It's Time for Kevin Smith to Close His Twitter Account
I'm not sure how much deeper he can dig that hole
Photo: Warner Bros.
I can't tell you how many times I wanted to write an article concerning Kevin Smith's comments regarding film criticism in relation to his most recent film Cop Out, but the more and more he was quoted the more and more it became obvious Smith was intent on digging his own hole and it was only getting deeper.
However, today Devin Faraci at CHUD has brought to my attention Smith's latest tirade as he took to Twitter and responded to one of his followers going by the name of "coked_up_jesus" when he wrote, "I gotta say that every day I hate film theory and film students and critics more and more. Where is the fun in movies?" It was after this Smith was unleashed and had at it.
I stopped following Smith's Twitter feed a long time ago due to similar rants, but thanks to Faraci I have it all for you directly below. I have removed some of the Twitter jargon, and formatted it so it's a little easier to read, but just know that this was all published about 15 hours ago and 140 characters at a time:
Sir sometimes, it's important to turn off the chatter. Film fandom's become a nasty bloodsport where cartoonishly rooting for failure gets the hit count up on the ol' brand-new blog. And if a schmuck like me pays you some attention, score! MORE EYES, MEANS MORE ADVERT $. But when you pull your eye away from the microscope, you can see that shit you're studying so closely is, in reality, tiny as fuck. You wanna enjoy movies again? Stop reading about them and just go to the movies. It's improved film/movie appreciation immensely for me.
Seriously: so many critics lined-up to pull a sad and embarrassing train on Cop Out like it was Jennifer Jason Leigh in Last Exit to Brooklyn. Watching them beat the shit out of it was sad. Like, it's called Cop Out ; that sound like a very ambitious title to you? You REALLY wanna shit in the mouth of a flick that so OBVIOUSLY strived for nothing more than laughs. Was it called Schindler's Cop Out?
Writing a nasty review for Cop Out is akin to bullying a retarded kid who was getting a couple chuckles from the normies by singing AFTERNOON DELIGHT. Suddenly, bully-dudes are doing the bad impression of him, using the "retart" voice. The crowd shifts uncomfortably. And you may impress a couple of low IQ-ers who're like "Yeah, man! Way to destroy that singing retart!" But, really? All you've done is make fun of something that wasn't doing you any harm and wanted only to give some cats a some fun laughs (Yes, I compared my flick to a retarded kid). It was just ridiculous to watch. That was it for me. Realized whole system's upside down: so we let a bunch of people see it for free and they shit all over it? Meanwhile, people who'd REALLY like to see the flick for free are made to pay? Bullshit.
From now on, any flick I'm ever involved with, I conduct critics screenings thusly: you wanna see it early to review it? Fine: pay like you would if you saw it next week. Like, why am I giving an arbitrary 500 people power over what I do at all, let alone for free? Next flick, I'd rather pick 500 randoms from Twitter feed and let THEM see it for free in advance, then post THEIR opinions, good AND bad. Same difference. Why's their opinion more valid? It's a backwards system. People are free to talk shit about ANY of my flicks, so long as they paid to see it. Fuck this Animal Farm bullshit.
There's a lot to be said based on everything above and I will do my best not to say everything Devin already said, but I am sure there will be some crossover.
First off, I did not like Cop Out one bit, and along with Clerks II and Zack and Miri his last three films have done nothing for me. I interviewed him back in 2008 and we talked about critics, he was excited about the reviews for Zack and Miri (which received a 65% at RottenTomatoes) and I even brought up how he linked to several reviews of the film out of the Toronto Film Festival. However, his opinion on film criticism in general seems to have shifted 180-degrees. For a man whose career began by being championed by critics it seems odd he's become so dismissive of anyone that doesn't like a film of his.
Cop Out has so far earned $42.8 million at the domestic box-office, a little over $11 million more than Zack and Miri, but barely topping the $34.2 million production budget. Yet, it is his highest grossing film to date. The film opened with $18 million, and an interview at the Los Angeles Times after the film opened was when I finally figured out Kevin Smith really didn't get it.
When asked about the reviews he responded, "It's weird — these were some of the worst reviews I ever got in my life, including work I did in grade school. But they're completely out-of-sync with what people want to watch." He touches upon this slightly in his Twitter rant, but he only has it half-right.
That quote above is insinuating that people want to see a film with "fun laughs" as he says in his Twitter posts. The problem is, for many people, Cop Out didn't supply those laughs and was therefore given low marks as a result. It has nothing to do with being "out-of-sync," it has to do with not thinking Cop Out was funny. People wanted a funny film. Yes, and they turned out to the tune of $18 million to hopefully see one. Just because they showed up to watch Cop Out doesn't mean they thought it was funny, it means they paid money hoping it would be. It would appear Smith is the one that's out-of-sync and the numbers prove it.
If I go by the RottenTomatoes community rating it appears 54% of the people that saw it thought it was good. Not high marks if you ask me, rotten in fact according to RT standards. At the box-office word-of-mouth didn't prove to be too strong either as it dropped 49% the weekend after its release, another 54% after that and last week it was out of the top ten after four weeks in theaters. It opened in 3,150 theaters and was down to only 1,563 this past Sunday. It's not a good sign and while Smith's intentions were to make a funny film, and people wanted to see one (critics included), it appears he didn't deliver. He insists audiences "dig" his films, but the numbers don't seem to reflect that opinion, especially considering his films can't seem to crack the box-office ceiling, making it appear he has a dedicated $30 million audience, but that's about it.
As for his statement asking, "Was it called Schindler's Cop Out?" All I can say is I didn't read a single review comparing it to Schindler's List. However, to see Smith openly admit he is comparing Cop Out to a "retarded kid" is just baffling. His implication here is that he made a film for the lowest common denominator and is now mad at the people who respect film to such a degree they have decided to make a living out of writing about them. He's also implying that allowing to critics to see a film for free should guarantee they won't write a bad review and perhaps if they were asked to pay to see early screenings it would somehow make things right.
Smith has been beaten up over his films before, and I have heard him say he's done with the Internet as he wonders why he sits around getting in fights with people running random blogs hating on his films. So it's strange to see him taking it to this extreme, especially considering Cop Out was his most profitable film and he has since received funding for Red State, a film he openly told me "not a lot of people want to pony up for it, it's not a commercial movie by any stretch of the imagination." So why is he still so angry?
To imply reading about movies and sharing opinions hurts your ability to enjoy them is confusing. I can understand how a filmmaker would be hurt when he sees his work being lambasted by the masses, but considering the way he describes Cop Out I'm surprised he can even say it's any good.
My hope is Smith will get over this hump and find a way to progress as a filmmaker, because the cracks are becoming more like canyons.
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 23 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New Comment |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
"So we let a bunch of people see it for free and they shit all over it? Meanwhile, people who'd REALLY like to see the flick for free are made to pay? Bullshit." – Kevin Smith, you're my new idol. This is something so true
Why spill all these beans on someone this stupid? Get over it, this man is just a loud-mouth.
I think that Devin has had it out for Smith for quite some time now, so I really don't put much stock in him taking offense at Smith's comments. As for your own, you make some solid points, but I really think this is a case of Critics VS The Filmmaker. Filmmakers don't like it when critics rip their movie a new one and critics don't like it when their word is questioned. This is an endless fight that will never have an end and it's a shame to see this site joining in on what is really a pointless debate.
Facts are, when RED STATE is made, Smith isn't going to charge the critics to see the flick and they probably won't have to pay to see it. Worst case scenario, he'll somehow get the studio to not pre-screen the movie for critics and they'll bash it into the ground (which seems to be the MO for movies that don't pre-screen). Either way, it doesn't matter.
I'd personally like to see Smith move forward as a filmmaker (COP OUT seemed to be more of a cash grab than an actual movie) and I'd like to see critics quit comparing his current output to his earlier (and quite frankly, better) films. The dude is obviously in a different place as a filmmaker and his films (like all other filmmakers) should be judged on a film by film basis. I've never understood why everyone keeps referencing his earlier films when reviewing his current ones. It makes no sense. If we were to do the same with all filmmakers, then Tarantino hasn't made a good movie since PULP FICTION (which is, arguably, his best work) and Cameron peaked with THE TERMINATOR (which is, again arguably, his best work). Why Smith is constantly judged against work he did nearly fifteen years ago is beyond me.
Any way you slice it, this is almost a non-article. Smith got his feelings hurt and lashed out. You got yours hurt and you lashed out. Back and forth, back and forth, all so very pointless.
Who is comparing Cop Out to Smith's earlier work other than to say it's not as good, which seems to be the same thing you are saying? To that point, Cop Out wasn't a cash grab, Smith took something like an 80% pay cut to release it as a rated R film.
My feelings aren't hurt, I am simply disappointed watching a filmmaker I once respected publicly self-destruct.
The comment about comparison wasn't directed specifically at you. Sorry for the confusion. I should have specified.
As for the "self-destruction" comment, why is it that you consider his comments to be self-destructive? He's simply a filmmaker with an opinion. It just so happens that his opinion is that he doesn't like critics. Self-destructive is something like driving drunk and then dropping some anti-Semetic remarks, or maybe going on a public drug binge. Bashing on critics who disliked (more appropriately, hated with a vengeance) your most recent pic is hardly self-destructive.
well said Bryant..
I have long been a reader of this site and have yet to comment on anything until now, but Kevin Smith has long been one of my favorite writer/directors, I felt it necessary.
Smith's comments seem to have an underlying hypocrisy in them, where he blames the system for forcing people who want to see these movies to pay but almost outrightly admits to selling out to said system by making unintellectually stimulating movies to get more people into the theaters.
Now, I'm not surprised to see a decline in his films. Most of them have been laden with simple dick and fart jokes disguised by intellectual banter and superbly written dialogue, like a Tarantino of comedies (if you think that statement is a stretch, please watch his four-minute "Flying Car" short). This is how he can turn a $27,000 black-and-white film with his best friends into one of the greatest comedies of the 90's.
But why complain so much about people hating it? It's almost as if he hated it too, by the way he threw it under the bus as a cheap-laughs movie.
Don't get me wrong, he makes a few good points, but, mostly, he comes off as a guy who's been corrupted by the system he's complaining about so vehemently.
I have seen all of his movies and have yet to be pleased by any of them.
Kevin Smith seems to be quite ignorant when it comes to film in general. Kinda surprising considering he's been making movies regularly for the last 15 years… Would have thought he'd pick up something by now.
And Devin is just vile and offensive in that article. He openly insults the guy for what he wrote on twitter, way to take it to the next level of idiocy.
But beside the tone of his article I agree with him.
Um, why do you think Kevin Smith self-destructed? Perhaps from within the film critic community, but outsiders, the viewers (those that validate both of your existences as professionals) could not care less.
It is entertaining to see Kevin so openly poke a finger into the beehive.
I might even add that anyone from a creative industry that is subject to criticism quietly or loudly supports Kevin's outburst, perspective…and bravery ;-)
I agree with you 100% on this. Kevin Smith seems to have lost the plot recently. He just seems to be acting out at the critics because they didn't like his movie and he seems to think they missed the point when watching it.
To the person that said you can't compare his recent movies to ones 15 years ago, of course you can. When someone makes a film like Clerks you expect them to go places, and in recent years KS has sold out and has generally lost his way. And to compare him to QT is a joke, IB and Kill Bill may not be as good as Pulp Fiction but they are still incredible movies in their own right.
Just to correct you, I didn't compare him to Tarantino. I simply referenced Tarantino in saying that if ALL filmmakers were to be judged by their previous works, not many of them have had much of career since their earlier works. I could have substituted a good deal of other directors in place of Tarantino (I simply chose him because Smith and him both came out of the Miramax indie explosion of the mid-90s), and I realize that the two of them are in entirely different leagues, filmmaking-wise.
Also of note, I didn't say that BASTERDS or KILL BILL weren't any good, I said that IF ("if" being the operative word) we judged filmmakers solely against their own works, then Tarantino hasn't made a good film since PULP. However good his other works have been (and they have been very good), PULP was a cultural milestone that changed the film landscape. It alone inspired almost an entire new generation of filmmakers and none of Tarantino's recent works have done the same. I don't care how good his recent output is, but PULP was one-of-a-kind and if you want to get technical, everything since has paled in comparison.
And I do stand by my point, judge the current film on its own merits and not by the previous films the filmmaker has done. If reviewing COP OUT, we get that you loved CLERKS (everybody loved CLERKS) but this is a review about COP OUT and I'd like to hear whether or not THIS film is any good.
Sounds like you're digging your own hole. You just said that you didn't compare Tarantino to KS… but I read your earlier statement and it sure sounded like you did. Don't you realize that if you put Tarantino in the same sentence with Kevin Smith that their will be backlash.
Film fanatics who enjoyed The Terminator and Pulp Fiction still enjoy other movies by Cameron and Tarantino
The film fans who enjoyed Clerks and Chasing Amy are the same people who are bashing Smith's later work.
People that have a passion for movies so great that they want study it and write about it, are people who can tell that Kevin Smith is not the most talented director. His ineptness is so obvious sometimes that his movies just like their poorly made. And his uneducated characters talking like they have the most broad vocabulary is something that worked with Clerks, but in every movie it is very distracting. Plus he has no sense of film style…and if you have no style that's the first thing that critics are going to tear you apart for.
I don't think Kevin Smith is a great director and his movies suck now so he he shouldn't get so upset about bad reviews. If he doesn't do something good soon he's coming dangerously close to becoming the next Ed Wood
You actually were making some solid points, Central, right up until you said Smith is dangerously close to becoming the next Ed Wood. Not only have none of the films of Kevin Smith ever come close to the ineptness of Ed Wood, but the mere idea that you would suggest that they are heading there just establishes that you have no idea what you're talking about.
I just threw that out there because I know how sensitive Kevin Smith fans are and I knew that statement would get a rise out of them…and just like i thought, it did. But you are right…Kevin Smith is not as bad as Ed Wood…you got me there.
Smith is hurt. He wants to be the golden boy of clever but offensive comedy that he once was but he fails to realize that the trend in film that he helped usher in has developed, moved on, and changed. So yes his comments are somewhat silly and childish but I can't pretend as though I would act any different. People get frustrated when the lives they've become accustomed to change. No one can argue with that.
But Smith is correct about critics. More often than not, critics of any sort of art or media would rather jerk themselves off than give a helpful, constructively critical analysis of said media. In other words most criticism devotes the majority of its length to the elevation of the critic over the artists whom they are criticizing. I think Smith's idea to give 500 random people a chance to see his flicks for free rather than 500 critics is brilliant not because it'll help his films receive better reviews (it won't) but because it takes some of the power to shape public opinion out of the hands of the critic.
I hope he gets centered and makes another movie I can enjoy.
I personally feel that kevin smith is a fortunate man to be able to make movies but compared to Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer he's a goddamn veritable directing god.
So lets give him a break.
You know what, Kevin Smith gets a lot of hate for no reason and at one point, it gets to you like it would to anyone else. Just like everyone who sees a movie is entitled to an opinion, I believe every filmmaker can defend his or her work to the same extenet. There is far too much hate and negative reviews to movies like Cop Out that is really unnecessary. I'm completely confident that if Judd Apatow's name was attached to this pic or Zack and Miri, reviews would be different. But no matter how good, mediocre or bad this movie is, the critics can't get passed the fact that it's a Kevin Smith movie. Just like Michael Bay: no matter how entertaining his movies may be for some, no one can get passed the fact that it's a Michael Bay movie. And then critics flame them freely until no end. It's getting rather annoying.
So yeah, Kevin Smith unleashes a huge rant to defend his work. Big deal. And FYI, Kevin Smith IS progressing in his films. He left the whole Jay and Silent Bob universe after Clerks 2 and has since made 2 movies, with 2 more on the way, one of which a thriller which is completely out of the box for him. Let's see how he does. And let's keep an open mind people.
Personally i saw cop out and loved it. it was what it was, a movie to make people laugh-and i laughed. i think J.Bryant was spot on. if someone feels attacked they will defend themselves, just like brad felt attacked by J.Bryants statments and posted a comment to defend himself. if you dont like a movie thats fine, no film makers can make every film perfect. even steven messed up with the crystal skull movie. i feel the same goes with critics, some times your spot on and some times your reviews are trash. that life and human nature-no one can be perfect. alot of people liked clerks 2, i thought it wasn't funny. people have diff. opinions on what is funny and what isnt.
I read brads review on cop out but i went to see the movie and liked it. so should i be a critic of a critic and say that brads review of the film was wrong? NO. that was his take on it and thats fine. the only thing that seems odd is that there has been so many posts/editorials by brad about kevin smith. this gives the apperence that brad doesnt like Kevin smith. i dont really know or care, but i think if a critic doesnt like a movie then review it, say u dont like it and let that be the end. why are caring aboout his twitter posts? its a film makers job to make a film and a critics to review the FILM, not the person who makes it…thats just my opinion.
Brad, I don't want to insult you, but you really don't sound any different than Kevin Smith.
This is just a waste of time, let Smith do and say whatever he wants. He's no Tarantino or Eastwood, we can just ingore him. It's not like if he has anything to be looking forward to in the movie business, he's just going to continue making these trash comedies, let's let him be.
It's really funny how people like to protect critics, as if they're doing some kind of public service. They're just selling a product, and their product lacks creativity. Film criticism in the internet era has degraded to love fests and pile ons. You want to actually look at the films that get 100 percent on Rotten tomatoes and tell me they're that universally loved? It's all a popularity contest among sad hopefuls.
The guys a douche and his films suck. End of story.