Roger Ebert seemed personally disappointed with Kevin Smith in his review of Mallrats

Kevin Smith’s “Mallrats” was a major breakthrough in the director’s career in 1995. His 1994 debut film, “Clerks,” was a sensation in the independent world, capturing the popular zeitgeist with nothing more than smart conversation, pop culture references and black-and-white film stock. “Clerks” was made for just $230,000 in total (and cost just $27,000 to shoot), but it grossed well over 10 times that at the box office. It was even more successful on home media, allowing Smith’s voice to proliferate across a generation as “Clerks” became one of the most important films of the 1990s.

“Mallrats,” by comparison, was a sleeker, larger film distributed by an established studio in Gramercy Pictures. Indeed, everything from the film’s budget to its setting and cast was more important. Michael Rooker appeared in the film, while heartthrob Jeremy London played one of the two lead roles. However, the big “success” of the project was Shannen Dohertythe ultra sexy star fresh out of “Beverly Hills 90210.” Smith also cast actor Jason Lee and managed to make an appearance in Stan Lee, the guru of Marvel Comics (no relation). Even young Ben Affleck played a notable role. In structure, “Mallrats” was similar to “Clerks” in that both films were about a couple of twenty-something laymen who complain to a retail outlet bemoaning the sorry state of their respective romances.

“Mallrats”, however, was not as successful as “Clerks”. In fact, it made less money at the box office and didn’t get very good reviews. Roger Ebert gave the film only one and a half stars, noting that its budget was perhaps 100 times that of “Clerks”, but that Smith covered essentially the same material with the same themes as in “Clerks”.

Ebert, it should be noted, was very fond of “clerics”. He observed that the film and “Mallrats” were set in an attractive world where dead-end teenagers and twenty-somethings have new concerns other than hanging out and talking. As many critics have observed, it was during the pointless hours of conversation that the characters in “Clerks” receded into depth. In his review of “Mallrats”, Ebert described the film as follows:

“One of the charms of ‘Clerks’ was that it captured the aimlessness and boredom of its world with deadpan humor. There was no plot, just slowly developing themes, like the return of old girlfriends and the problems of bizarre clients. We felt it was close to life. […]and it was funny to see the way the character seized on every little development like a breach in the wall of inactivity. »

That said, Ebert felt that “Mallrats” had the same type of structure but with a more conventional Hollywood plot and typical, predictable central romances. Ebert emphasized that a plot was not necessary in “Clerks”. So why did Smith feel the need to add one to “Mallrats”? He continued:

“The fatal flaw in the plotting is that we don’t care. The movie is about two teenagers who have girlfriend problems, and those problems, unfortunately, would be more entertaining if absolutely nothing was done to resolve them.”

In “Mallrats” there is an over-the-top plan for handsome TS (London) to win back his girlfriend Brandi (Claire Forlani) on a game show taped live at his local mall. Brodie (Lee) is forced to help by intervening on Brandi’s cruel father, Jared (Rooker), while trying to renegotiate with his own girlfriend Rene (Doherty).

The plot also becomes more and more complicated. There’s an evil security guard at the mall, and TS hires Jay and Silent Bob (Jason Mewes and Smith) to distract the guard and ruin the game show. (Jay and Silent Bob were, of course, characters carried over from “Clerks.”) There’s even a miniature plot involving Jay and Silent Bob, as well as a subplot about a teenage prodigy (Renee Humphrey) and her studies of sexuality. It proves instrumental in thwarting the romantic nastiness of Affleck’s character, who has set his sights on René. Halfway through the film, Brodie and TS leave the mall and go to a nearby flea market in order to visit a fortune teller (Priscilla Barnes). The clairvoyant’s trick is that she has to be topless while looking into the future (!) and she also has a third nipple. Oh, yeah, and Ethan Supplee has a supporting role as a man who can’t see a Magic Eye poster. Do you remember it?

Ebert was disappointed by all these shenanigans, writing:

“‘Clerks’ spoke with the sure, clear voice of an original filmmaker. In ‘Mallrats,’ the voice is hushed, and we sense instead the advice of the tired, the establishment, the timid and other familiar Hollywood executive types.”

Smith, it seems, is exhausted. He was eager to have a thriving career as a Hollywood actor, and with “Mallrats” he made the studio version of “Clerks,” a film that lacked the striking eagerness and serious sense of boredom of his first film. It seems that many aficionados of Smith’s “Clerks” felt the same way and stayed away en masse. However, like “Clerks,” “Mallrats” found new life in home media, and some people enjoyed it just as much.