09-25-2009, 12:28 PM
|
#11
|
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Americas Finest City
Casino cash: $7990778
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saccopoo
The guy uses the same formula that he employed in Clerks and re-works it (barely) for every other movie. It was brilliant in Clerks. The grainy B&W filming gave legitimacy to the locale and main characters plight of self-assumed brilliance and supremacy while working for/at a low budget convenience store, the witty mental sparing/castigating of their inferiors/superiors, the relationship ironies, etc. It was brilliant. And then came everything else, which was, pardon the pun, Kevin Smithian dogmatic tripe. The fact that he forced a tired, obnoxious, overused Jay on us, the spiteful insightful loser buddies, all of it. And it got progressively worse each and every film, culminating in that putrencent pile of pungent porcine poop, Clerks 2.
And I'd beg to differ on Mel Brooks. Some really brilliant stuff, but Robin Hood - Men in Tights and Space Balls didn't do him any favors.
If you are talking about directors/writers, how about Danny Boyle, Clint Eastwood, Baz Luhrman and the like?
|
You have sniffed way too much glue to be alive let alone typing. Jay is popular. Hence there are several movies with him in it. Batman is popular. Hence there are several movies about him. Some are better than others. Kevin Smith is in the business to make money, and he does. Because he gives people what they want to see. Aside from people with no sense of humor or bad taste in movies. But hey, you cant please everybody.
|
Posts: 2,321
|
|