| This post is made in response to the assumption that Kevin Smith is a "great" writer. This assumption is held by many fanboys, message board whores, and random others. Truth be told, I find most of his movies very entertaining and funny, so my criticisms of Kevin Smith as a writer have nothing to do with whether I enjoy his movies or not. So in a way, this is a critique, more than a review. Now, I'm not going to delve into what makes a writer "great", per se, I'm just going to go over aspcets of his writing that I consider makes him not a "great" writer, so please don't condescend my opinion by dodging the point of this rant. Now, onto the rant:
Probably the biggest beef I have with Kevin Smith, as a writer, is the style in which he writes almost all of his characters. For some ungodly reason, every person in his movies seems to talk with the shiniest silver tongue. The extent of everyone's vocabulary, the speed, and the manner in which they speak never seems to be reflective of their characters. It's really hard not to equate these characters with the same characters in Dawson's Creek or any other Kevin Williamson brainchild. This normally wouldn't be a problem...a style, is a style. Although, every character, despite the wide range of characteristics and attributes that they possess, talks exactly the same...the only notable exception is Jay, but every once in awhile he still manages spew out a diatribe containing its fair share of polysyllabic words. Another side of the argument would be, that I need to calm down, his movie are just comedies. Although, that's a half truth, it's well known and acknowledged by Kevin Smith himself, that he does try to inject some sort of social, personal, whatever-commentary in his movies...in reference to Chasing Amy("male insecurities buried in a sea of dick and fart jokes"). Now I believe in judging something on its merits and if he's trying to comment on certain aspects he should be critiqued at a higher levelthan Not Another Teen Movie. The most blaring instance, in my eyes, of misplaced dialogue is with T.S's character in Mallrats. Somehow I don't believe that this guy is smart enough to talk as smoothly as he does, at random sporadic moments throughout the flick...it also doesn't help that he's placed opposite the champion of realizing Smith's dialogue, Jason Lee. Essentially, it seems that this is the only way he knows how to write, and though he hits the notes dead-on, his writing is still only one note. It's reasonable to assume that a "great" writer should be able to play more than one note, so to speak.
The other problem I have with his writing is the undertones he puts in his movies. For the most part, I don't believe they ever work. In Clerks, it was the undertones of apathy and flat-out laziness...which, unfortunately, is slammed down our throats near the very end of the picture during Randall's monologue after their fight(side note: probably the worst physical fight ever captured on celluloid, but that just adds to the charm of it). It would've worked much better, had it not been thrust upon the audience at the very end of the flick. Mallrats is, perhaps, the shadiest of them all. It's never quite clear if its undertones consist of male insecurity, apathy, or just love. It contains elements of the aforementioned themes, but doesn't really flesh out any of them. Chasing Amy, by far the best in terms of writing, works like a dream up until the end. The big resolution that Holden(by the way, I hate blatant references to Catcher in the Rye) comes up with by the end of the flick, is so incredibly outrageous, that it doesn't fit the character and the movie at all. It may work beautifully in Smith's mind, but when it comes off the screen, the general audience response is "Wha' Happened?!". Dogma, although its intentions are well, just comes across as a movie where Smith wanted to put down an endless amounts of theories and personal opinions relating to his spirituality. The problem with this, is that he doesn't really put much rhyme or reason into it. It just feels like, he sat us down and is just saying "this is what I think" without attempting to validate or justify anything he says. On the other end of the spectrum is Jay and Silent Bob Strike back, the most expensive spectacle of self-indulgence I've seen in my entire life. I'll refrain from criticizing this movie, because it isn't trying to say much and accomplishes what is was meant to...entertain.
Other random aspects of his writing also keep him from becoming a "great" writer. It's perfectly fine to watch a movie that has little inside jokes from the cast and crew, but to most, the Kevin Smith movies(namely Clerks, Mallrats, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back) feel like gigantic inside jokes. Even though the material serves its purpose, a mark of "great" writing involves coming up with, for the most part, original material. Also, he drew out the whole Jersey mythology a little too long, which in turn restricted him into pleasing the legion of fanboys and his own self-indulgence. Thankfully this may be ending with Jersey Girl, although I do find it peculiar that he says that he's departing from the Jersey mythology and yet his movie is called Jersey Girl.
In conclusion, I think he's a fine writer, but these self-imposed boundaries he's putting on himself doesn't allow him room to expand as a writer. Hopefully the departure from the Jersey mythology will change all of this and he'll mature into the writer and director that shined in Chasing Amy.
-Jake |
