Hmm, I kind of liked “a wheelie good time”.
Yeah, but a film critic appearing as a transexual in a roundly panned flick about the fickle Hollywood machine. Ol’ Rex couldn’t very well walk out of that one. About all it didn’t have was donkey sex.
It did have Raquel Welch in the role of Dr. Frankenfurter. And a pre-augmented Farrah. In bed together. With Rex Reed! Man, I was born in '61. Raquel Welch and Farrah Fawcett, about 1970 vintage, were high on my hi-it list (Rex Reed…not so much). If my pecker would have grown 1/2 mm with every stroke I dedicated to just those 2 ladies, it would reach halfway to Alpha Centauri.
I never saw this movie back then, it is pretty tame/lame by today’s standards. I probably never saw it until maybe 10 years ago.
I think Joel Siegel out to be strapped down and… No not that!.. have to watch this movie with his eyes held open by metal clamps. That’ll show him.
I just listened to that and it was funny. You’re right, Siegel doesn’t realize he’s talking directly to Smith until over halfway through, but that’s not really his fault. Smith never introduced himself but that’s not his fault. I would say the fault lies with the producer or assistant or whoever it was who called Siegel and prepped him for the airtime. I’ve been a call-in guest on a radio show and they tell you what to expect, who you’ll be talking to, and generally how long you’ll be on. Someone didn’t do their job here, and I kind of felt sorry for Siegel. Not just because of that, but also because they hardly let him get a word in.
Of course, when he did speak he kept tightening the noose around his neck. He just refused to admit that he had acted unprofessionally by either walking out or by causing a disturbance. He finally apologised but it wasn’t very convincing. He honestly didn’t realize that what he’d done was wrong, much like Gene Shalit, who honestly didn’t see anything wrong with calling Jack a “sexual predator” in his review of Brokeback Mountain.
The best part of the interview came at the end when Siegel says something like “I think Kevin Smith is a fine filmmaker” and Smith asks Siegel if he can put that on the posters for Clerks II as a blurb, and Siegel says yes! Smith was delighted.
Btw, I liked Jersey Girl. It’s a trifle, but it was sweet. Liv Tyler was adorable, the kid was believable, Affleck was decent, George Carlin can actually act, and JLo dies within the first 5 minutes.
(I like JLo as an actress but I thought I’d say that to head anyone else off)
My wife and I just got back from Clerks 2. On top of being ridiculously, outrageously funny, it was actually a pretty heartwarming film. I almost got choked-up during the jail scene.
The fact that someone called this beautiful movie “foul, mean, and repulsive” is upsetting.
In summary…
Joel Siegel thinks Kevin Smith is an imbecile who makes stupid, repulsive movies that aren’t nearly as funny or insightful as he thinks they are.
Kevin Smith thinks Joel Siegel is a hack who doesn’t know anything about movies, never says anything interesting, and pads his reviews with godawful puns.
THEY’RE BOTH RIGHT!
I don’t get why everyone thinks Kevin Smith’s head is so far up his own ass. He constantly drives home the point that he’s made a career out of “dick and fart jokes” and admits that if he didn’t get lucky with Clerks, he’d still be a clerk.
If he seems excited about his own work, it’s only because he’s a geek at heart. Geeks get excited about movies/books/video games, etc. They shouldn’t get slammed for it just because they’re moderately successful.
That’s a different Kevin Smith than the one discussed in this thread. The Kevin Smith I know is a pretty smart guy who makes interesting movies that are generally as funny and insightful as he thinks they are (assuming he actually said “My movies are funny and insightful” out loud somewhere). Repulsive, yeah, gotta give you that one, but if they were repulsive with no redeeming features, I wouldn’t be interested.
After having seen the movie, I think Joel is even more of a dipshit.
Agreed. This is a man without much of an ego.
Ridiculous to walk out on a Kevin Smith movie because of the obscenity. There are so many better reasons.
I agree with all of this. In interviews the guy is very self-deprecating and not a bit egoistic. He even admitted that Jersey Girl didn’t work and that he wouldn’t try to do any more mainstream movies. He sometimes posts on the AICN boards and he probably rips on himself as much as anyone else does. He very much comes off like a guy who feels that he’s just an ordinary geek who got lucky and found an audience and appreciates everything he has. I get the impression that he also really listens to his fans and wants to give them what they want, make them laugh, make a good living and be content with it. He knows a certain percentage of moviegoers are going to hate everything he does, that he isn’t really the kind of filmmaker who’s ever going to become an another Spielberg or even a Tarantino so he’s just decided to write the kind of stuff that he finds entertaining and what his fans find entertaing and to hell with everyone else because he’s never going to please them anyway.
Kevin Smith may be an absolute sweetheart of a human being, but that’s irrelevant.
And I’m not buying for a second that “Dogma” and “Chasing Amy” (the only two Kevin Smith movies I’ve seen) are the work of a guy who just wants to make pee-pee and poo-poo jokes. They’re the work of a guy who thinks (wrongly) that he has something interesting and important to say about serious subjects.
I had problems with both of those movies too. In fact, Clerks 2 is probably the firts Kevin Smith movie I have liked all the way through (the firts Clerks movie and the Jay and Silent Bob movie made me laugh here and there but I didn’t think they were brilliant).
I think Smith did go through a phase where he was trying to say something more serious but has now more or less recognized his limits and given up on it. The fact that his latest movie isn’t trying to do anything but play to his strengths (the ribald humor, the geeky dialogue, a few sight gags, some in-jokes for his fans) without trying to go for anything more serious or profound (except maybe a mild bit of musing about growing up) is the reason I enjoyed it.
Which encompasses valuing friendship. And accepting who you are. And not over-reaching for goals just because you think you should. And not letting other people run your life. And accepting responsibility. And taking responsibility. And some other interesting things like that.
And that you can get a live donkey fuck show to come to your place on short notice.
Hey, now, let’s not offend anybody. It’s not a donkey fuck show, it’s interspecies erotica.
HAHA! I forgot about that.
See now, snoots are going to think that Smith thinks bestiality is ok, and therefore we must too.
I gotta say that having seen the film in question that the whole donkey fucking business was tame! (As tame as such subject matter can be.) I was expecting to hear Randall get all graphic about everything, and instead, we got a pretty oblique description. I think that I was the first one in the theater to figure out who Kelly was. I have to say that it was a good, strong, film, but not Smith’s best work.
It’s probably okay if you ask for forgiveness afterwards.
Speaking of, did any of you guys know Jesus was a Jew?
I don’t care if KS makes another movie or not. I liked Clerks, loved Mall Rats, liked Chasing Amy, thought Dogma was alright, and loved Jay and Silent Bob (I used to smoke pot then, go figure). I have no intention to watch Jersey Girl, ever. I saw a “behind the scenes” piece on Clerks II and I think I’ll watch it, but not in theaters. IMO KS sold his soul when he started schilling for Leno, how pathetic. He had so much cred too. He jumped the shark big-time. Too bad, he had lots of potential. Then again, so did Troy Duffy. Meh.
Saw it yesterday and I think it’s some of Kevin’s best work.
All this because a big shot wanted to pay him good money to sit there for a few minutes and talk about a movie he made?
Snerk.