I'm a huge Kevin Smith fan, so take this for what it's worth: I feel like a lot of criticism that's harped on the guy from film critics -- especially those that liked his early films and used to champion him -- stem from either 1) the fact that Smith has a very loyal and sometimes overzealouss fan base that often descend on those critics whenever they utter a negative word about Smith and his work, or 2) the fact that they heaped a lot of expectations on him back in the 90s and feel like he never grew into the kind of filmmaker that his potential teased, or 3) both.
Bob appears to be in camp 2, though I suspect he's had experiences with the first point (let's be honest -- most critics have). But in Bob's case, this video essay seems a little unfair and contradictory. You can't argue Smith never achieved the potential he showed with Clerks on one hand, and then later say, "Well, Clerks wasn't really that good, there was no skill involved and it was really just a movie of its time." If the latter is true, then you never should have expected him to become "the chosen one" and evolve into some kind of indie filmmaking messiah.
P.S. Yes, some of his recent films are poor, but Red State was GREAT.
P.P.S. Affleck was the bizzomb in Phantoms.
Bob appears to be in camp 2, though I suspect he's had experiences with the first point (let's be honest -- most critics have). But in Bob's case, this video essay seems a little unfair and contradictory. You can't argue Smith never achieved the potential he showed with Clerks on one hand, and then later say, "Well, Clerks wasn't really that good, there was no skill involved and it was really just a movie of its time." If the latter is true, then you never should have expected him to become "the chosen one" and evolve into some kind of indie filmmaking messiah.
P.S. Yes, some of his recent films are poor, but Red State was GREAT.
P.P.S. Affleck was the bizzomb in Phantoms.