Search This Blog

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Clerks II Review

There's only one direction in the faces that I see;
Its upward to the ceiling, where the chamber's said to be.
Like the forest fight for sunlight, that takes root in every tree.
They are pulled up by the magnet, believing they're free.


Clerks II will go down as the worst sequel to a movie in the history of mankind, at least to me it will. I remember when I heard that Kevin Smith was in the process of making a script for the sequel and I immediately disliked the decision.
How exactly are you going to make a sequel to Clerks?


Clerks is one of my all time favorites. It has great character development, phenomenal dialogue, and it was hilarious. It’s one of those movies that you could watch over and over again and still catch something new. The acting wasn’t perfect and there were some plot holes in the film but it was a great movie for anyone who has ever worked in retail.

Clerks II was…

Well I’m going to put my frustration in this movie in a series of concise rants.

-It’s in Color
As a rule of thumb if you’re going to make a sequel to Clerks, it has to be in black and white. It has to be because it’s just really weird seeing all the characters ten years later and in color. I don’t want to see Dante’s blue eyes or Randal’s razor burn.
Black and White added an underrated element to the first film in that it was almost like a hidden camera or someone who just hung out around the Quick Stop. Color makes this seem like a “summer blockbuster” which makes the credibility turn to crap.

-Characters
I don’t know who the characters were in this film but they were not the same characters in Clerks. Dante was basically the same but I never sympathized with him. His presence seemed forced and he never really added much to the movie.
Randal was my favorite character in cinema history as a result of Clerks. In Clerks he was a unemotional voice of reason; he had the blunt sarcasm and stinging honesty that would bring anyone back to Earth. He put Dante in his place and was right.

In Clerks II Randal is just a shell of his former self. The dialogue is predictable and formulaic. Basically whenever he approaches someone you can predict when his “shocking conversation intro” will start and his “crazy anecdote” or his “unbelievable sarcastic remark” will be said.

Also the homosexuality by Randal is painfully blatant in this movie. Before, it was always an interesting element but in this movie it was a lot like Champ Kind telling Ron Burgandy that they should rent an apartment together.

Randal also shows emotion in this movie and even mutters the phrase,
“I love you”

(blink: blink)

Seriously, WTF?
Randal used to be unpredictable but in this movie he’s nothing but a Kevin Smith puppet.

-Silent Bob
This has actually been a long standing annoyance to me for awhile because Silent Bob is now nothing more than a mime. It wasn’t the case in Clerks or Chasing Amy where Bob would stand and smoke in a dignified manor. He’d do very little than look around or flick his fingers toward Jay and Jay would automatically know what he’s talking about. Plus he’d always have incredible words of wisdom at some point of Clerks and Chasing Amy making for a damn interesting character.
In Mallrats, Dogma, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, and Clerks II Silent Bob is doing this stupid mime crap. He’ll dance with this stupid bright eyed smile, make these stupid looks toward anything cool or dumb, and his words of wisdom is wasted on “no ticket” or “I’ve got nothing”. What happened to the introvert that didn’t give a damn about anything?

-This movie is basically a watered down version of Clerks
As I was watching this movie I was amazed as to how this movie had the same outline like Clerks had. It was pretty damn close to a full blown cheap plagiarizing job. Dante was unable to feel confident in his current relationship, Randal was jealous, Jay and Silent Bob save the day, and even the same exact argument in the first movie was used in the sequel.
That’s right, the same “shit or get off the pot” argument was used as the main climactic argument in Clerks II.

-Transformers
I was feeling pretty objective about this movie until Randal started crapping all over the Transformers. Randal gets all over the religious shut-in Elias about how Transformers are nerdy and a terrible cartoon.

I really took offense to that and even mouthed off,
“You son of a bitch!” while watching it at the theatre

I’m thinking that Randal hating the transformers was an outlet for Kevin Smith to vent his feeling on the cartoon.

Nerdy?! From a guy that does whatever he can to include Stan Lee and a Star Wars conversation somewhere in all his movies…and he calls Transformers nerdy!

-There is a song and dance routine in this movie
Nothing more needs to be said about this.

-Kevin Smith
I’ll be honest, Smith was one of my favorite directors back in the day. I loved Clerks, enjoyed Mallrats, and I think Chasing Amy is one of the most underrated movies ever. I loved the Kevin Smith dialogue and how he interlaced the New Jersey trilogy seamlessly throughout the first three movies.
Now I’m putting Smith in the M. Night Shayamalan category for directors that started out decent but then lost the heart they originally had.

Clerks II sucked really bad. Don’t see it.

2 comments:

mps said...

carpet crawlers, evening callers

Aliecat said...

Man, I wish it was good, I really do, cuz I'd actually see it because I have a wierdo crush on Jay. Sick, ain't it?