Too much of everything

Captivating movie !

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

It starts out with what appears to be an old fashioned movie, but quickly escalates into a number of plot scenarios. Two losers no longer have a place to hangout, so they choose the local fast food joint. There the two former workers at a grocery store have found a place to continue working; one of them is about to get married and move to Florida, his friend is there for support; but his boss is also there to add some mischief to the mix. There are three plot devices that enter – two nerds that make numerous references to Lord of the Rings and Transforers, and one multi-million dollar individual that can't help but showing up to gloat about his success.The movie at one point I wanted to put down; it played down on too many stereotypes and it looked like the rest of the movie would play out this way. Instead, it takes the stereotypes as we know them – and uses the reason we know the to be stereotypes and then mixes the up a bit and turns the into a progressive movie where the stereotypes are evolved as the losers slowly find some epiphany or solace in life; granted a few of the token characters are there just to mix things up a bit. The movie has a few bogus moments which are completely unbelievable, but they do give some instant charm to the movie and help amp up the feel a bit.The movie has at least three memorable sequences; first a dance montage on the roof of a fast food joint; an on tour show involving a male stripper and a donkey and lastly the ending of the credits where the copyright credits are listed – be sure to fast forward through the credits to reach this part; they are hilarious.Having said all of this; this movie isn't on my 'top picks', but it should be entertaining on a Sunday afternoon to the casual movie viewer.Originally posted to Orion Age (http://www.orionphysics.com/?p=10242).

Most main-stream comedies would try to have over-the-top fantasy life premises, in which the audience can lance on, because how bizarre & surreal, it is. However, some of the better comedies, known for their Seinfeldian humor, idiosyncratic focus on more conversational everyday stuff that some audience might find mundane. Then, there are those, whom can mix, both of them, well-enough, that the audience can find, the simplest of premise, funny. This is one of those movies. Directed & written by Kevin Smith, Clerks 2 is a follow-up to the highest successful 1994's movie, Clerks and Smith's sixth feature film to be set in the View Askewniverse AKA Kevin Smith's fictional universe from the first film. Ten years after the events in Clerks, Dante Hicks (Brian O'Halloran) & Randal Graves (Jeff Anderson) find themselves working at a local fast food joint, after their previous work, Quick Stop Store, burned down, a year ago. Dante has plans to move away from town and get married, but Randal cannot yet, allow his long-last friend to leave, without one last goodbye party. While, Randal set up the party at the workplace, Dante is struggles with his mixed feelings for his current boss, manager, Becky Scott (Rosario Dawson) & his love for his fiancée, Emma Bunting (Jennifer Schwalbach). Will the goodbye party go according plan, or will Dante & Randal find themselves, making a bigger mess than before? Watch the movie to find out! Without spoiling the movie, too much, I have to say, it's nice to see Kevin Smith retackling his old films; however, in retrospect, it's generally viewed as Smith trying to rebound after his commercial failure in his non-View Askewniverse movie, 2004's Jersey Girl. Much like the original movie, the sequel to Clerks, also take place over the course of one day, and loosely connected with a series of small discussion skits and gags. But unlike, the first movie, the movie doesn't make too much jokes about the settling of the film. For a movie that mostly takes place at a fast food joint. I'm really surprised on the lack of jokes about junk food. You would think, the movie would be full of it. Anyways, the movie instead, tackles other issues, such as debates over movies, sexual positions, religion, racism, and romantic love versus pragmatic life choices. Like the first movie, the dialogue is rife with obscenities. Over 130 curse words, to start, as well as a lot of homosexual & racism slurs. The movie also has explicit jokes about bestiality, rape & others that some people might feel uncomfortable with. For me, the oddest thing about the film is having Jason Mewes as Jay do his 1991's the Silence of the Lambs, "Goodbye Horses" dance. That was really out of place & inappropriate. Even with all those, kinda offensive humor and jokes. There were some witty, somewhat heartfelt moments in the film. I did like the whole Jackson 5 'ABC" musical number. For the most part, all of these scenes serves mostly as filler. It really takes forever, for the weak main plot to kick in. The fact that the majority of that scene was ad-libbed, added to the pacing problems. While, the movie is not well-paced. The acting in this film was pretty good for the most part. The main actors, supporting actors, and cameos, all did their parts, very well. I have to say, my favorite actor in this, had to be Trevor Fehrman as Elias Grover, Dante and Randal's new co-worker at the Mooby's fast food chain. It sucks that he hasn't acted since this movie, because I found him to be, very funny. The worst acting in the film has to go to Jennifer Schwalbach. I'm really didn't buy anything, she was saying. Her performance was so wooden. Another thing, that was way different from the first movie, is how this sequel was in color & not in black & white. But as mentioned in the DVD commentary for this film, the entire film was desaturated, a bit after filming, because the colors were far too bright and cheery. In my opinion, I didn't mind that it was, as it adds so much to the cartoony astrosphere, giving the film a far, greater look. It reminds me, so much of the early 2000's animated TV Series Clerks with its style. Overall: While, Clerks 2 will never outshine the original. I have to say, it's still a watchable guilty pleasure of mine. Worth checking out. Face it tiger. You just hit the jackpot!

Clerks was Kevin Smith's first film and his only film to date that was ever fully artistically realized. While it would be a little hasty to call it an outright masterpiece, Clerks certainly had the makings of a great work of art. Beyond being fresh and in many ways clever, it wholly embodied the era and attitude from which it sprang with its brilliant portrayal of a directionless generation and the disillusionment that has become such a vivid trademark of the American 1990s.Some of that creative genius is still visible in Smith's more recent work, but only in brief rays shining through the heavy cosmetics of the mainstream movie industry. Clerks II is certainly the best example. Some of what made the original great is present here, namely the character banter, wandering plot, and grotesque humor. Viewers familiar with Smith's other work will see many of the staples in Clerks II, and many of them done in decent enough fashion. But much else has been lost to an obvious ploy for mass appeal, and Clerks II is veritably dripping with a weird mainstream conformity. The most obvious signs are of course born of the discrepancy in production budget ( ~$30 thousand vs. ~$5 million) and all the snazzy camera tricks and filming doodads that come with it. These are also the most forgivable, as you can hardly blame Smith for utilizing the greater resources available to him even if cheapness was a big part of the original's charm. Still, it's hard not to roll your eyes when a full dance crew emerges from nowhere and begins undulating to the Jackson 5's "ABC" midway through the movie. While such a tactic might be cutesy or feel-good in another film, this particular film has some very different shoes to fill. Those who cherish the original will find many, many other problems with the sequel that fall into this same vein.To clarify, Clerks II is not a bad movie. It's just a bad sequel in that it sacrifices the charming idiosyncrasies of its progenitor for a disappointingly generic take on its characters. A simple name change would have improved it dramatically, at least helping to pull it out from under Clerks' shadow. But again, it does not appear that Smith was interested in creating a great film, just one that would sell and keep his catalog moving. To this end namedropping is a strategic move, albeit one that is bound to alienate some fans. In any case, it doesn't have to tarnish the greatness of the original if we refuse to let it, and in the meantime we can merely cross our fingers and hope to avoid the misfortune of an even worse Clerks III.

Pro's: Great gags, witty banter, fantastic ending between our two life long friends. Con's: Colour (didn't need it), romantic schmaltz (way too gooey in places), slapstick (some visual gags were a bit too dumbed down), soundtrack not as interesting as Clerks 1 (except for Soul Asylum's "Misery" at the end).All in all, slightly disappointing follow up, I think they had too much money to spend on it and mainstreamed it a little bit too much. If you hadn't seen Clerks 1, this film works without previous knowledge of the characters, but obviously it benefits you greatly if you have, except you do realise they've made it more mainstream and less culty.