So why are we bothering with 'VA5' if we're cocksure the
critics are going to not only turn their backs on us, but also
do so after having served up our entrails with pithy
dismissals and half stars galore? It's quite simple,
really.
We should be able to make any movie we
want, stupid or not - so long as it doesn't cost too much, and
is reasonably guaranteed to make its money back for our
distributor. That, for the curious, is why we're allowed to
keep making movies. Some cats (particularly the denizens of
Internet movie chat boards) can't figure out why we're allowed
to continue lensing flicks, when we never seem to grow as a
visual story-tellers, or keep making - what's to them - the
same movie. The answer is that we've never lost anybody
money.
I'll say that again: we've never lost
anybody money. Granted, we came close with Rats; but
even that made a killing on video and, more recently, DVD. And
even though we've never had a break-out, blockbuster,
monstro-hit (our highest grossing effort was thirty one
million bucks), we've never spent much money making said
pictures (said flick only cost ten million bucks), so the
return-per-investment usually pleases the suits (we earned
three times what we spent; and that was just the theatrical
release). If you can make some cats a little green without
losing them any in the process, they'll let you shoot, shoot,
shoot, like you're Oswald in the Book
Depository.
It doesn't always work like that for
some filmmakers. Some cats let their budgets escalate with
every successive movie they make until they get to the point
when it's tough to turn a profit, because their pictures cost
a hundred plus million bucks. But while I'm a glutton at a
$1.99 buffet, I'm incredibly responsible when it comes to
spending other people's money. I don't need bigger budgets,
because I make movies in which people talk at each other for
an hour and a half, and shooting talk is cheap. Shooting
explosions is expensive, so I tend to shy way from
those, particularly because explosions have no place in a
conversation about auto-fellatio or the like.
So
because I work cheap and always turn a profit, I get to make
whatever flick I want with my gaggle of friends. This time,
it's a dumb comedy - partly because we all thought the script
was funny (well, Affleck and Mewes did, anyway), and partly
because the last time we made a picture, we got all manner of
hate mail and a couple death threats. It wasn't a good time
for most, to work their asses off on what they felt was an
entertaining-yet-thoughtful pot-boiler about faith and
spirituality, only to have so-called 'Christians' let us know
that the Son of God had charged them with smiting us for our
efforts. After dealing with that for two years, it just felt
like it was time to do something light and airy, for which the
only death threats we may receive won't be related to some
jihad, but instead to the quality of the flick itself (i.e.
"Your movie sucked so hard, I want to kill you."). And while
the people who tend to intellectualize a medium as silly as
motion pictures maintain that Amy and Dogma are
highwater marks in our careers, you wouldn't believe the
amount of people who'll come up to me and say "Mallrats
is the bomb, yo. You should make another one of those."
Granted, they may be twelve, but I'm no snob; a fan of my work
is a fan of my work, regardless of whether he or she has
sprouted pubes yet.
That being said, all these
actors and actresses we're meeting with [See last column.
-ed.] are under the impression we're doing what we like to
call a "classy picture". Since we're not, and we know we're
not but they don't, the meet-and-greets we're able to line up
are really impressive. If some of these folks had any clue
they were meeting on a flick that features a monkey in a
prominent role, they might've held out for a meeting with a
more visionary director. As they have no clue what the
script's about, they deign to meet with me and
Scooter.
One such cat who probably would've taken
the meeting regardless of his foreknowledge of the flick's
contents was Jay Mohr. You may know him as Bob Sugar, the
asshole agent who back-stabs the title character in the
sublime "Jerry Maguire". Or you may know him as the lead in
the short-lived yet on-the-money Fox series "Action" (or, if
you're an Opie and Anthony nut, you might recognize his name
from his many appearances on their radio broadcast). Whatever
you know him from, you don't know him unless you've spent some
time with him in real life. He's a really, really funny
motherfucker, with a head screwed so straight on his
shoulders, that you're amazed he's able to navigate the waters
of show business. He summed up meet-and-greets best when he
broke them down to me and Scooter thusly: "You know and like
my stuff, I know and like your stuff. We know this because we
say 'no' to having lots of these meetings. But when we
actually hook up for one, we don't really mention the mutual
appreciation, because it's assumed. We really want to meet
just to make sure we're not assholes."
While Mohr
may not be right for the flick we're doing now, I will
eventually find something to do with Mohr. Because life's too
short to not work with a guy that smart.
Kevin
Smith has made a few movies and written a few comics -
both with too many words in them. He won a Harvey Award once,
but the Eisners have thus far ignored him (probably with good
reason). When he's not spouting off at Psycomic, he's spouting
off at his website, the View Askewniverse. But
before all else, he's a husband and a father (yes - he's
gotten laid at least once).
Respond to Kevin
and his column in the Psycomic
Forums...