MovieChat Forums > SLC Punk! (1999) Discussion > This movie is not about punk, per se

This movie is not about punk, per se

posted 13 years ago by Anirak1337
7 replies | jump to latest

I know this board is mostly dead, but I'd like to leave this here since I've watched this movie 4 times already and I usually don't do that with even my favorite movies.

The best quote I can relate to this was actually about fight club, when the author of the book said it could have just as easily been "golf club".

The main theme of the movie is struggle for identity. It's about losing the identity you once thought you had. Steveo loses everything, from his punk identity to his best friend. He finally ends up giving in to his father's dream for him, but we don't really get the feeling that he's found anything more substantial this go-around.

I had no interest in punk before this movie, and I can't really say that I do now. I think the "haters" of the film had too much attachment to the punk movement, either in the way of disliking it or seeing themselves as a punk. I can say that despite this lack of interest in the punk scene, this has become one of my favorite movies.

Someone mentioned that it doesn't have a plot. Sure, in the linear sense, it doesn't. It's more of a collection of scenes from Steveo's recollection of how he got to where he was at that moment. Frankly, the more I have rewatched it the more I have seen just how multilayered the movie really is. The device of him "retelling" the story is woven so seamlessly that it never gets gimmicky.

I apologize for the stream of consciousness. These are the thoughts that have been stewing in my head about this movie for the last few days. I have a feeling I'm going to rewatch the movie yet again this week. The characters really hooked me from the get-go.

[–] i_screaminternet 12 years ago

This movie actually opened the door for punk to me. I was a metal kid for about 4 years and then once I started to get bored of metal and hate the whole scene, I watched this movie (for the fifth time in about 6 months) under the influence of alcohol and it hit me-this was a culture that fit me well. Now, I know what you're thinking and no, I didn't rush out and buy myself combat boots and start throwing the anarchy A around. I downloaded Black Flag, Operation Ivy, Minor Threat, Bad Religion, and Misfits. I then listened to the music and loved it. Then I read the lyrics and that's when I realized this was for me. I agreed with virtually everything in this music.

One thing this movie got wrong though is Steve-O's "explanation" of anarchy...it's just false and gives anarchists a pretty bad rep for being idiots who just wanna mosh through America.

A Very Harold and Kumar Christmas: 8/10
In Time: 7/10
The Thing: 6.5/10

[–] IndaChood 11 years ago

^^
Why do you feel a need to attach yourself to a scene?

"I was a metal kid but realized I was punk rawk"

Why not just listen to whatever music you like and feel like listening too? Are you so shallow and vapid that the only way you can define yourself to others is by what kind of music you listen to?

[–] hoboboxerjoe 11 years ago

Why do you care if someone "needs" to attach themselves to a scene? Your line of reasoning is silly.

[–] spidervein 11 years ago

Part of being human is finding community with others like yourself. It doesnt matter whether someone wants to be apart of something or not. Like someone said, your line of reasoning is silly and only implies that all those people in that scene are "shallow and vapid". Leave people be, let them do what they want to do. Let OTHERS find community and support where they want it or need it.

---------------------------------------

Why are you all wet, baby?

[–] eden-35 10 years ago

I reallllly hate "SLC Punk". Not because of my attachment to the punk scene (I love punk and post-punk music now, but I was more of a goth kid back in high school haha), but rather because I'm an Anarchist (an Anarcho-Communist, to be specific) and I consider this film dangerous. It completely misrepresents what we believe. The protagonists of the film don't know what Anarchists actually believe, making the whole message at the end where dude sells out and is all like "*beep* anarchy!" completely null and void. At the root of the problem is that the film's writer seems to think Anarchists advocate simple chaos. Rather than opposition to order, we Anarchists (at least the true, leftist kind - "Anarcho"-Capitalism is an oxymoron) oppose hierarchy. In fact, the society we advocate is a highly organized one (we'd argue that CAPITALISM is truly chaos).

It's obvious the writer of the film never read a WORD of Mikhail Bakunin, Emma Goldman, or any other classic Anarchist writers (hell, even Noam Chomsky would be better than nothing!). SLC Punk furthered the myth that "Anarchism = Chaos" in the minds of thousands of young punks. All it did is aid the American propaganda machine (no wonder most Americans don't know what Anarchism/Communism is) - Seriously, *beep* that movie haha

That said, the main message of the film was flawed too. Truth be told, most of the punks I know are still punks today (in their late-20s to mid-30s). Many were/are homeless/squatting crust punks and the like - They took me "under their wing" when situations beyond my control lead to my own homelessness many years ago. At any rate, they were all pretty much a world away from the middle class trust fund kids depicted in the film.

[–] PhoenixPhuck 10 years ago

I never felt this movie was "punk" at it's core. Punk was the setting as much as the time and location.

Repo Man, now that movie is punk.

Even the most primitive society has an innate respect for the insane.

[–] mickeylbrown 10 years ago

Yeah most people on this board didn't get it. Too stupid.