His early work was top notch, before his ego ruined things for him. And his reluctance to “grow up” along with the material.
Clerks is far more then “viable”, and Dogma is, along with Clerks, a classic of the 90’s.
Worst director in history is hyperbole, considering I can name far worse directors who didn’t even have half the same creativity as Smith’s early career.
Well, I guess it depends on what we look for and value in cinema that makes us determine who the worst is. If what he does works for you, great. Have at it. But I can assure you that when it comes to what I look for, I'm not being hyperbolic when I say I think he's the worst. Or at least pretty damn close out of any 'name' directors.
What do I value? It would be one of the following
1) A director who devotes himself to the craft of filmmaking in the hopes of mastering the form
2) Anyone, knowingly or unknowingly, who somehow upsets the standard cinematic form through their passion or delusion towards making movies. If you don't have it in you to bend the medium to your whims, then break it and see what you can do with that.
3) Failing these other two, at least some discernable philosophy that makes me understand why the director is compelled to make film and what he wants to do with them.
I see dont' see much of any of this in Smith's work that envigorates my senses in regards to any of these points. When it comes to Clerks, I do think he stumbled towards something of value. Through his characteristic laziness in learning the form, and his obsession with ephemeral pop references, the film feels really emblematic of that generation. And I don't say that as a total backhanded compliment. I think that's important. But it's really a movie that at this point is only interesting to me anthropologically, not as an actual movie I'd want to watch on its own merits. I once thought is was vaguely funny, and now I don't know why I ever thought that. The only thing I still find somewhat charming about it was the discovery of Jason Mewes, who is a compulsively watchable weirdo.
Ultimately, what makes me hate Smith's work so much is how profound his lack of curiosity is about the very medium he uses. He doesn't care about the potential of all the things it can do. He's actively bored by this notion. He says as much in interviews at the time. I find that attitude personally offensive. Now, should he have to adhere to what I want from a movie. Of course not. He basically made Clerks (and much of his follow up work) because he wanted to just film the kinds of conversations he likes to hear (or, more accurately, a bunch of characters talking exactly like he talks). And I guess that's kind of a philosophy. Sort of. But when I don't even particularly like the conversations he films, documenting a world where everyone talks in Star Wars references until the sun comes up, you can't blame me when his movies annoy the **** out of me.