Page 1 of 2
Posted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:03 am
by Leisher
Kevin Smith returns to his roots with this story about Dante and Randall 10 years after Clerks.
They now work at Mooby's, which also happens to be Jay and Silent Bob's new hangout.
There are a LOT of laugh out loud moments and lots of nods to Clerks. I haven't heard laughter like that in a theater in a loooong time. It even got cheers and applause at the end.
The really shocking thing is Brian O'Halloran and Jeff Anderson's performances.
Dante is still Dante, but not as...cocky, which is PERFECT for his current situation.
Randall is still Randall, but he has some serious moments and really shows he can act.
In fact, the only person who didn't really sell me on their role was Jennifer Smith, whom I believe is Kevin's wife and not really an actress.
The majority of the laughs come from Randall and Jay which is great because unlike Lucas, Smith hasn't lost his edge since he's had children.
You will LOVE Randall's rant about the Rings trilogy and Jay is scary good in his Buffalo Bill impersonation.
Smith really made a great followup here and while some scenes aren't for everyone (there is a tribute to 80s films and a tribute to the 50s teenie bop films, with the 50s thing seeming to be a flop with the group I was with), you have to respect that the man made the movie for his fans and didn't try to create some souless, hybrid piece of crap that tries to appeal to everyone.
Overall, this is a huge success and a must see for any Smith fan.
I really hope he has enough ideas left to give us Clerks III because I think there's at least one more story to tell about Dante and Randall.
I already want to see it again.
8 out of 10
Read the credits at the end, there's some funny stuff in there.
Posted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:21 am
by Vince
The really shocking thing is Brian O'Halloran and Jeff Anderson's performances.
The majority of the laughs come from Randall and Jay which is great because unlike Lucas, Smith hasn't lost his edge since he's had children.
You will LOVE Randall's rant about the Rings trilogy and Jay is scary good in his Buffalo Bill impersonation.
Smith really made a great followup here and while some scenes aren't for everyone (there is a tribute to 80s films and a tribute to the 50s teenie bop films, with the 50s thing seeming to be a flop with the group I was with), you have to respect that the man made the movie for his fans and didn't try to create some souless, hybrid piece of crap that tries to appeal to everyone.
Overall, this is a huge success and a must see for any Smith fan.
I really hope he has enough ideas left to give us Clerks III because I think there's at least one more story to tell about Dante and Randall.
I already want to see it again.
8 out of 10
Read the credits at the end, there's some funny stuff in there.
O'Halloran showed me he had some acting talent in Vulgar (I think that was the name of it). He was able to really convey what his character was feeling, just not through dialog. He can't deliver a line without sounding like he's a stand-in that's helping the real actors with their lines. He's really bad.
The majority of the laughs come from Randall and Jay which is great because unlike Lucas, Smith hasn't lost his edge since he's had children.
You did see Jersey Girl, right? :;):
Posted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 10:32 am
by Leisher
You did see Jersey Girl, right? :;):
Loved it.
It is my belief that Jersey Girl was only bashed the way it was because of the backlash from Gigli. Remember this was the other film with Affleck and J-Lo.
Affleck was good, Carlin was great, and the little girl was awesome. Live Tyler was decent enough. The writing was well done and the characters were actually selfish and real. Where was the problem?
That movie got a bum rap which Smith acknowledges in Clerks II...
Posted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 2:54 pm
by Malcolm
Vulgar (I think that was the name of it).
Yep. In my Netflix queue.
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 1:50 pm
by Vince
You did see Jersey Girl, right? :;):
Loved it.
It is my belief that Jersey Girl was only bashed the way it was because of the backlash from Gigli. Remember this was the other film with Affleck and J-Lo.
Affleck was good, Carlin was great, and the little girl was awesome. Live Tyler was decent enough. The writing was well done and the characters were actually selfish and real. Where was the problem?
That movie got a bum rap which Smith acknowledges in Clerks II...
To be honest, up until a couple of days ago I didn't even realize this was a Kevin Smith film. To be equally blunt, I'm not sure if your knowing that it was may have tainted your view of it somewhat.
But you are right that Jersey Girl really wasn't all that bad. But it was horribly predictable, which in and of itself wouldn't be a problem it it handn't been equally boring. I had completely forgotten all about this movie having ever been made until I was overlooking a review of Clerks II recently, and I actually rented it and watched it a couple of years ago.
Reverse the genders of Affleck and Liv and you have any of a number of movies on Lifetime, We and Oxygen. Not really bad, but quite forgettable. And like Jack Sparrow said, "But you have heard of me."
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 4:05 pm
by Malcolm
I was not a huge fan of "Jersey Girl."
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 4:05 pm
by Selby
Jersey Girl struck me as a movie that was edited and changed from it's original intended release. I don't know whether it is true or not, but some jumps to various points in time just seem like something was missing. The ending setup from the job interview to the play just didn't feel right at home with the rest of the movie, almost like it was too much of a "feel good" ending rather than the one that was originally intended to be. Like I said, I have no way of knowing whether I am right or wrong, it is just the way it came off to me.
Carlin was perfect in that movie, the kid and Affleck were decent, but the storyline and responses of some of the scenes struck me as hokey\fake compared to some other moments. The kid bitching about her dad trying to get ahead in a career somewhere and him not having time for her every little moment annoyed the crap out of me, mainly because my dad did his best to provide for our family and just because he wasn't at every little practice or match doesn't mean he didn't love us or want what was best for us. Sacrifices have to be made kid! When you're older, you understand that better. Affleck not even thinking to put the kid in daycare or hire someone to help out also annoyed me, especially if he was as high powered and up the chain at his big job as they made him out to be. Beyond that, it was an okay movie 
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:59 pm
by Vince
Vulgar (I think that was the name of it).
Yep. In my Netflix queue.
Worth seeing. It started really slow and I was thinking, This really sucks. Then it kind of takes off in a really weird and fucked up direction.
It was one of those movies that wasn't so much a really good movie, but a movie that alters your brain for a day or two after you see it while you're trying to process the whole thing (if that makes any sense). It was powerful without being great.
Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 10:50 am
by Leisher
Reverse the genders of Affleck and Liv and you have any of a number of movies on Lifetime, We and Oxygen.
Most chick flicks or romantic comedies are like that. You need to come up with something better than that.
Jersey Girl struck me as a movie that was edited and changed from it's original intended release. I don't know whether it is true or not, but some jumps to various points in time just seem like something was missing. The ending setup from the job interview to the play just didn't feel right at home with the rest of the movie, almost like it was too much of a "feel good" ending rather than the one that was originally intended to be. Like I said, I have no way of knowing whether I am right or wrong, it is just the way it came off to me.
I felt the jumps were completely natural. No movie has the time to tell a person's life from start to finish so he concentrated on the key points. Other films have used the same method of "time jumping". And yeah, the ending was very "feel good", but he was going for that. This was more of a mainstream, family film, which is totally unlike him.
the kid and Affleck were decent, but the storyline and responses of some of the scenes struck me as hokey\fake compared to some other moments
The kid was awesome. Best performance by a little girl not named Dakota Fanning.
As for the fake/hokey stuff, again, it's a family film, plus it's a Kevin Smith film. His dialogue is always a bit more highbrow in how it comes out. (Sure, the content might not be, but the delivery is...)
The kid bitching about her dad trying to get ahead in a career somewhere and him not having time for her every little moment annoyed the crap out of me, mainly because my dad did his best to provide for our family and just because he wasn't at every little practice or match doesn't mean he didn't love us or want what was best for us. Sacrifices have to be made kid! When you're older, you understand that better. Affleck not even thinking to put the kid in daycare or hire someone to help out also annoyed me, especially if he was as high powered and up the chain at his big job as they made him out to be.
This all is life. Kids are stupid when it comes to the big picture and some parents are just horrible. Children don't understand the concept of work and sacrifice, that is only something that can be learned from years of experience and a true knowledge of how the world works. As for Affleck's daycare choices, you must not have kids. No matter how well you plan, sometimes you have to watch the kids yourself. Plus, daycare is expensive and if you have a grandparent that's available to watch the kid, most people are going to go that route. The unbelieveable part came when nobody knew how to watch a child for a few minutes, especially one that young. They're either sleeping or you stick a bottle in their mouth. Done.
To be honest, up until a couple of days ago I didn't even realize this was a Kevin Smith film. To be equally blunt, I'm not sure if your knowing that it was may have tainted your view of it somewhat.
Actually, and this is something Smith has pointed out, the fact that Smith made it is probably why a lot of people didn't like the film. He said a lot of his fans were disappointed and wanted Jay and Silent Bob and references to pop culture and all the things Smith puts in his films. They weren't willing to accept Smith doing something more mainstream. He said people called him a sellout. What the fuck? People are idiots.
Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:15 pm
by Vince
He said a lot of his fans were disappointed and wanted Jay and Silent Bob and references to pop culture and all the things Smith puts in his films. They weren't willing to accept Smith doing something more mainstream.
If by "mainstream" he was shooting for mediocre, then he succeeded (just my opinion)
Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 12:46 am
by Selby
They weren't willing to accept Smith doing something more mainstream.
I had no problem with him doing what he wants. As a matter of fact I knew it wouldn't be another Jay & Silent Bob movie, so I wasn't even expecting them. I just didn't think it was that well edited or scripted in some parts. That's probably just my "not from Jersey" world influencing my thoughts =P
Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:02 am
by Malcolm
This movie kicked much ass. See it. All of you, damnit. I only wish my newly-married buddy'd made it to the theatre so I could see the look on his face after he heard some of the lines that were tossed around. Ain't quite as good as the first one, but I'll still toss four stars its way.
Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:45 am
by Malcolm
I'd another opportunity to see this.
If you can imagine not one, but two versions of Dante & his fiancee, you get an idea of the four folk I saw it w\. The biting irony & satire of the flick w\ respect to my company exponentially increased the comedic value. I may not be that entertained ever again.
Edited By Malcolm on 1155530734
Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:59 pm
by TPRJones
I liked it. Not quite as charming as the first, and the slick camera moves look a little out of place, but on the whole it's a 5-star movie, IMO.
Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:36 pm
by GORDON
You NEVER go ass to mouth. You just don't do it.
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 3:02 am
by Cakedaddy
If you rent/buy the DVD, make sure you look for GORDON in the credits. He gives you a shout out. I guess you're famous now. I suppose it's possible that other people in the world might go by the name GORDON. But based on the context, I'm pretty sure it's you. So, don't you feel really cool now.
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:38 am
by GORDON
Actually, I do have some autographed stuff of his.
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 5:52 am
by Cakedaddy
Actually, he lists the names of everyone that registered at his my space site, or something like that. So, others from here may be listed as well. Only took the time to look for Gordon. It's a looooooonnnnnnggggg list.
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 12:37 pm
by TPRJones
It's 11 minutes of high-speed three-column scrolling in tiny text. How in the world did you find GORDON in there?
And since when does GORDON have a myspace account? There's something disturbing about that.
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:16 pm
by Cakedaddy
It's alphabetical.