MovieChat Forums > SLC Punk! (1999) Discussion > Wow, this movie sucks! (Spoilers, as usu...

Wow, this movie sucks! (Spoilers, as usual)

posted 14 years ago by vampyrebat666
15 replies | jump to latest

I can't believe how many people seem to love this movie. It had a few interesting moments, but no plot whatsoever. It was just a bunch of random scenes with nothing to string them together. And it was so hokey that I wasn't even halfway through it before I guessed that it was going to end with some tragic drug overdose. (I'll admit I was mildly surprised that it was Bob who died, I thought it was going to be one of the girlfriends.) The tragic death is of course followed by the main character "growing up", putting aside his youthful punkish ways, and going on to Harvard. It's all about as predictable as beer-farts at a keg party.

I also found it extremely annoying the way the main character kept narrating and breaking the fourth wall to tell the audience what was happening. That works in some movies, but here it was just like listening to some bonehead bragging about how cool they are. Am I the only one who though that this "semi-autobiographical" tale doesn't seem real at all? It seems more like writer/director James Merendino's fantasy of what his life would've been like if he had been a wild punker when he was young.

Since it's supposed to be semi-autobiographical, James Merendino writes the main character (aka, himself) as being smarter, cooler, tougher, and of course punkier than anyone else. A perfect example comes right at the start of the movie, where Stevo is talking about how much him and Bob hated rednecks. That really struck a chord with me, because I had a mohawk in Calgary, Alberta back in the eighties, so I know all about being a teenage punk in a right-wing town getting hassled by rednecks. But of course, Stevo and Bob are far too badass and tough to get hassled by rednecks like mere mortals, so instead the scene shows Stevo and Bob jump the rednecks and beat them up! First of all, this never happens, and secondly it makes Stevo and Bob mindless, vicious thugs, exactly like the rednecks they profess to hate. Except of course they're the main characters so it's portrayed as being all good clean fun.

I saw the trailer for this movie a little while ago on Youtube, and I thought I was going to love it. What a disappointment. It's too boring to be a good coming-of-age movie, too unfunny to be a good comedy, and too lame to be a good punk rock movie. A complete and utter waste of time.

[–] kkJamie 14 years ago

I'm not going to get into a discussion about this clearly the movie was not meant for you. I'll just point out a couple of things:

Although Merendino was a "punk" the movie is not even slightly autobiographical and James (who is a real writer not an old boring ex-"punk" that wont get over his glory days) was not Stevo. The movie is not all meant to be realistic. Stevo is an extreme and a stereotype at times. Its a character not a person but the story is still relatable to people who enjoyed the movie and understand the message.

All narration is coming from the Stevo at the end of the movie (notice that he sometimes uses legal terms or presents things like evidence for a trial.) He was taking you into his past. It was the best way could tell the story leading up to the main point. Stevo is aware of the hypocrisies and contradictions. Of course they fought the rednecks for fun not because they hated them. Theres even that whole scene where he stops the movie and attempts to explain and analyze it.

Most importantly SLC Punk is not about punk.

[–] vampyrebat666 14 years ago

I'm not going to get into a discussion about this clearly the movie was not meant for you.

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

...the movie is not even slightly autobiographical...

Almost every single review of this wretched film describes it as "semi-autobiographical". Go ahead and type "SLC Punk semi-autobiographical" into Google and see what you find.

Most importantly SLC Punk is not about punk.

The movie has the word "Punk" in the title, the main characters are punks, and the story (what there is of one) is presented as the reminisces of a guy who goes on and on in long, boring monologues about what it was like to be a punk. Don't you think this could cause viewers to assume the movie has something to do with punk? Saying this movie is not about punk is like saying the movie Aliens is not about aliens.

[–] kkJamie 14 years ago

What do the reviewers know about Merendino's life? Were they friends of his when he was a teenager? He did grow up in Salt Lake City and got into punk as a teenager but he didn't go jumping skinheads and stealing cars.

The movie is about rebellious kids who just happen to be into a punk scene. If you did in fact watch the entire movie you would see neither of the main characters were even "punks" and obviously none of their friends. So two kids got behind a trend to look cool, got drunk, went to concerts, took drugs. Not much separates them from the kids that aren't "punk". You don't have to be a punk or be into that music to identify with the story. It seems its better if you're not because you could be disappointed like vampyrebat666. And the younger "punks" that do enjoy this movie may be disappointed by the fact it was inspired not by current punk scenes but by a Rage Against The Machine concert.

[–] vampyrebat666 14 years ago

If you did in fact watch the entire movie you would see neither of the main characters were even "punks" and obviously none of their friends.

Are we even talking about the same movie? The main character spends most of the movie talking to the audience about what a punk he was. You could make a drinking game out of it. Every time someone on screen says "punk" you have to slam a shot. You'd probably get alcohol poisoning before the end of the film.

[–] Rycor 14 years ago

Were either of you even alive in the early 80s?

If not, then you have no perspective.

Go listen to Sum 41 and talk about how your older brother loaned you his Dead Kennedy's T-Shirt.

[–] vampyrebat666 14 years ago

Were either of you even alive in the early 80s?

Did you even read my original post on this thread?

[–] Rycor 14 years ago

Answer my question.

[–] vampyrebat666 14 years ago

I already did. Read the *beep* post you're commenting on, dimwit.

[–] kkJamie 14 years ago

You did not read the OP or my reply.

The answer is no.

Sum 41 I only liked the song they did with Iggy Pop but their guitarist isn't bad. Dead Kennedys I've never been a huge fan of.

[–] JoshMoshes 14 years ago

You CLEARLY missed the thematic message in this movie... LOL. wow, people these days need movies to be full of action, comedic relief, and very suspenseful with no moral concept, huh. It wasn't meant to be a "Lets get *beep* faced and make the viewers lawl all the way through" flick. It was meant to show the life and "after life" of a Punk and what they stand(ed) for.

A true 90's kid

[–] ShutterShocked 14 years ago

I think kk is just saying that the punk scene is merely a backdrop for the movie. The thematic content is really the most important element of any story. This thematic content could be told with any kind of trend that young adults must eventually grow out of (or end up like Sean).

So no. It really isn't about punk.

[–] yfguitarist 14 years ago

Agreed. I couldn't even make it 15 minutes before getting so annoyed.

[–] kwfj 13 years ago

This movie made me depressed b/c it reminded me how I wasted my time wearing those same *beep* outfits in the nineties, and of course, the movie is terrible. Hokey is a good word. "Dude, we had a blast doing this, this and this." boring

[–] artschoolsuicide 13 years ago

I agree mostly with what the OP said about the film.

And I have to differ on the point that the movie isn't about "punk" or what have you. Whether intended or not, and I think it was, this movie's main appeal is to a younger generation fascinated by punk rock or the punk scene (who obviously weren't teens in the 80s or live near the east village) and are basically told "all punk rock means is whining, dressing up in flashy clothes (which were more raver than punk), finger pointing, dying your hair, and creating a colorful diversion for yourself until it's time to grow up."

Although it may be unfair to judge a film based partially on what a certain audience is guaranteed to take away from it because they don't know any better, it would have been nice if the director had more than a hot topic cashier's perspective on what punk rock must be like.

I think a more interesting film could have been constructed with a couple small 'tweaks' to the story. One would be the presence of an actual punk rocker, and by that I don't mean a character with a more authentic mohawk, but just someone (or perhaps a couple) who have 'been places'. Street smart, musically and socially aware, cautiously tolerant and not pre-occupied with "posers" or any of that nonsense. And have "Stevo" and his friends meet them and come to the conclusion that they themselves are the stereotypes and so is their entire visual attempt at teenage rebellion.

Secondly instead of the film being called SLC Punk it should be renamed SLC 'Punk'. From this you can maintain the editing style and all of what people like and instead of some gleeful cliched fantasy have a wry social commentary on how the 'misunderstood' teen(s) crusade through life unable to see through their own makeup and realize what normal teens they actually are.

Unfortunately, writer/director seem to believe that the characters they are putting forth are the genuine article--and so do many of the people who watch the film.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]