1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Kevin Smith serious about Clerks III?

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by LongTimeListener, Mar 8, 2013.

  1. JRoyal

    JRoyal Well-Known Member

    I'm surprised by the hate for Comic Book Men on here. Seriously, it's friggin' Pawn Stars for comic book geeks. As a comic fan, I dig it. I can see how you wouldn't like it if you aren't into comics, but if you aren't into comics, I don't think you're their core audience.
     
  2. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    The ending of Chasing Amy is wildly disappointing considering how good the first hour or so is... Still a good movie though...
     
  3. JRoyal

    JRoyal Well-Known Member

    I dug Chasing Amy, but Mizzou's right, the ending didn't live up to the early parts of the movie.

    I'm in the same camp as Mizzou, too. I liked Smith's "early" work (Clerks, Mallrats, Chasing Amy, Dogma, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back) but haven't liked his recent movies as much. I didn't despise Clerks II, thought it was decent actually, but nowhere near the original.
     
  4. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    Re: Smith.

    What major (or even minor) studio was ever going to finance another film once he revealed his high-chronic "work process"?
     
  5. sgreenwell

    sgreenwell Well-Known Member

    I think Hollywood is pretty OK with just about any substance you want to put in your body... as long as the work product remains good. Robert Downey Jr. kept getting chances because, even though he had ridiculous substance abuse problems, he was still a hell of an actor. Lindsay Lohan, not so much.

    With Kevin Smith, it's hard to believe the idea that Seth Rogen was the one who get him really into pot, not when Jason Mewes struggled with addiction for so long. I can believe though that it's affecting him more as he's gotten older, and he mistakenly attributes it to Rogen or something else. And to loop back around to my first paragraph, Smith's later work 1) hasn't been that critically acclaimed or 2) made a ton of money. If he wants Clerks III made, I imagine he can probably get financing for that, or another random sequel of a movie that originally made money. But for an original piece of work, I imagine it's a much harder task.
     
  6. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    1. Why would anyone in Hollywood care if Kevin Smith smokes pot? Everybody smokes pot.

    B. I want to like 'Comic Book Men,' but it's terrible. The people/characters in it are not engaging. The format with cuts to banter in the radio booth is much affected. There's not enough actual buying and selling of comics.
     
  7. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    I guess I should have made clear that Mr. Smith smokes on the set, and considers it a creative necessity.

    Studio accountants and bond insurers are unlikely to see it the same way.
     
  8. JRoyal

    JRoyal Well-Known Member

    You don't think Seth Rogen smokes on set? Adam Sandler never smoked on set? Paul Rudd? Dave Chappelle? He was mostly TV, but still. Plenty of Hollywood folk smoke on set. I don't think studio folk worry too much about it.
     
  9. Bradley Guire

    Bradley Guire Well-Known Member

    I'm also positive no coke was ever consumed on a film shoot. Especially not by Jack Nicholson.
     
  10. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    Lots of actors get high. Lots of actors drink. Always have. Same with directors.

    Most weren't so stupid as to say publicly that they did so on the set during the work day, or that their work depended upon it.

    Add to this that directors are the ones held to account for a movie's scheduling problems and production failures.

    Kevin Smith is a B- movie director who asserted in an interview that he needed to get high to work. So again, if I'm a studio head or an insurer writing a completion bond for a movie, why risk hiring Kevin Smith?
     
  11. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Smith is also famous for delivering movies on time and under budget... I'm guessing the reason he's not doing studio movies lately has more to do with the fact that his movies aren't making money and not because he's an admitted pothead...

    A studio will get behind Clerks 3 because they know he can make it cheap and it's probably guaranteed to make money. Clerks 2, cost $5 million to make and made $25 million.
     
  12. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    He might find financing for a 'Clerks 3,' but I'm not sure it'll come from a studio. His numbers aren't great, especially when you add a marketing budget to these figures,

    boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Director&id=kevinsmith.htm

    and when you factor in the Bruce Willis/'Cop Out' debacle and stories like this,

    www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/02/kevin-smith-burned-out-director-s-retirement-red-state-more.html

    I'm not sure Hollywood wants to bother. That said, Smith sounds like he doesn't much care.

    movieline.com/2011/04/19/how-kevin-smiths-red-state-earned-back-its-budget-six-months-before-release/
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page