Author Topic: Which Clerks film is superior? (Read 5956 times)

The Fake Shemp · « **on:** December 19, 2006, 06:44:40 PM »

After watching both the past two nights, along with companion episodes from The Animated Series, I am willing to concede that Clerks II is superior to the original (which has aged a lot in places).

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #1 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:45:41 PM »

I am willing to concede that you're a fucking moron.

Mupepe · « **Reply #2 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:46:17 PM »

Clerks II has one of the worst endings I have ever seen. The jail scene is ridiculous.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #3 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:47:00 PM »

Quote from: Mupepe on December 19, 2006, 06:46:17 PM

Clerks II has one of the worst endings I have ever seen. The jail scene is ridiculous.

Thats it, you, me, OUTSIDE!

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #4 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:47:09 PM »

The original Clerks is a classic; the latest is just another movie. Sorry Federwang.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #5 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:47:26 PM »

The ending to Clerks II is easily superior to the ending of the original, where Dante and Randal hatefuck and the movie falls apart.

Ecrofirt · « **Reply #6 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:48:02 PM »

Clerks II would have been better is Mewes wasn't in it as much. His antics were a little too much for me in this film.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #7 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:48:57 PM »

Quote from: Willco on December 19, 2006, 06:47:26 PM

The ending to Clerks II is easily superior to the ending of the original, where Dante and Randal hatefuck and the movie falls apart.

Yes. But you're forgetting how awesome the other ninety minutes of Clerks were.

Cheebs · « **Reply #8 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:49:17 PM »

II is overall a superior film. I mean come on

ROSARIO DAWSON BOOBIE BOUNCE SCENE

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #9 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:49:25 PM »

I'll take Jay overexposure than Mewes debut in the original Clerks. His acting in that is awful.

Also, the original is poorly acted in general.

Cheebs · « **Reply #10 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:50:01 PM »

Quote from: Willco on December 19, 2006, 06:49:25 PM

I'll take Jay overexposure than Mewes debut in the original Clerks. His acting in that is awful.

Also, the original is poorly acted in general.

Randal's speech at the end of II put a tear in my eye. :'(

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #11 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:51:46 PM »

Quote from: Willco on December 19, 2006, 06:49:25 PM

I'll take Jay overexposure than Mewes debut in the original Clerks. His acting in that is awful.

Also, the original is poorly acted in general.

Damn it, you are right. There's still just something... THERE in the first that isnt there in the second.

Disposable White Guy · « **Reply #12 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:52:30 PM »

I can't decide

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #13 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:53:10 PM »

Yeah, both grew as actors. There are some points in the original where O'Halloran(sp?) is painful. Both female leads in the original are awful actresses as well. And the editing is awful - the are parts in the original where an actor fucked up their lines and they just left it in.

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #14 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:54:31 PM »

Quote from: The Dark Shake on December 19, 2006, 06:51:46 PM

Quote from: Willco on December 19, 2006, 06:49:25 PM
I'll take Jay overexposure than Mewes debut in the original Clerks. His acting in that is awful.

Also, the original is poorly acted in general.

Damn it, you are right. There's still just something... THERE in the first that isnt there in the second.

It's called HEART, and it's something Hollywood scum like Federwang know nothing about. Now back on ignore you go!

Mupepe · « **Reply #15 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:56:07 PM »

Quote from: The Dark Shake on December 19, 2006, 06:47:00 PM

Quote from: Mupepe on December 19, 2006, 06:46:17 PM
Clerks II has one of the worst endings I have ever seen. The jail scene is ridiculous.

Thats it, you, me, OUTSIDE!

That scene is fucking lame.

The hatefuck at the end of the original was awesome. It was funny and got the point across. Especially the part where he throws the mini donuts at him before getting up.

The jail scene was just bad. Cheesy and bad.

The acting in the first may have been bad, but you can tell they were really into it and they put much more emotion than they did in II.

Not to mention, THE CONTENT WAS JUST BETTER. I was funny in more spots than II was.

The acting doesn't matter if it the content was just better. I'd watch fucking high school drama students act it out if the plot was funny!

Mupepe · « **Reply #16 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:56:30 PM »

Willco, when did you stop caring about the movie and start caring about the glam?

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #17 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:56:39 PM »

O'Halloran is still a shitty actor these days, imo. In the second he just seemed to be doing his best "I'm a loser who is scared to shit or get off the pot" act, rather than putting any real effort into the role. Jeff Anderson, on the other hand, stole the fucking show. Randal in Clerks II > Randal in Clerks.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #18 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:57:16 PM »

Clerks II is anything but a Hollywood film. Just because it doesn't have atrocious acting, poor lighting or amateur level crew doesn't mean it's a sellout popcorn flick.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #19 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:58:08 PM »

Quote from: Willco on December 19, 2006, 06:57:16 PM

Clerks II is anything but a Hollywood film. Just because it doesn't have atrocious acting, poor lighting or amateur level crew doesn't mean it's a sellout popcorn flick.

Keep spinning, sell out.

Mupepe · « **Reply #20 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:58:24 PM »

No one said it was a sellout film. But acting, lighting etc are nothing without good content. The content (besides a braless hottie) was trash in II.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #21 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:58:53 PM »

Even in content, Clerks II is funnier, better paced with better writing, tightly edited and well made. Nothing will make me not love the original, even with all its faults, but it's really just 90 minutes of douchebagery. Clerks II has a story.

Mondain · « **Reply #22 on:** December 19, 2006, 06:59:46 PM »

Clerks 2 is complete shit

Quote from: Willco on December 19, 2006, 06:58:53 PM

Even in content, Clerks II is funnier, better paced with better writing, tightly edited and well made. Nothing will make me not love the original, even with all its faults, but it's really just 90 minutes of douchebagery. Clerks II has a story.

It doesn't feel natural anymore, the dialogue and these kinds of situations just feel forced when passed through Hollywood's blender some twelve years later.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #23 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:00:25 PM »

Quote from: Mondain on December 19, 2006, 06:59:46 PM

Clerks 2 is complete shit

This poster is complete shit.

CrystalGemini · « **Reply #24 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:00:54 PM »

Clerks II.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #25 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:01:06 PM »

You can say a lot of things about Clerks II, but that it's complete shit is not one of them. In a very mediocre summer blockbuster field, dare I say it was the best of the summer to come out of the Hollywood pipeline?

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #26 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:01:59 PM »

Quote from: CrystalGemini on December 19, 2006, 07:00:54 PM

Clerks II.

That's my girl!

Disposable White Guy · « **Reply #27 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:03:02 PM »

I dunno, Clerks II didn't seem like it was really trying to be better than Clerks (apart from the outrageousness), but just an extension to the Clerks storyline. I enjoy them equally, shitty fight scene/gay jail experience and all.

Mondain · « **Reply #28 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:05:12 PM »

well, better than the average Hollywood film, for sure, although that's not hard to accomplish

but in the end it's just yet another forgettable film that has lost the magic of the original... the recipe for View Askew comedies with this crew is now tired

the actors aren't very good, only Jason Mewes is entertaining through the film with his replies and he has very little screen time

especially Brian O'Halloran... although admittedly sympathetic, he looks and talks gayer than Frank 'N Further

CajoleJuice · « **Reply #29 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:05:30 PM »

I have seen neither.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #30 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:07:31 PM »

Quote from: CajoleJuice on December 19, 2006, 07:05:30 PM

I have seen neither.

Well, you suck. :'(

Disposable White Guy · « **Reply #31 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:08:43 PM »

^true story

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #32 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:09:31 PM »

Quote from: CajoleJuice on December 19, 2006, 07:05:30 PM

I have seen neither.

Dammit Juice, put the original at the top of your que.

Himu · « **Reply #33 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:10:35 PM »

I love the original movie, and don't feel it has aged much at all.I have yet to see Clerks 2 though, so I can't vote unfortunately.

CajoleJuice · « **Reply #34 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:11:40 PM »

Quote from: Emperor Triumph I on December 19, 2006, 07:09:31 PM

Quote from: CajoleJuice on December 19, 2006, 07:05:30 PM
I have seen neither.

Dammit Juice, put the original at the top of your que.

Fuck, I have so much shit I wanna watch but half the time I'm like, "eh fuck it, I don't feel like sitting down and watching a whole movie." I usually end up refreshing this board and GAF or playing a game or both.

Himu · « **Reply #35 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:13:55 PM »

I'm going to get a Netflix account. You guys make suggestions for movies that are NOT on that top 100 movies list in Cheebs' thread!

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #36 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:14:14 PM »

You're dead to me, you hear?!

DEAD. :'( :'( :'(

Himu · « **Reply #37 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:17:05 PM »

huh? I said that because I'm getting most of those movies anyways, so it'd be redundant to suggest the same movies on that list!

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #38 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:18:15 PM »

YOU STAY OUT OF THIS, I'M SPEAKING TO CAJOLE!

Cheebs · « **Reply #39 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:20:09 PM »

How is clerks II a hollywood film? It's a 5 million budget rather independent movie.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #40 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:21:42 PM »

Because, technically it was produced by a studio.

Cheebs · « **Reply #41 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:22:46 PM »

So was Chasing Amy yet it is still considered indie. Miramax funded Amy.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #42 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:23:34 PM »

I never really thought of Chasing Amy as an indie film. A lot of people that use the term don't really know what it means.

Cheebs · « **Reply #43 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:25:05 PM »

Technically wouldn't the star wars prequels be indie films since Lucas funds them himself 100%? (Fox just distributes the films)

CajoleJuice · « **Reply #44 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:25:25 PM »

Quote from: The Dark Shake on December 19, 2006, 07:18:15 PM

YOU STAY OUT OF THIS, I'M SPEAKING TO CAJOLE!

I'm sorry. I'm changing my tag (I forgot I could could do it now).

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #45 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:26:59 PM »

YOU DAMN WELL BETTER.

Himu · « **Reply #46 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:28:06 PM »

Quote from: CajoleJuice on December 19, 2006, 07:25:25 PM

Quote from: The Dark Shake on December 19, 2006, 07:18:15 PM
YOU STAY OUT OF THIS, I'M SPEAKING TO CAJOLE!

I'm sorry. I'm changing my tag (I forgot I could could do it now).

Himuro
Sucks at movie watching
Senior Member

?

Let's make a Sucky Movie Watchers Guild.

Melissa · « **Reply #47 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:30:42 PM »

Quote from: Emperor Triumph I on December 19, 2006, 06:47:09 PM

The original Clerks is a classic; the latest is just another movie.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #48 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:30:51 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on December 19, 2006, 07:25:05 PM

Technically wouldn't the star wars prequels be indie films since Lucas funds them himself 100%? (Fox just distributes the films)

Yes. A lot of people have referred to them over the years as the most expensive indie films ever made.

The term indie is supposed to imply that the film was made outside the system or financed independently. Like, I'd refer to Sin City as an indie film, because it was definitely made outside the system.

Mostly, people use it to describe films with low to no budgets, but that's just incorrect. Lots of major players will finance cheap films with strong scripts for an Oscar push, and they are by no means independent films (I'm looking at you, Brokeback Mountain!).

Cheebs · « **Reply #49 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:33:02 PM »

True. Plus Lucas seems to HATE the hollywood system and is a vocal critic of the director and writer guilds.

So does Rodriguez I believe.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #50 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:34:55 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on December 19, 2006, 07:33:02 PM

So does Rodriguez I believe.

Well, ever since Sin City, he's taken a very ANTI-DIRECTOR'S GUILD stance.

Disposable White Guy · « **Reply #51 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:35:52 PM »

Can't imagine why he'd feel that way

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #52 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:36:33 PM »

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #53 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:36:44 PM »

Rodriguez may not like Hollywood, but Hollywood sure hates Rodriguez. I know folks that work in the industry that won't even see his movies given his anti-union stance.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #54 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:39:00 PM »

I'll watch any Rodrigues movie just to be amazed by how awesomely he can tackle the techincal aspects.

Cheebs · « **Reply #55 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:39:09 PM »

Did Lucas do the Indiana Jones films independently ala Star Wars or does Paramount put up the money for those? Because Spielberg is in the union even though Lucas is opposed to the guild.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #56 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:43:23 PM »

I believe Indy is financed by Lucas Film, as well. Spielberg just has very different viewpoints on the union than Lucas.

Cheebs · « **Reply #57 on:** December 19, 2006, 07:47:09 PM »

Quote from: Willco on December 19, 2006, 07:43:23 PM

I believe Indy is financed by Lucas Film, as well. Spielberg just has very different viewpoints on the union than Lucas.

Yeah. It is weird. Spielberg couldn't direct ROTJ because of the guild yet he could do Jones which is a Lucas owned creation as well. Weird.

TVC15 · « **Reply #58 on:** December 19, 2006, 11:30:17 PM »

Clerks II is a funny comedy. The ending sucks and it's pretty hammy, though not nearly as awful as say, the shitty ending to Chasing Amy. That said the movie is hilarious.

Clerks, the original, is an American cultural milestone in film. Anyone that has worked retail can relate to the movie at a deeper level than Clerks II. It's a definite Everyman movie. Clerks II is about the characters, Clerks is about the experience. Nearly everyone has been in a situation from Clerks, whereas Clerks II is about the characters that have stayed in such jobs far longer than people typically have the ambition to.

TVC15 · « **Reply #59 on:** December 19, 2006, 11:34:22 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on December 19, 2006, 07:25:05 PM

Technically wouldn't the star wars prequels be indie films since Lucas funds them himself 100%? (Fox just distributes the films)

The concept of an independent movie really doesn't mean much when it's applied to most pre-80s movies. I don't think it meant much of anything before budgets flew out of control in the late 70s and early 80s.

And frankly, Star Wars cost a lot more than any lower budget movies happening around its time. Lucas had a big hit under his belt with American Grafitti, and he had the vocal and financial support of industry heavies. He could do what he wanted to a degree, although nobody would give him the total bank on a risky scifi venture.

Anyway, more specifically, the "indie movie" didn't mean much until Richard Linklater made Slacker. That's when it became a buzzword.

News:

Poll

Which Clerks film is superior?

Author Topic: Which Clerks film is superior? (Read 5956 times)