I just watched Scream

Brendocon · Post by **Brendocon** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 11:50 am

Clerks isn't a particularly good film, but it's a film I love. Mainly for the dialogue. The direction and acting is pretty non-existant.

Mallrats much the same.

Chasing Amy I really like, despite the high Affleck ratio.

Dogma I love.

Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back has its moments, but is to Kevin Smith's movies what DW's volume 2 is to Transformers. But with more gay jokes.

Smith is his own biggest fan, unfortunately.

Autobloke · Post by **Autobloke** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 8:31 pm

Phew! I thought I was weird or something 'cos I didn't particularly like some of Smith's stuff.
The dialogue IS cool on most of his movies though, and I liked Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back 'cos I just like that bizarre type of movie and dumb/rude humour.
I quite fancied that lead woman in Chasing Amy - although she did have an odd voice.

Snoogins.

sprunkner · Post by **sprunkner** » Thu Jul 21, 2005 11:45 pm

Gotta say I thought Chasing Amy was far more worth watching than any of his others. Come on, if you found that out about your lesbian girlfriend, you would react the same way, wouldn't you?

And Star Wars is racist...

Brendocon · Post by **Brendocon** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 7:43 am

"F**k Lando Calrissian!"

KingMob · Post by **KingMob** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:37 am

Chasing Amy def my preferred Smith movie also. Hooper rules.

Poss cliche? Are his movies just considered good because they are 'relatable' to? Part of why - in fact pretty much the only reason why - I enjoy Clerks, Mallrats and Chasing Amy is pretty much because of that.
If so, if they don't strike a chord with someone for that reason, would they just come across as pointless and crap?

Spot-on with Indy and the Last Crusade.

Brendocon · Post by **Brendocon** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 8:50 am

I think a lot of their appeal is definitely in the human element. Taps into certain emotions in the viewer, lets you empathise with the characters.

I think it was Joss Whedon that said "I know nothing about science, but I understand people." I think that if you can connect to the viewer on an emotional level, the rest of the story doesn't matter so much, as it lets people feel a part of it.

If you took away the "two male buddies as the central characters" aspect from his films, I'd expect them to flounder. It's the main dynamic that he builds everything else off, and does show a bit of a lack of originality. It's something he can do well, so he sticks to it.

If a film produces characters that the viewer can relate to, it can get let off on a lot of other stuff.

Autobloke · Post by **Autobloke** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:02 pm

Brendocon wrote:If a film produces characters that the viewer can relate to, it can get let off on a lot of other stuff.

I worked in a petrol station/store for a while, so I can relate to the stuff in Clerks (well, perhaps not the guy dying in the bog, or roof hockey, or - you get my point though). As for letting it off of other stuff, my main problem with the film was that it didn't ever seem to be going anywhere plotwise - it could've ended pretty much anywhere in the story. And the black and white just made my head hurt. Anyway, it was only done for budget reasons, so I'll judge it on the fact that it would have benfitted a bit more from being in colour, in my opinion.

Brendocon · Post by **Brendocon** » Fri Jul 22, 2005 11:34 pm

The b/w adds to the charm of Clerks, imo.

And no, the story doesn't really go anywhere. That's sort of the point. It's mundane and meandering, much like the lives of those it revolves around.