Posted by Kevin at spider-wq062.proxy.aol.com on February 28, 2002 at 14:10:12:
In Reply to: I saw -Flying Car- last night. posted by Transition on February 28, 2002 at 13:02:05:
: I enjoyed the short and it was good to see the familar characters from
'clerks' again.
Thank you.
: However,
Uh-oh...
: it just felt like it went on too long.
I actually agree with this. I submitted a five minute version and a six
minute version. The folks at the "Tonight Show" chose the six minute
version, but I was pushing for the the tighter, five minute version.
Didn't seem to hurt the piece, though, as the audience there dug it.
: In reality, anyone would have said "Enough about the flying car, already,
alright?"
In reality, yes. But that's why we have film: to escape reality, even for
a few minutes.
: The et up was nice,
The set-up too, I thought.
: but the ending was predictable, you just knew about the elaborate set-up
about the being 'diddled' that once the other guy agreed to it, he'd be
taken to task for having done so.
Well... yeah. To me, that's why it's funny. Everyone else sees it coming
except Dante.
: Flying car still featured well written snappy dialogue, but you saw the
ending coming and really seemed to lack the 'freshness' of the earlier
clearks shorts.
There were earlier, "Clerks" shorts? Might you point me in the direction
of said shorts - as I've never seen them myself.
In terms of the short lacking the "freshness" of "Clerks"... I can see that
take on it - particularly if you've seen "Clerks" before. But out of the
six million folks watching last night, I'd wager that the lion's share of
them HASN'T seen "Clerks", so it played as fresh as a fabric softener.
And for those who HAVE seen "Clerks" many times, I'd imagine (based on what
I've read here and elsewhere on the 'net) that the "freshness" factor
wasn't a concern; they were just happy to watch Dante and Randal going at
it again.
As was I.
***********************
************************
*************************
**************************
**********