks is that if you EVER were one, you'll understand much of the attitude of the movie.
posted by tj at 2:32 PM on January 22, 2001


Speaking of Clerks, has anyone noticed what's going on in the ambulance when they hall off the body? If you don't know what I'm talking about, go get your copy of Clerks and watch that scene, right now!
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:34 PM on January 22, 2001


I thought Clerks had a nice amateurish charm to it. The acting and the lense work sucked, but really its all kinda surface anyway. Once you get into the idea that it is not a polished hollywood movie, it doesn't really matter anymore. I don't think it's a movie doesn't work if you can't suspend your disbelief. I thought the jokes were good, and I thought the premise was, well, true to the title. Why not enjoy it?
posted by Hackworth at 2:43 PM on January 22, 2001


Clerks, at the time of its release, easily catered to men 18 to 25. e.g., the same demographic that was wondering what they're going to do with their life, and likely working a lousy job and/or going to school.
posted by fleener at 3:26 PM on January 22, 2001


[Dreama] five minutes into my recent rental of Clerks I had to give up and press "stop."

That's a sure way to fairly judge a movie.

"The first five minutes sucked. I didn't watch the rest, but it obviously sucked, too. I just don't get it."

How much would you enjoy and get it if you only watch the first five minutes of 2001 or Crouching Tiger... or even Star Wars? (Especially 2001...)
posted by daveadams at 3:50 PM on January 22, 2001


tj: some people get the joke and others don't

I don't think it's even that. I mean, the jokes are all easily gotten, it's just that some people appreciate them and some don't. Okay, semantics. :-) You're right, it's just a matter of taste.

re: "indie sensation"

What else would you call a movie made for ~30 grand of the producer's credit and become something almost everyone between 18 and 30 has heard of? Something which, in turn, prompted a major studio to give the production company a few million to produce it's successor? Okay, that's phrased poorly, it's much more combative then I want to sound, but I am genuinly curious what makes it not indie?

daveadams: Hell, I almost walked out of the room after the first 4 minutes, and I've never walked out of a movie. The first 5 minutes of Clerks sucks hard rocks, it's just bad. Dreama never actually said the whole movie sucked, either.

If I were to watch a movie I didn't enjoy (Dreama and Dogma) and the start of a second movie by essentially the same group of people started as bad as Clerks did, I'd probably say "Screw this" too.
posted by cCranium at 4:04 PM on January 22, 2001


Though most consider Mallrats to be his worst work, including Smith himself, I think it's the best. Some of the acting is horrible (Jeremy London, I'm looking in your direction...), but some of it is damn funny, and Jason Lee gives a great performance as a dumped boyfriend trying to win back his girl.
posted by megnut at 5:17 PM on January 22, 2001


Dreama: love those scare quotes around "films." They're a useful way to indicate disdain without having to go to the effort of actually *saying* anything.

Daveadams: that's a great idea for a movie site (which I hereby donate, free, to anyone interested): reviews of the first five minutes of movies as if they were the whole thing.
posted by rodii at 5:39 PM on January 22, 2001


I certainly wouldn't require anyone to watch a movie they hate after five minutes. I might encourage them, but jeez, to each his own. I think Smith is an acquired taste.
posted by dhartung at 5:47 PM on January 22, 2001


megnut, I'm working on a theory here. Which did you see first, Mallrats or Clerks?
posted by cCranium at 6:48 PM on January 22, 2001


Mallrats. What's your theory, that whatever movie you see first is the one you like more?
posted by megnut at 9:31 PM on January 22, 2001


I still think "Chasing Amy" is his best movie...and, astounding moment, I even like Ben Affleck in it. (Truly scary, as I really don't like Ben Affleck...)

Marketing moment o'fun: "Chasing Amy" DVD features Mr. Affleck sans beard and right up front -- pretty funny, since the man had a beard the entire flick...
posted by metrocake at 11:21 PM on January 22, 2001


megnut: exactly. Okay, so it's not a great theory, but it's held true with the 10 or so people I've enquired. I'm sure someone will break it though.

Expanding on it though, Mallrats is a much more polished film. Part of the charm of Clerks, for a lot of people, is the poor production quality. It could almost be a group of people who camcordered their actual whereas Mallrats is most definitely a Movie.

I don't think that makes one inherently better than the other, incidentally, just different.
posted by cCranium at 5:55 AM on January 23, 2001


cCranium, you're absolutely right. "Mallrats" isn't so bad when it doesn't have to live up to its potential, and compared backward, "Clerks" can feel messy and unpolished (which is its charm, but can be rough if you're not expecting it).

I have similar reactions with music -- if I discover a band on its second album, I usually have a hard time going backward and enjoying its debut.

That said, having grown up in New Jersey and seen "Clerks" in the theater (one of a whole six people in the crowd at the Angelika in NYC, folks), Kevin Smith will probably never do better. I have to go watch the ambulance scene again....
posted by werty at 8:17 AM on January 23, 2001


Can Kevin Smith can make a movie where he isn't recycling the same, tired characters?
posted by Trampas at 8:57 AM on January 23, 2001


Trampas, yes. Actually, the new movie is the final chapter of the Jay and Silent Bob trilogy (he apparently labels series like Douglas Adams :-) and is being done expressly so Smith can move on to different things.

But then, part of the charm of the whole series is the consistency. Both in characters, in actors and in setting. Chasing Amy stayed truer to the Jersey Smith portrays in Clerks and Mallrats (aneurysm while doing the backstroke anyone?) than Dogma does, but the linkage of all the movies through various nods to the previous ones is a little reward to the loyal viewers.
posted by cCranium at 9:27 AM on January 23, 2001


daveadams -- I value my time. I didn't have a great deal of desire to watch the movie to begin with, and when it failed to give me any reason to watch at the beginning (and granted, it was perhaps more than five minutes, but not much) I found something better to do. Why is that such a terrible thing?

And as for my scare quotes around the word "film" all I can say is that I call 'em as I see 'em.
posted by Dreama at 9:49 AM on January 23, 2001


Dreama, reconsidering what you said, I was a bit harsh, sorry about that. No call for incivility.

However, the five-minute review website sounds like an excellent idea, so something good came out of my rudeness... Hmmmm...
posted by daveadams at 11:59 AM on January 23, 2001


Reviews written in five minutes or reviews of five minutes worth of the movies?
posted by Dreama at 9:28 PM on January 23, 2001


I think that would be reviews of the movie, based on their first five minutes.
posted by kindall at 10:09 PM on January 23, 2001


« Older John Gilmore (via Wes Felter) lets the dogs out   |   Erik Davis on Feed: Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post