Slashdot Mirror
Kevin Smith set for Clerks sequel
bckrispi writes "Director Kevin Smith has announced an official sequel to his indie cult classic, Clerks. Currently titled "The Passion of the Clerks", the film will pick up with Dante and Randal ten years after the original as our two heroes trudge through the malaise of their thirties. Jason Mewes, now out of rehab, is back on deck to play Jay across Smith's Silent Bob."
To me, this represents Kevin Smith taking the final plunge into sheer hackdom. None of his movies lived up to the expectations that naturally came about as a result of the edginess of the original Clerks, so Kevin Smith is kowtowing to his fans' demands rather than making good movies. Jersey Girl both sucked and bombed. Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back was just a series of in-jokes for the rabid Kevin Smith fans. And wasn't that supposed to be the last movie set in the "View Askewniverse" that contained movies like Clerks and Mallrats? To me, this just makes Smith sound a lot like George Lucas. "I'll never make another sequel in this series. Wait, what? Money? Oh, yeah, I'll do it for money. What do you guys want to see? More Jay, more Randall, and the origins of Boba Fett? Ok, here's exactly what you want! Now pay me!"
This sig has been stolen. Return it to its original user for a reward.
Currently titled "The Passion of the Clerks"
At the end of one of Kevin Smith's movies, it stated that the title of the Clerks sequel would be Clerks 2: Barely Clerkin'. Guess they decided not to stick with that.
I really enjoyed the format and bad acting in the original Clerks ("You ever notice that all the prices end in nine? Damn, that's eerie."). I hope the sequel returns to Smith's roots a bit, instead of being some highly-produced lets-see-how-many-stars-we-can-put-in-this-flick movie like his recent ones.
I've always been a huge fan of Kevin Smith's movies. I read that "Jersey Girl" was going to be his first "real" movie that he hoped would be spectacular and wow the critics. It wasn't, however, so I guess this means he's going back to what he knows best and everybody loves...dick and fart jokes.
Clerks is a great movie for anyone who hasn't already seen it. If you've ever worked in a convenience or video store, you'll laugh your ass off.
You know, Kevin Smith *was* a great movie masterpiece creator until recently. I don't know if it is because of his direct link to Bennifer, or that he has just decided to sell out after 10 years, or that Jay and Silent Bob made the jerk-off teens thrilled with his work, but I am overly disappointed with the news of this movie being made.
It's bad enough that we have 5 or 6 different DVDs for every movie ever made (Digitally Enhanced, Collectors Edition, Gold Edition, Platinum Edition, Boxed Platinum, ad nauseum) but do we really need to make a fucking sequel of every god damn movie that found even partial success either in the theatre or cult/home markets? Baby Geniuses 2 (I didn't even know this movie had a first installment but I was informed that the first one was terrible) comes out and they wonder why a movie shelved for two years (Hero) rakes in unexpected dollars and a lame fucking sequel sucks it up with 3.3 million total?
Let me guess the pirates are to blame for the theft of money AND decent movies. They are the reasons we have to make duplicate copies of everything playing off the same old lines that the first one had and only adding jokes relating to their ages in the next? Baby Geniuses 4, BG's Grandchildren go to Montessori?
I loved Clerks and it was the first movie I seriously remember being sore from laughter after seeing. I think I have watched it more than any other movie I don't own. Do we really need its status as a cult classic scarred by some overpriced, overhyped, overaged wannabe sequel? If he really loves the fanbase he created he would listen to us on this one. It's a bad idea for all those involved, seriously.
Clerks sequel : (is to) /. :: (as is)
pigs : manned flight
I for one personally welcome our new clerk overlords.
How long are Daredevil: Target and Spider-Man and Black Cat overdue now? 2 Years?
In a row?
Bush Lies On the Record.
How exactly do you make quick money on a sequel to a movie that barely made any money?!
A good example of making quick money in movies is the new AvP movie. You start with a movie that made lots of money. You then create a cheap sequel. Fans of the first will see it even though they know it'll be crap. And because it was made cheaply, it will profit regardless.
Making a sequel out of Clerks is a HUGE monetary risk. Considering that hardly anyone has seen the original, the sequel will have to make money on is own merit.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
I thought Mall Rats, Dogma and Jay and Silent Bob strike back were all "sequels" to Clerks.
Kevin Smith is a one-trick pony whos films get less and less impressive each time out.
Clerks wasn't a great movie, IMO, it just sort of struck one of those cult chords. I know a lot of my friends were going on about it like it was genious or something, myself I thought it was just a cheap indy film with a handful of funny moments.
I'd imagine those who were so in love with it 10 years ago feelings have faded somewhat. Kind of like the Star Wars movies. The fans grew up, got too old to give a shit about SW anymore, and the younger kids couldn't give a shit or get into it at all.
I wouldn't call Rocky Horror Picture Show a great movie either, but it's obviously a cult hit with a lot of legs left in it. But going to the show in drag on Hallowe'en and throwing toast at the bride is one thing. Paying 10 bucks to see the 10-year-delayed (cash grab) sequel is another.
I dunno. Smith, Damon and Affleck, these guys are supposed to be so young and hip and scary talented that they're going to take over Hollywood and change cinema forever. I really don't see where all the talent is, myself. Throw Tarantino on that list too. Pulp Fiction was his only flick I can say I really enjoyed watching.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Eh? So let me get this straight. We're supposed to respect him more because he's going to make more money off of a probably mediocre movie because he's spending less to make it?
He probably knows he'll take in around X amount of money whether he spends $250k or $50 million. But somehow we're supposed to like him more because he's going to low ball the production and increase his profits. At least high production movies typically put more people to work creating them. If he really cared he'd take all the production money he's saving and offer half price rebates to see his movie in the cinemas.
Just not if you were a critic. It lost major critic points for being "formulaic", but for young people, it really was a romantic comedy that was superior to most romantic comedies. Better dialogue, more depth of character, and J Lo dies. What more could you ask for?
The problem Kevin has is that he can't possibly be as "successful" dealing with fare other people have dealt with before (Mallrats (teen mall movie)/J&SBSB(road trip movie)/Jersey Girl(romantic comedy)) as he can be with dealing with stuff no one has done before. There was no other movie like Clerks when Clerks was made, as there was no movie like Dogma or Chasing Amy either. It's not that some of the movies are "better" than the others, they're just more "successful" because they're not compared to other similar successful movies that happened to have come first.
People like me, in their 20's to early 30's, appreciate what Kevin makes, "unique" or not, as being more appropriate for our age group. That's not good for box office success, and it's often not good for great critical acclaim, but it's nice to have generation-specific fare for those of us in that age range.
It's not like the video clerk would give a customer a pity screw in a romantic comedy your parents would go see, is it?
Great movies can be quite "unsuccessful", especially if you're not trying to make a movie that is only going to be great for a certain group of people. It's sad that so many people only measure a movie's success against the opinion of the general population.
paintball
Face it folks, Clerks wasn't all that great. The fact that there are people who identify with the drudgery of working at a dead-end job doesn't make Kevin Smith a good filmmaker, and standing around on the sidewalk smoking for 90 minutes isn't acting.
Well Dante appeared in J&SBSB so it already would have to be non-canon.
For me, the appeal to Kevin Smith is that he looks at Hollywood with an intentional sell out point of view. I feel that his art is that he can "sell out" to such an extent that he manages to lampoon all of Hollywood, internet and pop culture, as well as deep stereotypes all at once.
I think he has that Python-esque talent of taking a joke too far, then taking farther and farther until it finally wraps around to funny again. An example is the profanity of Jay. He's SO profane I think you start to realize it's just words and the words don't mean anything once they are so over-used. Additionally, the inside Hollywood pandering is evident in all his films, taken to extremes just for the fans in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. I think the humor works because he KNOWS he's being shameless. It's raw, unpretentious, lamblasting.
To quote Homer, "It's true. It's true, it's funny because it's true!"
Never confuse volume with power.
His non-J&SB movie pretty much flopped, and well, he hasn't had much luck with anything except Clerks being positively received by the public. Why not?
It's a shame, he's got a good sense of humor and a novel approach to movie making. Here's hoping he can get back into the groove.
Human nature is the same everywhere; the modes only are different. -- Earl of Chesterfield
"It's about what happens when that lazy, 20-something malaise lasts into your 30s. Those dudes are kind of still mired, not in that same exact situation, but in a place where it's time to actually grow up and do something more than just sit around and dissect pop culture and talk about sex," Smith said during an interview at his Hollywood office.
I find this supremely funny. Kevin Smith, God bless him, has done nothing but revisit the same characters, gags, and environments for the past 10 years. So is this movie about "growing up" supposed to be prescient in some fashion? Because I see no evidence of Smith doing anything of the sort in his body of work thus far.
Dissecting pop culture and talking about sex is what's made Kevin Smith his fortune, and now, apparently, he's too good for it? What did I miss?
Don't get me wrong. I love Kevin Smith's movies, and Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back, arguably his worst film, is actually my favorite. I have no quarrel with being preoccupied with sex, drugs, pop culture, and extremely over-tired Star Wars jokes. But at least be honest about your tastes.
It will be interesting to see what he does with this material -- I don't care if he makes a buck off it or not (more power too him), but Smith could come off as something of a hypocritical ass if he's not careful. (Not that he will care what critics have to say about him, of course -- another thing I like about Smith.)
Look, making movies involves risk. The more money you spend, the less risk you are allowed. When the studio puts lots of money on the line, they MAKE you do things a certain way because they want to lessen the risk to their money.
If he does Clerks 2 the low-budget way he wants to, the studios will leave him alone and let him do whatever he wants. He can do any damn thing and its okay. This is a good thing.
As for whether we are supposed to respect him or not, I don't remember him saying "respect me now because of my l337 l0w-budget skillz." He just announced the movie.
And he doesn't really "know" he will make any particular amount of money. If he spends peanuts on this movie he has lessened the risk, not guaranteed huge profits.
Perhaps he just wants the challenge/experience of making another low-budget movie?
Look at the Indiana Jones 4 project (or what's left of it at the moment). Spielberg has already stated that they'll be minimizing CGI and using old-fashioned stuntwork to make the next Jones film. Why? They specifically want to have to work around stunt apparatus - something about how it makes them more creative.
It's already proven that Smith gets more creative when he's got less money to spend. And, as someone else already pointed out, when you're spending less money, you're guaranteed to make it back on Kevin Smith's name alone. If he keeps it on the cheap, Miramax is going to let him do whatever he wants. And that's exactly what I want to see.
Anyone that has seen the Flying Car short on Jay Leno by Kevin Smith, featuring Dante and Randall, knows that the new Clerks Movie will work.