Reading:
John Pierson, The Odd Couple: 1994
Perusing:
View Askew Website
Questions (answers due on Wednesday, March 26):
1. In her review of Clerks, New York Times film critic Janet Maslin stated that the film is "a classic example of how to spin straw into gold." Do you agree or disagree with Maslin? Use examples from the film to support your points.
2. After reading the Pierson chapter and looking at director Kevin Smith's viewaskew website, what are your impressions of Smith's persona and style? Does he fit the mold of the independent cinema culture that we have been discussing within the class thus far? Why or why not?
17 comments:
1.I agree with Maslin. This film was shot in only 21 days in minimal locations. It was filmed efficiently, and seemed to use a low number of resources (the script drawing from things that were accessible to the crew). Clerks, with help from Miramax, was turned into a very “put together” low budget film. It was a very good move to re-edit and cut out the sequences of scenes that may not be that interesting. The movie was also spun into gold by transforming the ending sequence into what it is now, as opposed to the original ending of Dante’s murder. This movie was spun into gold especially by the press it received and by the way the movie made itself over through many edits. I find it fascinating that although distribution companies liked the film, many had no idea how to market it. The tag line “just because they serve you doesn’t mean they like you” is genius. The movie’s plot draws completely from the dialogue, and the intensely-fired dialogue thus carries the film. Who knew a film about two regular slackers working in a small complex (one of the only locations) could be so amusing just by adding witty dialogue alone?! I believe that Maslin is saying Clerks is a classic example of how a low budget film transforms into a film that is given a lot of exposure and great press. The filmmaker did a lot with just a little money, and got great results from doing so.
2.Smith’s persona seems very flamboyant. I think he does fit the mold of independent culture – he does as he thinks and feels. Nothing he says or exhibits on his website is held back by fear of offending the viewers (including his title for his current film “Zach and Miri Make a Porno”). Also, his website is very revealing: he has personal blogs up and interactive sections on his website as well. If this were a “Hollywood website” I feel it would be more informative and not as interactive as Smith’s is. He is very open with fans and people that are interested in his productions. In one of his interviews on the website he said that nobody sits with him when he edits, which is very much an independent nature and commendable that he doesn’t require 10 people sitting near him as he edits to offer advice. He definitely has his own mind and expresses himself as he sees fit. He shows he has a creative mind with anecdotes on his website that includes an option to view his “Smodcasts.” It is a ‘loud’ site where he voices his opinions and views of life without holding back.
1. The film Clerks is exactly what i believe to be a true independent film. It was made by a filmmaker that was truly passionate about the subject and was able to work well with a very beyond modest budget. So in regards to Maslin i completely agree, Kevin Smith was able to make straw into gold by understanding his key audience and delivering a good movie. What also makes Smith so good is his ability to work with and around the system. He took the feedback from distributes and changed many thing s without letting ego get to him. And in this particular case it worked out. Another thing that played into him being so successfully was his subject matter, nobody had ever seen a movie about slackers made by one. And truth be told the majority of film buffs are just that and the time was perfect audiences were looking for something dramatically different then what they were seeing in the multiplex and distributes realized this and luckily for Smith and us they capitalized off of it.
2. Kevin Smith's website is pretty awesome, not even joking. It is really interactive and he puts up very straight to the point and interesting reviews and blogs. The two that stood out for me was the review of the third Star Wars prequels and how he said it was amazing and if anybody said else wise they pretty much don't know what there talking about, which i can agree with the last sword fight was pretty badass. But the video clip that made me crack up was the one in which he is doing a speech on a college campus about how he protested his own film Dogma. I would say to anybody who wanted to know what Kevin Smith is all about they should check out that clip. In it he explains how he made signs and stood outside a theater bashing his own movie with other protesters. So all in all i have nothing but respect for Smith cause he does what he wants to do and has a fun time doing it. And plus his website and films are really amusing and at times make you think.
1- Spinning straw into gold is certainly one way to describe what Smith did when he made Clerks. He took an extremely limited set of circumstances and worked hard to use them to their fullest potential. The low budget forced Smith and his cast/crew to be creative in their solutions. One of the saving graces was that the film was so dialogue driven which allowed them to take the viewers attention away from the low number of locations. Admittedly Smith designed his film to be about the characters more than the locations, but it took skill on his part to keep those places interesting for the entire movie. Taking a low budget and running as far as you can with it is a risky move, but Smith's sharp writing style and the timing of the movies release, during a period of grunge and slacking, paid off quite well in the end. Besides, having a hockey game of the roof was both unique and a great use of available location.
2- Kevin Smith is a hell of a lucky guy. He's got the moxy to put it all on the line for his dream and he managed to catch a wave of success and is still riding it. What's great is that he seemingly hasn't had to change anything about himself to do it. In this respect he defines the indie filmmaker, at least to me. It's not so much that he's bucking conventions of Hollywood, but that he's making up his own rules and his own world, and Hollywood just happens to be next door. His films are becoming slick pieces with big name actors, but they are still nothing like what you'll see coming out of Disney. "Zach and Miri Make a Porno"? Yes, he is clearly an independently minded filmmaker.
1. I both agree and disagree with the quote. Clerks was considered to be straw when it first started out, due to it “bare-bones” production. The film was shot in the convenience store in which Kevin Smith worked day shifts. The film also used all non-actors i.e., Smith’s friends and acquaintances. Considering these two factors, the film was made with extremely limited means. However, through negotiations, patience, and slow exposure, the film turned into a million-dollar empire, which included international distribution, a highly publicized soundtrack, and a place in American pop culture. Looking from a business standpoint, the film was extremely profitable, which is what I guess you can consider “gold.”
On the other hand, I personally feel like the film is directed towards one audience and has a very short shelf life. I spend my teenage years worshipping this film with my friends. It had everything a rebellious teen (or so I thought) could want – crude humor, a reticent air of taboo, and a “screw you!” attitude. However, watching “Clerks” now, my opinions have changed with my maturity. I don’t laugh quite so hard at the “37 dicks” scene. Jay and Silent Bob seem like annoying losers instead of the cool guys on the corner. In a way, the gold I once saw has now dissolved back into straw.
2. From the excerpts from the Pierson article and the blogs and podcasts from Kevin Smith’s website, I can tell Smith is a “real guy.” He is not afraid to tell his audience that he is insecure about success or how he went about making his films. He is not afraid to tell his biases towards films and actors. In a way, Smith still seems like the guy behind the Quick Stop counter, instead of a powerful filmmaker. I think he does fit the independent cinema culture mold because he presents himself as a human being working on his projects, rather than a mechanical business model cranking out film after film.
--Anne Snyder
1. Her analogy of spinning straw into gold is accurate only when you look at the success of this film. Being shot in only 21 days and with minimum sets and making so much money and winning at Sundance Film Festival sure proves that anything is possible. I don't however think of this film as gold, because to be honest I don't think this film was very good. The dialog was pretty cheesy and the acting was pretty awful. The failed attempts at comedy were quite obvious.
2. I think he fits an independent cultural persona. His website was very fun and easy to use and the way he speaks seems to be very down to Earth and informal. He is quite intelligent though and seems well educated. He also seems that, according to his movies and interviews, that he is not afraid of the movie industry and is not afraid to do or say what he feels.
1. Janet Maslin stated that Clerks is a great example of “how to spin a straw into gold”. I agree with Maslin. The film clerks was made on a small budget and used few locations (which Kevin Smith actually worked at). Also the quality of the film was lacking, and the fact that it was in Black and White. But what made this film gold was the text. There were so many one-liners in this film. It had an interesting plot with interesting characters. It also seemed to be written to attract a lot of different people. For example goofy teens that enjoy sick humor or for the people who enjoy witty humor that makes you think for a moment. All these different elements really helped make this film gold
2. After reading Pierson’s chapter about Clerks I noticed that Kevin Smith was a real people person and had a great sense of humor. After checking out his website I noticed that he likes to joke around and have fun. There are many different molds to fit in when it comes to independent cinema culture. I believe that Kevin Smith fits into a later more modern mold where being silly is okay instead of having a serious plot and attitude. I think that Kevin Smith belongs in the same category as some of the Hollywood comedians and writers.
1. I would agree with Janet Maslin's beautiful description of what Kevin Smith did with Clerks. Kevin took what he had, access to the convenient store he worked at, shot it in 21 days, and used his friends and himself as actors in the film. Kevin took the little he had, budgeted a film for $27,000, and turned it into a unique masterpiece. I absolutely love the style of Clerks, the conversation, and the humor behind the ridiculous storyline. The film takes place mostly at the store, it is only about that one day, and we just learn about the characters Dante Hicks and Randall Graves. The humor and the strong and smooth conversation is what turned this straw into gold.
2. I think Smith does fit the role of an independent director. In the sense that he does his own thing, does everything for his films, and does not given into Hollywood norms. However, I feel that Kevin Smith does not fit the mold of other independent directors. He is very different. He makes himself known in his films, keeps his friends and family involved, and does not seem to be one involved with the independent culture. However, as different of a personality Kevin may be, he is what he is - an independent filmmaker. I commend him on his work, keeping his love and interests involved in all of his films, and I love that he has created the Askewinverse. His second feature, Mallrats, references the death of the girl in Clerks. So, essentially, Mallrats takes place two days after Clerks, both characters from both films being affected by the same event in time. This is sums up Kevin Smith to me - clever, funny, innovative, loyal, and consistent. He is a great personality in the film world, and comedy would not be the same without Kevin Smith.
I would start by assuming that to spin straw into gold would reference turning a low budget, “day in the life” kind of story into a hit film. In which case, I would suppose I do agree with that statement pertaining to Clerks. As we know Kevin Smith made this film with a budget that was next to nothing, using his friends as actors and the convenience store that he conveniently worked at. What screams “straw” to me about Clerks is the caliber of acting quality as well as Smith’s idea of pacing. Its more and more clear to me upon each time that I see this film that whether these characters can deliver the lines well or not, it’s the speed at which they deliver them that’s important. One scene that bugs me to no end is when the woman recording Dante’s account of the “girlfriend bathroom rendezvous” and how she’s obviously just trying to deliver her lines right on cue with no hint of acting talent. While this is a common aspect of independent film, and to some extent forgivable, it’s most prominent and distracting in this film. Thus to give Clerks much credit, one would have to have spun straw into gold.
My impression of Kevin Smith is that he IS or can be an independent film maker. He has always generated his own material and from the looks of the website, it would seem that he will continue to do so. Also, his films have always seemed to be funded as needed, meaning he gets the money he needs to make the film the way he wants to. As it was explained in the article, Clerks was made first, screened as a 16mm print, and then at that point the studio companies decided to purchase it and distribute the film as 35 mm prints. Therefore I think that Smith fits independent cinema the way we’ve been discussing it in that he makes the films he wants to make, with whatever budget he has or for as much as he can get, then sells it to the studios.
After watching clerks, and thinking back on it, I really enjoyed it. you could tell that kevin smith truly just wanted to make a film about just everyday life in a convenience store. The movie really captures the essence of the "burnout" society of the 90's. People just don't seem to care and do what they want because they can. I do believe that kevin smith really did turn straw into gold. The film is so simple in the sense of the characters, settings, and dialog, but somehow smith catches the humorous side in life and makes a masterpiece.
After reading the article and viewing the website, i got a pretty good incite in to kevin smith's head. It seems like the way that kevin smith makes movies, is he just writes down things that are funny to him and hope that they are funny to everyone else. He is not like a normal inde filmmaker in the sense that he doesn't make films that might strike a nerve or hit on a topic that may be controversial. Smith makes movies that are funny, which makes them more assessable to larger audiences.
Well to think about the complement a little, you see the task as impossible. Logically, you cannot turn straw into gold. But it suggests that there is something unexplainable in Kevin Smith's Film, something that he might not even be aware of. The underlying message is that you have to stop blaming other people for your problems but at the same time other people are the problem. Like the problem, if you let someone else do your work for you, what you become belongs to them (first born) unless you can stop thinking about yourself long enough to remember who helped you. One of the best scenes is the scene where they play hockey on the roof, the ultimate symbol of compromise. Everyone is pleased, except the customer who cannot wait a reasonable 12 minutes.
2.I think Smith is very genuine, he makes these films that he knows aren't the greatest films in the history of cinema but aren't trying to be. He sent a genuine message out to the world hoping that someone was on the same page as him and his friends. I also think he has a strong desire to get the first hand feedback from fans which was touched on in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. I would say that he fits the mold of an independent filmmaker because he is sharing a unique perspective that isn't made for everyone.
1. After reading Maslin’s article I think Clerks is a prime example of spinning straw into gold. We have a film that initially doesn’t seem that marketable to a large audience. Somehow with catchy slogans and making the film more accessible (eliminating the death scene at the end) Miramax marketed a film that received a lot of attention not only in America, but oversees as well. Judging by the grain of the film, that fact that it was shot in black and white and the focus on dialogue to tell a story, the film was clearly made on a low budget. The whole film takes place in only few locations and Smith didn’t have money to use for special effects or spectacle, signs of an independent film. It’s rare that an apparently low budget film receives the kind of attention it did. It’s interesting to take into account how marketing contributed largely to the success of film that has more of a “student” feel than a professional one. The article explains the marketing of a soundtrack including Alice in Chains as part of their technique to sell the film. It blows my mind how a film like this has developed into a cult classic
2. I think Smith not only fits the mold of the independent cinema culture that we have been discussing but also markets himself that way successfully, which is part of the reason why people like him. The way he interacts with his fans through the site with diary entries, podcasts, etc.. is very appealing. He breaks the boundaries between the audience and fans and your typical pretentious Hollywood director. He’s a man of the people so to speak. In addition, Smith’s vision is pretty independent in my opinion. He has and continues to create films that interest him regardless of their marketable value. Before Clerks and Mallrats were made, probably no one would have guessed that they would be huge hits. He has his own style and doesn’t try to conform to other people’s conventions. Many of his stories essentially have no plot and just rely on dialogue to carry the story a marker of the independent film and vision.
-Jacob Feiring
Personally, I disagree with the statement the Clerks "is a classic example of how to spin straw into gold." I didn't like the film very much. I guess the humor just wasn't my type. Except for Jay, I thought he was hilarious. I can, however, see how people could see it that way. The film is very basic and has a very simple plot line with minimal characters. The whole film was shot at basically one location, the Quick Stop, which is where Kevin Smith actually worked. The film was also shot in merely twenty one days. I think that due to the low budget and the simplicity of the film in association with the results, I suppose it is a prime example of "spinning straw into gold."The film received a lot of critical acclaim and is now a cult classic. This is not common among low budget simple films like Clerks.
After reading the article and looking at Kevin Smith's website, I think that he has a very interesting, humorous way of looking at things. He seems pretty laid back and light-hearted. I think that his persona very much is representative of the independent style. He doesn't seem to feel he deserves distribution and money for his films. I thought it was funny that he protested his own film, Dogma. That showed that he has a good sense of humor, and doesn't take things too seriously.
I would completely agree with Maslin's comment on Clerks. The film was shot at Smith's day job at night. He maxed out credit cards to make the film. Also, he took a cast of unknowns and made them in to a dysfunctional band of disillusioned twenty-somethings, perfectly capturing the mood of that generation at that time in America. This film makes the most of what it has directly at hand.
My impression of Smith is that he is an ambitious slacker. Meaning that while he is now a successful film director, he is only that because he stayed true to he was. That being a disillusioned, smart, sarcastic, easy going person whose pursuit of his artistic visions was going to be on his own terms.
1. In many ways I do agree. Kevin Smith was motivated by Films like Stranger Than Paradise, a film that is very static hardly any movement of the camera. Smith used this idea for Clerks. Instead of trying to use money to have smooth moving shoots with cranes and dollies but on the content of the film. quick snappy dialogue that caught the audience off guard, "did he really just say that." He worked on perfecting the delivery of these non acting friends staring in the movie. Rehearsing over and over again, which is cheap if you're using your friends. Smith knew what he had for money and used it to his advantage, perfecting the qualities that really counts that use materials that are inexpensive: the thought, pencil and paper.
2. Kevin Smith has one foot in the independent ring and one in the studio. Which was inevitable working with the Weinsteins who try and make independent like movies through their studio. While at one point in his carrier Smith was working with no budget and non actors he has now progressed to using stars like Seth Rogan and making movies with budgets in the millions. Even though he has moved up the ranks in the money industry he still seems to be doing and saying pretty much what he wants. His new film is called Zack and Miri Make a Porno, a title that implies more than may actually happen in the film, but I don't think many mothers of teenagers are going to be thrilled to let their kids go. Yet he holds his ground to make films about things that young adults talk about but everyones else is to afraid to say.
1. After watching clerks I was surprised at how good it was for now much of nothing that happened. I totally agree with Janet Maslin in that statement about the straw into gold. There is no large plot. No climaxing element. No villain. No hero. Clerks was and is one of a kind. The movie it self is really good. In that sense “gold.” But the beauty of it was that in the movie clerks its just following they guy in a day of his life. Nothing out of the ordinary for him. People walk in, buy stuff, and heckle for a bit than walk out. Nothing special but the way in which the characters react to the ordinary is what makes this movie so entertaining. How simple minded the characters are is also entertaining. I don’t think there are many things about this film that aren’t entertaining. Even with nothing normal in it this is a great film. Truly Straw into Gold.
2. I don’t think Kevin smith fits the mold at all. Most of the films that we’ve watched and people we’ve read about all cared a lot about making films and making a difference. Kevin smith although still caring a lot about his films and making them seems more about having a good time. Most of his films are light hearted not tapping in on any controversial topics just having a good time. I think he’s changed the way people see independent films and the way some people are making Hollywood films.
Clerks have all the low budget qualities of an independent film, but the controversial part made me confused. I would disagree with the comment because I don't see how Clerks is considered gold. I personally don't like it for it's obvious storyline and plot. It reminded me a lot of Hollywood films now-a-days where things happen just because it can or because that's what the audience wants to see. All the qualities of the film is independent in that the actors are unknown, the location is limited, it's in black and white, and the sound is very bad. In previous blog comment under Spike Lee I mentioned that the actors become the characters they play, but in Clerks it was a clear they were acting. The dialogue just seemed very unnatural; like a broadway show where everything said is over ennounciated. The film left me made because my expectation of independent controversity was met with mundane problems. Something I could have easily seen at a budget theatre.
As for Smith's website,I was overwhelm by the abundant information I didn't know where to start first. I went to the youtube clip and that was interesting. It gives a clear idea of the way Smith works and thinks. Most of the contents were outrageous. Smith takes other people's comments into consideration regarding movie, yet puts his own unique touches on them that truely screams Smith.
Post a Comment