Sunday, March 08, 2009


The title to this post is the headline from an article on the Guardian UK's web site. More befuddling is the sub-headline:

The one-time enfant terrible of indie comedy has finally taken the corporate dollar. And nobody seems to mind.


Uh.... if Kevin Smith was seriously ever considered an "enfant terrible" then movie culture is in worse shape than I thought it was

And what of the "(Kevin Smith) has finally taken the corporate dollar" comment???

If no corporate dollars have ever touched the stained fingers of Smith's with a list of acting, writing, directing, producing, and overall celluloid molesting credits such as these... then I need to reeducate myself on what "corporate" means.

Here is the entire article/blog post if you wanna read it. I stopped after reading the headlines, so, let me know if that whole thing ended up being satire, OK?


Ed Howard said...

Does anybody really give a shit about the so-called "integrity" of the guy who made Dogma? Seriously?

bill r. said...

Yes, that's pretty ridiculous, all right. I mean, if Kevin Smith can succumb, who's next?? Where have all the heroes gone!?

Speaking of which, Fox -- did you see Watchmen, or what? Ed, Piper and I have all weighed in, and I'm looking for more from within our group.

Ed Howard said...

Yea, I'm curious as well. Although I have a weird feeling this'll be a movie where Fox really pours the hate on.

bill r. said...

To be honest, I agree. A positive review of this from Fox would genuinely shock me.

Pat said...

Let's just say the author of that article has way different taste in comedy than mine.

Except for "Chasing Amy," which isn't even mentioned in the article, I'm not much of a Smith fan. If he did sell out, I don't think I'd even notice.

I'm probably the only person in the movie blogosphere who didn't run right out to see "Watchmen" this weekend.

Rick Olson said...

Watchmen is god-like in its wonderfulness. If anybody says bad things about it, I will climb into their backyard and set their garbage can on fire. Then I'll put it out, 'cause I ain't no firebug.

Fox said...

Bill & Ed-

This is awesome! Commentary on my awaited comments on Watchmen. I'm honored.

BUT... I haven't seen it yet! I know, I know. But I couldn't fit it in this weekend. I plan on seeing it ASAP. Maybe if the movie wasn't 8 hours long...

Fox said...


You and I! Though... I admit I tried really hard to see it, so I'm not much different than anyone else.

So far, I will say I'm surprised about the positive response I've heard from people. Not surprised in a good or bad way... just surprised.


Watchmen is god-like in its wonderfulness. If anybody says bad things about it, I will climb into their backyard and set their garbage can on fire. Then I'll put it out, 'cause I ain't no firebug.

Aren't you a man of god??

Rick Olson said...

Yes. That's why my opinion is definitive. It's got the Jehovah (tm) stamp of approval.

Moviezzz said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fox said...

What about his performances in:





That's exactly what I was thinking. Live Free or Die Hard wasn't exactly a independently-financed, low-budget, hand held piece of work.

And it's not that I begrudge Smith from getting paid, I was just seriously confused by the writers claim. Perhaps it's. as you say, that they haven't seen anything over there beyond Clerks or Clerks II... but then, STILL, there is the Disney thing! And then to think that the Weinstein Company wholly outside of the corporate world???

I know this is a whole bunch of poopy nitpicking and "who cares?" over something that doesn't really matter..... but I had to get up a quick post last night, SO GIMME A BREAK!

Fox said...

Whoa whoa whoa... Rick!

Even GOD likes Watchmen?!?!

Jesu... oops... I mean... Gee whiz! Does this mean that if you don't like Watchmen then you are going to hell??

Tommy Salami said...

It seems like an article meant to troll Kevin Smith fanboys. Personally I think Smith needed to make other people's films years ago, to get some discipline. I liked Zack & Miri, though.

Jonathan Lapper said...

I hate Kevin Smith and have no desire to see Watchmen. The constant attention that movies with characters who dress up in costumes get is really making me want to just fucking give up on blogging and surrender to the fanboy masses. So, anywho, what's up everybody?

Fox said...

I hate Kevin Smith and have no desire to see Watchmen. The constant attention that movies with characters who dress up in costumes get is really making me want to just fucking give up on blogging and surrender to the fanboy masses. So, anywho, what's up everybody?

Whoa, Jonathan! What did Bill say to you??? Is it b/c he's wearing that Watchmen costume today at work?

Hey, have you ever fantasized about doing one of those "big glove" boxing matches with a celebrity you can't stand? They are completely safe because it's like hitting someone with a beach ball, but I bet it's very therapeutic. Anyways... we should have a double-bill sometime (not yet sure where the location should be):

Lapper Vs. Kevin Smith

Fox Vs. Sean Penn

P.S. There are so many others I would like to "fight" but I'll start with the head of the snake first an go backwards.

Fox said...

Tommy Salami-

I kinda feel the opposite...

I don't mind Smith's dialogue so much, so I think it would be interesting if he just wrote scripts... or at least co-wrote them. I don't think he handles plot too well (outside of losers hanging out with each other for a day.)

In fact, I don't think he has a filmic mind at all. I think he kinda fell ass-backwards into this and he's making a career out of it.

Jonathan Lapper said...

I'll take on Kevin Smith barefisted, that pathetic piece of shit.

Anyway, I'm just really getting sick of special effects blockbusters becoming the movies that are "discussed" these days. I like some of them but they're too bluntfisted to inspire conversation on a high level. For me at least. They all deliver their "messages" ("the world is a bad, baaaaaad place" "men are evil") with such cartoonish heavy handedness that I just have to laugh when people discuss them like they're talking about Hobbes' Leviathan.

And yes, that was the cue for everyone to start yelling at me.

Jonathan Lapper said...

And please no one bring up Ebert giving it four stars. Three is as low as he goes these days. I used to like Ebert a lot but I've got to be honest, and maybe it's the scare he got with his life (and I wouldn't blame him a bit) he has slipped far, far down the list of respectable critics in my eyes. Arbo recently called him out for an especially badly written review and I agree. His reviews seem simplistic now, like a seventeen year old's writing them.

Rick Olson said...

Dissing Roger's like kicking a dog, Jonathan: where's the Love?

I know what you mean about heavy-handed costume-crime-fighter movies. I'm getting sick of them myself.

But, I have to say, I didn't hate Watchmen. Review will be up tomorrow (<---shameless plug)

Fox said...


As SNL said about Peter Travers... "I like anything, so this counts!".

I see what your saying. I mean, I obviously enjoy discussing just about anything, but there does seem to be an elevation of Watchmen to a more serious movie than maybe it should be. Or, maybe? I don't know. I don't feel comfortable saying that quite yet since I haven't seen it, but I think I see where your going with this.

It's like with Iron Man last year. I mean, cool, if you like Iron Man, then cool. And if you wanna write about it, then cool, but then those same people didn't seem to wanna discuss say... Happy-Go-Lucky. To each his own, of course, but it does kinda seem like a bruise on movie culture when Iron Man gets 100 times more discussion than Happy-Go-Lucky.

And I get that Iron Man is more accessible to people who aren't lucky to live in a town with more than who movie theaters. But I'm thinking that your beef with someone like Ebert is that he discusses films like Watchmen on the same level as something like 2001.

Still, I'm not sure where I would stand on that opinion either. I think all movies have the POTENTIAL to be great and thus become great topics of discussion (ex: I think You Don't Mess With the Zohan is a great movie and could easlily be discussed passionately), so I guess I just field bizarre taking a stance until I've seen it.

God... did any of that make sense??? I felt like I just made a rollercoaster ride of points that might have all contradicted each other.

Fox said...


My god, make up your mind man!

First, Watchmen is divine... then it's "well, I didn't hate it"... tomorrow you're gonna say it's "worse than Milk".

By the way. If you spell dog backwards, it's god. So what would Ebert's "god" be? Herzog? And what would happened if you kicked him?

Jonathan Lapper said...

Fox, what you said about the 2001 comparison is exactly my beef. I have written before about genre movies getting a bad rap, so I agree, they can all be great. For instance, I think The Shining is a great horror movie and a great movie period. Same for 2001 and sci-fi. But it seems to me too many blockbusters are being unduly elevated to their level.

I mean, I don't want to start the whole Dark Knight thing again, really I don't, but that's the starting point for me. It doesn't seem worthy of any further discussion than, "Yeah, it's an okay comic book movie but not a great movie in its own right" like Shining or 2001.

And Rick, I look forward to your review.

Moviezzz said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Soiled Sinema said...

Hey Fox,

Do you torrent?

Fox said...

In my defense, HAPPY GO LUCKY never opened in my area.


And see, that's what I mean. I certainly wanna be careful not to dismiss any type of film (or genre) from the arena of discussion. And, full-disclosure, Happy-Go-Lucky was my favorite film last year so I'm a little biased in fighting for its popularity (I should note here, that in the blogosphere Happy-Go-Lucky was a movie that got a lot of discussions going, and I think that's what's great about blogs.)

For example, and though I never wrote about it on here, I quite liked last year's The Incredible Hulk. It's probably the first comic book film I can claim having real affection for (certainly in our new era of comic book movies).

But I also feel some of what Jonathan is expressing about film criticism taking a dive. And I don't think it's anybody's fault. I think it's just a mix of pop culture and industry as it currently is. There's more movies, more blockbusters, more access than ever before, and the most widely accessible movies are just gonna rise to the top of discussion. Also, critics who work for magazines, sites, newspapers end up seeing & reviewing 300-400 movies in a year which leaves very little room for an extended discussion on a smaller film. Meanwhile, a film like Iron Man or Watchmen will stay in the collective consciousness longer b/c it's such a nationwide phenomenon. Then Happy-Go-Lucky goes trickling out across a few states over four months time. Just the way it goes, I guess.

But again. I go back to praising bloggers for not doing a good job of writing about smaller movies, but of movies that have been lost by time. I really think a lot of this "new criticism"/film-blogging is responsible for sustaining interest in a lot of old films.

Fox said...

Do you torrent?


Is that a pickup line, a proposition, or a tricky for some freaky initiation???

But. No, I've never torrented before. I tried to set up some software once, but I'm retarded with computers and I quit trying.

I also feel ethically in knots about it. I don't wanna take money from any hard workers, but then Ed Howard told me that out-of-print/unavailable films (like old Hawks movies) can be found on torrent sites.

Is this how you came across Bad Biology? You can also e-mail me about it.

Anonymous said...

Hello everyone! Who knows where to upload the film Avatar?
I even bought the film Avatar for a SMS to , the link was, but download fails, the system will boot quite strange cocoa something.
Men, advise where to normal as quickly download film avatar?

Anonymous said...

I sell a boat-program which will help you to outwit auction and to win, initially the boat was created for the Scandinavian auction but now the program can work with similar auctions: gagen ru, vezetmne ru and with ten.
The program-boat stakes for you, i.e. for this purpose it is not necessary to sit constantly at the monitor. The boat can set time when it is necessary to stake, thus you as much as possible will lower expenses for rates, and as much as possible increase the chances of a victory.

The price of the program a boat for the Scandinavian auctions 20$

For the first 10 clients the price 15$

To all clients free updating and support.

Behind purchases I ask in icq: 588889590 Max.

Anonymous said...

[b]Set software LoveBots v 5.2[/b]

All for a mass mailing dating

The script is written in php5


[i]registration, account activation
manual input captures, or the solution through antikapchu
filling data accounts:
- Gulf desired photo
- Инфы about yourself
- Diary
- Sexual preference[/i]

gulyalka on questionnaires spammer on lichku
- Randomization Posts: replacement of Russian letters in Latin analogues

optimized to work in a continuous loop
check-activation-filling-spam check ..

Updates and support free of charge.

Price per set 100 wmz

For the first 10 buyers price 70 wmz (your feedback on the software).

For shopping I ask in icq: 588889590 Max.

Scrin program:




Flooding in the subject no! Write to feedback after the purchase.