|
It's been a while since I've seen it, but I recall that one scene with Holden and Alyssa smoking cigarettes in bed having a pretty nice moonlit thing going on.
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
Here's a Kevin Smith thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCYSK0R-Sxw Cameos by that guy from Comic Book Men and James Rolfe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
I like Chasing Amy quite a bit and it's an earnest, if sometimes overwrought attempt by Smith to deal with some issues that he was actually having, though it's taken to a more extreme degree. I feel like it's a more honest and human work than say 'Clerks 2' is, which probably would've worked better if they were working in an office now or something. I've never had any real issue with how it looks, it just seems to look like any indie film from the 90s, like 'Singles' or 'Reality Bites'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 10:29
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:I've never had any real issue with how it looks, it just seems to look like any indie film from the 90s, like 'Singles' or 'Reality Bites'. Excellent comparison to the two worst movies ever made. Reality Bites makes me want to join the Taliban so I can ban singing and dancing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Here's a Kevin Smith thing. I'm curious how this is going to work as a film. Everything I know about the behind the scenes of Clerks is that it was a pretty straight-forward zero budget film. There's only so much comedy that can be drawn from them using hockey sticks as boom mic poles.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:I'm curious how this is going to work as a film. Everything I know about the behind the scenes of Clerks is that it was a pretty straight-forward zero budget film. There's only so much comedy that can be drawn from them using hockey sticks as boom mic poles. Smith has also already told all the stories dozens of times. It seems to be directly targeted at diehard KS fans who are willing to pay to see stories they've already heard/read played out by amateur actors. Apparently it only raised 9% of its crowdfunding goal, so not sure that is a very big audience: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-kevin-smith-biopic-shooting-clerks
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:I'm curious how this is going to work as a film. Everything I know about the behind the scenes of Clerks is that it was a pretty straight-forward zero budget film. There's only so much comedy that can be drawn from them using hockey sticks as boom mic poles. It should end with animated Dante and Randall walking out of a movie theater talking about how much a waste of time the movie was
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
SpaceWolfPurrp posted:It should end with animated Dante and Randall walking out of a movie theater talking about how much a waste of time the movie was "A 90 minute gay joke"
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:I'm curious how this is going to work as a film. Everything I know about the behind the scenes of Clerks is that it was a pretty straight-forward zero budget film. There's only so much comedy that can be drawn from them using hockey sticks as boom mic poles. Its act structure would be perfect if they dont spend all the time on the shooting. If i did it i'd start with smith a nobody grocery store clerk, his realization (with the help of his sister): "I dont want to be a filmmaker, i am a filmmaker, i just havent made a film yet. Jump cut to various failures in film school and an initially antagonistic relationship with scott mosier, his partner for "clerks". His house and car are nearly destroyed in a massive storm. Point out what a happy accident the movie was, making clear that they dont really care about this movie's quality, they just want to get it done cheap and use it as a calling card. Blah blah blah Auditions blah blah shooting. Than the real dramatic part happens: You drop hints throughout the movie that the whole objective is this film festival and thats where they will hit it big, play it up like they will and at the last moment open that theater door to see 3 people in it! (2 of which didnt like the movie and think nazis are reencarnated to live in NJ) Smith goes into a despair (and remarks with discomfort how loving raunchy the movie is) and heads home to consider his credit card debt. The last person turns out to be some kind of movie mover and shaker who calls the right people, movie ends with them getting invited to sundance and you end with credit text explaining what happened there as far as his movie getting bought. (i love to end on a happy note) MattD1zzl3 fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Its act structure would be perfect if they dont spend all the time on the shooting. If i did it i'd start with smith a nobody grocery store clerk, his realization (with the help of his sister): "I dont want to be a filmmaker, i am a filmmaker, i just havent made a film yet. Jump cut to various failures in film school and an initially antagonistic relationship with scott mosier, his partner for "clerks". His house and car are nearly destroyed in a massive storm. Point out what a happy accident the movie was, making clear that they dont really care about this movie's quality, they just want to get it done cheap and use it as a calling card. Blah blah blah Auditions blah blah shooting. Than the real dramatic part happens: You drop hints throughout the movie that the whole objective is this film festival and thats where they will hit it big, play it up like they will and at the last moment open that theater door to see 3 people in it! (2 of which didnt like the movie and think nazis are reencarnated to live in NJ) Smith goes into a despair (and remarks with discomfort how loving raunchy the movie is) and heads home to consider his credit card debt. The last person turns out to be some kind of movie mover and shaker who calls the right people, movie ends with them getting invited to sundance and you end with credit text explaining what happened there as far as his movie getting bought. (i love to end on a happy note) This. I'd like to see that movie, even though its been covered in clerks X and at every other time Kevin smith is mentioned. Played straight it'd be watchable and and enjoyable. The trailer however looks like every other student film project out there. Clown shoes even.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 06:54
|
|
|
It's actually sort of amazing how Smith has turned himself into a brand. He's a marketable thing now where it's specifically about 'him'. On another note, I was listening to the commentaries for Louis, and he spends time talking about different lenses and why they were used etc and it makes Smith's unwillingness to learn anything even more remarkable. You have some amazing talent at your disposal (I think Jersey Girl is his best looking movie) and you carry on wearing your unwillingness to learn as if it's charming. Crazy thing is that it sort of was at the start. When he's making jokes about Mallrats and his limitations it was refreshing...but then it never stopped. It's no wonder that Bruce Willis chewed him out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 13:01
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:It's no wonder that Bruce Willis chewed him out. So what exactly did Bruce Willis say? I've heard Kevin Smith say quite a few negative words about Willis, but not the other way around.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
He took him aside on the set of Cop Out and berated him for gesturing with his hands to show the size of the lens he wanted because he didn't know the name of it
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
That always seemed like something you would really have to go out of your way to not learn. How do you go decades making movies and not even accidentally pick up that stuff along the way? With anyone else I would just assume that it was a joke, but I absolutely believe it given the quality of Smith's films.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
Raxivace posted:So what exactly did Bruce Willis say? I've heard Kevin Smith say quite a few negative words about Willis, but not the other way around. As the other fella said, basically Willis wanted to know what lenses they were using etc (Sometimes an actor likes to know because it helps modulate their performance) and Smith just sort of motioned with his hands. Willis chewed him out because how can he be a director when he doesn't know what different lenses do? He was supposedly excited to work with Smith until then, and the final product shows. While he has a reputation for being difficult, both Rian Johnson and Wes Anderson had good things to say about him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 15:22
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:It's actually sort of amazing how Smith has turned himself into a brand. He's a marketable thing now where it's specifically about 'him'. I don't really think it's all his doing because most people don't seem capable of criticizing his films (often rightfully so) without launching into stories of how fat and dumb he is as a person.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
Dr. S.O. Feelgood posted:That always seemed like something you would really have to go out of your way to not learn. How do you go decades making movies and not even accidentally pick up that stuff along the way? With anyone else I would just assume that it was a joke, but I absolutely believe it given the quality of Smith's films. He desperately clings to his "amateur turned pro" persona and believes his technical ignorance is one of the best ways to go about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
And if you have a lighting staff and a director of photography i dont see why not. Sure it would be great if the US president knew about central african rebel groups when an issue comes up, but thats why he has a staff. Clearly i have lower standards in film than you all. Keep the actors in the shot, throw some light on them, keep the mic out, and whatever i dont care about anything else. If i cared this much about quality i couldnt watch many old films. The worst Kevin smith film walks all over "Dawn of the dead", for instance as far as lighting and shooting quality goes. MattD1zzl3 fucked around with this message at 16:37 on Mar 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:And if you have a lighting staff and a director of photography i dont see why not. Sure it would be great if the US president knew about central african rebel groups when an issue comes up, but thats why he has a staff. - Kevin Smith
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:The worst Kevin smith film walks all over "Dawn of the dead", for instance as far as lighting and shooting quality goes. lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Clearly i have lower standards in film than you all. Keep the actors in the shot, throw some light on them, keep the mic out, and whatever i dont care about anything else. If i cared this much about quality i couldnt watch many old films. The worst Kevin smith film walks all over "Dawn of the dead", for instance as far as lighting and shooting quality goes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
I don't know why you're comparing Kevin Smith to Dawn of the Dead of all things, but that is a patently ridiculous argument.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
I'd like to hear Bruce Willis' side of things, because Kevin Smith has been proven in the past to be an exaggerator. Also, Chasing Amy has a reaction shot of Holden after Alyssa's lesbian kiss that totally wasn't filmed much later.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
Both Dawn of the Dead films annihilate anything Smith has ever put his hands on, cinematography-wise.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Toady posted:
Are you under the impression that these things are shot in chronological order? Let me be clear: I do not expect technical quality in visual filmmaking. Maybe you do, that doesnt make you wrong, and i hope it doesnt make me wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Let me be clear: I do not expect technical quality in visual filmmaking. Maybe you do, that doesnt make you wrong, and i hope it doesnt make me wrong. As long as they remember to remove the lens cap it's all good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
let's be clear: i do not expect anything better than literal dog poo poo on a plate when I go to a restaurant. maybe you do, that doesn't make you wrong, and i hope that doesn't make me wrong
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
What's the reason for not expecting quality? Because you don't think he could do any better? That's not exactly a point in his favor. I mean, I also don't expect technical quality from Smith, but I don't think that's a good thing. I like watching good movies, so I would like it if he improved.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:51
|
|
|
there's something to be said for admiring or appreciating a certain visual simplicity in an indie comedy but if you're saying "well clearly any one of Kevin Smith's films are better shot than, I dunno, Dawn of the Dead" then you very clearly have no idea what you're talking about
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Like, being bad in and of itself is not why people criticize Smiths work, its because he's been at this poo poo for twenty goddamn years and is literally proud of being less technically competent than even the weakest of his peers
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
Dr. S.O. Feelgood posted:What's the reason for not expecting quality? To immune whatever you're defending to criticism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
I mean lets not forget, as far back as the Mallrats Laserdisc commentary, Affleck is making fun of Smith for not shooting the traditional Master/Shot/Reverse Shot way, instead just shooting everything in master, because he doesn't know any different. Not once did he apparently think oh maybe they're onto something here, because the joke extends into the Dogma commentary. Weirdly, in some ways Clerks is one of his better shot movies, because it all adds to this sort of security camera footage aesthetic. Something like that is a lot more forgiveable than say the scene in Clerks 2 where Dante and Randall argue and Smith doesn't seem to know what to do, so he just spins the camera around them like a low-rent Michael Bay.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:I mean lets not forget, as far back as the Mallrats Laserdisc commentary, Affleck is making fun of Smith for not shooting the traditional Master/Shot/Reverse Shot way, instead just shooting everything in master, because he doesn't know any different. Not once did he apparently think oh maybe they're onto something here, because the joke extends into the Dogma commentary. I used to find it charming when he admitted to just straight up stealing shots for scenes when he couldn't think of a way to film it himself. Then I learned about how all director's do this, but most learn to adapt the shots competently into their movies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Let me be clear: I do not expect technical quality in visual filmmaking. Maybe you do, that doesnt make you wrong, and i hope it doesnt make me wrong. I understand. Just the other day I was watching a Hitchcock film and I was thinking that the technical quality and craftsmanship really doesn't contribute much. All the time he spent on that could have been spent coming up with a way for Cary Grant to make a joke about his penis or adding a subplot about how all lesbians really need is a guy to "cure" them, thus making the films important and timeless artifacts of cinema that are referred to as touchstones by all future directors. Fig.1 - unexpected:  Let me be clear too: I do not expect all films to be Hitchcock, but if a director doesn't even want to try, I would also hope he doesn't throw a loving poo poo on the internet when I decide to stay home and watch To Catch A Thief for the fifth time instead of watching a movie about hanging around the mall written and directed by a middle aged man who believes that being lazy is being "indie". InfiniteZero fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Mar 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:but if you're saying "well clearly any one of Kevin Smith's films are better shot than, I dunno, Dawn of the Dead" then you very clearly have no idea what you're talking about When i tried to think of a movie everyone would have heard of made in sort of the same era as "clerks" it was what sprung to mind. I think it looks like poo poo. So does clerks. But the original question was if is personal filmmaking journey was a dramatic and compelling story, which it clearly was (even if he hasnt figured out lenses yet).
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:When i tried to think of a movie everyone would have heard of made in sort of the same era as "clerks" it was what sprung to mind. I think it looks like poo poo. So does clerks. Clerks, Release date October 19, 1994 (USA) Dawn of the Dead, Release date May 24, 1979 (USA) Dawn of the Dead, Release date March 10, 2004 (USA)
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:When i tried to think of a movie everyone would have heard of made in sort of the same era as "clerks" it was what sprung to mind. I think it looks like poo poo. So does clerks. Uncle Boogeyman posted:you very clearly have no idea what you're talking about
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
I wonder if they're confused with Return of the Living Dead 3: Came out in 1993.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:Are you under the impression that these things are shot in chronological order?  Affleck, thinner from Going All The Way, doing a "lesbians" face in an empty room with different lighting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
JediTalentAgent posted:I wonder if they're confused with Return of the Living Dead 3: Came out in 1993. He'd still be wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 19:27
|
|