Kevin Smith's Dogma

Take a bow.

Unclear whether this is agreement, disagreement, or something else. My best guess is that it kind of means "yeah whatever, leave me alone."

In case you (or anyone else) is wondering why I'm on about this: it's because a lot of irreligious people talk very clumsily about religious folks. Particularly in the discourse around The Passion of the Christ, where it's almost treated like some kind of genre film, and where its content is completely divorced from its entire reason for being in a way they never would with subject matter that mattered to them. And the response earlier, reducing it to "blood and gore," as if the Christians who flocked to it enjoyed it the way someone might enjoy a splatter film, sure seems like an example of that.

The Crucifixion is at the core of Christian theology. It is, in the eyes of the faithful, the moment of the redemption of the whole human race and ultimate expression of God's love. Believers cry through Passion Plays, they don't cheer. Anthony Burgess (A Clockwork Orange) is scandalous precisely because he does cheer at the idea of crucifying Christ and imagines himself joining in with a whip, "dressed in the height of Roman fashion."

For non-believers, however, it is a bloody affair and humiliating one at that. Christianity had some difficulty taking root in Japan over the image of the cross. Their God died in a most embarrassing way, losing considerable face, right down to the "King of the Jews" sign hung around him.

Thus we have the same screen, but two different movies. For one audience, it's like watching the rape in The Accused. For another it's just a bloody guilt trip (think of that line from Angel Heart where Epiphany Proudfoot pushes back at the idea of killing chickens being disgusting stating, "At least we didn't nail a man to a cross").

Also, we should note that Americans are not averse to gore, but everyone is averse to being mocked. Everyone loves South Park until it is their turn. And then that episode went too far, or so we're told. No matter who you are, there is something sacred to you. To have thing mocked is offensive. From the outside, your sacred cow is just a cow and the rest of us just want to say "Moo!" and have a laugh and take it down a peg.

Of course, a lot of people who protested Dogma didn't see the film and didn't know what it was about (as Smith proved by anonymously interviewing protesters). They only knew that it was their turn, and that they didn't like it.

I think the Dogma protest was one of those last gasps of Catholicism. Today, Catholicism is a punching bag. Remember those mass graves in Canada (the Catholic orphanages that allegedly murdered first peoples and left their bones buried on the grounds?). Yeah, turns out that whole thing was wrong. Churches burned down in the area and Catholics were shouted at, but it didn't happen. And there was no apology from Trudeau or news services or anyone else.

Make a film depicting and mocking Allah, however, and find out what happens. Indeed, KFC is banning bacon switching to Halal chicken in Canada. I don't know why "inclusivity" demands that a customer who might want bacon should not be able to order it at a fast food joint, but I guess KFC ain't Burger King (i.e., you cannot, in fact, have it your way). I don't say this to deride Islam, but to note the casual prejudice against Christianity in contemporary culture. Anything Christian is just wrong, stupid, hateful, and bad in the eyes of many. Church Ladies and Lady Carmodys, Christians transifigured into Karens in a undivine comedy.

On a more serious note, this film features prime Selma Hayek dancing in a miniskirt sucking her thumb and so should be preserved by the Library of Congress for this reason alone.

Any movie with Salma Hayek, Linda Fiorentino and Alan Rickman is automatically a blissful experience....

While no one is ever going to seriously confuse Smith as being among the greatest directors of all time or even his generation, I do get quite a few laughs from Clerks and Dogma. They’re easily his best films and among the best of the 90’s, for me. Smith never evolved as a writer, though. He never evolved in his career at all. He was often his own worst enemy. And now he just rehashes his more popular films, pandering to the audience it’s aimed for, with stale poop jokes and shallow commentary on everyday life.

Clerks, and of course Dogma, were his first serious attempts at being about something, and maybe his reach exceeded his grasp at times, the overall product wasn’t so bad.

I even have a soft spot for something like Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back and Clerks II. Yeah, they’re stupid at times, and he relies too much on toilet humor, but sometimes I can’t help but laugh at them.

I thought Chasing Amy was OK. Smith's mistake was that his talent was for the mundane, not the fantastic. He found the large in the small with Clerks. He was good at small talk. He should have tried to stick with small movies about small people grounded in reality.

Yeah. His biggest problem was he thought he perhaps more clever then he really was (hence my “reach exceeds his grasp” comment) and although he did have his moments….they were inevitably ruined moments later with some sort of gay joke or maybe something involving poop.
I’m serious. Some of his movies had poop jokes shoehorned in there.

I recall seeing it in the theater and found it to be mildly entertaining, made somewhat more appealing by how much it seemed to be challenging sanctified "morality". That's mainly what I recall, so, recalling that, I thought, if it's easy or cheap, see it again, see if I still sorta-like it. My guess is that it would not age well.

I liked Clerks a lot at the time. Chasing Amy too. And even if they've both aged like mayonnaise (they have), I bet they're still way better than anything else he's done.


When it comes to directors who have any kind of significant success or influence, I'm particularly hostile to Smith. I honestly think he might be the worst of all time.

actually, this time i was agreeing with you. but sure, whatever, leave me alone.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

I don’t know about that. After Rewatching Clerks not that long ago, it seemed to have aged well, for me.
Also, worst of all time? I don’t know about that either. Overrated? Sure, especially since he never was able to reach the heights of Dogma and Clerks for me, but worst? I can think of directors who deserve that a little more.

I haven’t seen Chasing Amy yet.

Alright, fair enough. I guess I'd just note that "okay" doesn't really convey this, but glad to hear it.

I'm sure there are worse (Boll definitely lives up to his reputation), but I'm talking about directors who actually have had an influence. And I honestly can't think of anyone who is less inspired, or less technically or visually or artistically or intellectually empty as Kevin Smith has consistently been for his entire career.


He's had one idea. Let's have people stand around who all talk like Kevin Smith. And then he thinks it's totally fine to throw anything else of worth down the toilet.


His one ability is writing Kevin Smithesque dialogue. That's it. And it's turned out to be a pretty shallow talent that has become grating to the point I can't even appreciate whatever the hell I thought was mildly interesting about Clerks in the first place


And, yes, Michael Bay is leagues better than him. Even James Wan (although it's probably fair to say many who have been influenced by those two have made movies considerably worse than Smith's)

Kevin Smith's descent into mediocrity has been sad and precipitous, but movies need to be seen in their historic context. Back in the 90s he still seemed like a promising young director and a lot of "hot" actors wanted to work with him.

Of the once-promising directors of the 90s, none turned out to become as mediocre as Smith and Rodriguez. But for a while there, their movies seemed pretty hip.

He raced Shyamalan to the $5 DVD bin.

Well, I mean, at the end of the day, even Shyamalan's movies are still getting wide theatrical releases... Smith and Rodriguez are both in straight-to-streaming hell

Eh. Personally, I love Dogma. But then I love the irreverent and I'm a fervent atheist. And if there has to be a god, can it be 90s-era Alanis Morissette? So maybe it's just my kinda thing.

I'm pretty sure if there was a God, they'd have a pretty good handle on what irony is.

Ha! Good one.

I'm closing this thread temporarily until I can go back and figure out which posts to delete.

The film obviously deals with religion. But the discussion is obviously not even attempting to connect back to the film any more, which violates the No Politics rule. I'm not sure if we can draw a bright, clear line at the point at which it crossed over, but it clearly has. To clarify: "here's how my belief or lack thereof may influence my reaction to the film" is fine, but using the film as a jumping off point to argue about religion isn't.

EDIT: actually, nope, it was pretty easy to find the line.