Punk's Dead: SLC Punk 2

The first SLC Punk answered some questions that people might (or might not have) asked. About the 80's midwest HxC Scene, what was going through these suburban white kid's heads.

It did the scene some justice, and while not quite breaking untread ground, it was fun enough.

This one came out of left field. Didnt answer any questions. And while SLC Punk might have been a passion project, I don't really know what this was, or who really wanted it.

I will say, I loved the scenes with Shawn and Matt the Mod, and even Crash when Bob's son wasnt on the screen. Overall, not too bad... Would I recommend it:?

No. There's far, far better. Like Penelope Spheeris' Suburbia.

This turned out like an extended version of a Boy Meets World episode with more content related to my actual life. And it's significantly less corny. But the character development is nothing compared to the original SLC which may have to do a lot to do with it being told in 3rd person. It's also a road trip film and if you read Chuck Klosterman's take on road trip films, this is spot on and the film isn't about the anything other than an interpersonal character growth/reflection. I think the punk aspect is mostly an aesthetic and not very necessary to to the overall story, unfortunately. A lot seemed forced to make this happen, and as a fan of SLC Punk, I appreciate the attempt.

I don't know what happened to the writer/director between this and the original, maybe just age? Either way after having watched both back to back it is insane that they came from the same mind.

The first is both poignant and satirical, dripping with irony and original takes. The sequel is, bar some interesting ideas thrown in but never realised, simply a celebration of Punk and escapism. It lacks almost everything that made the original great. Even in the first 5 minutes you can tell the difference. Everything in the sequel is glamorised, there are touches of struggle, but mostly it's something to aspire to. The original starts off showing how crappy the lifestyle is and how false a lot of the philosophy is. There is a real sense of hopelessness and anarchy, whereas this film is basically saying "yay, it's cool to be yourself!"

Overall there are things to like here and it works for a 12 year old to watch and want to emulate, but somehow the original is much more advanced despite being over 20 years old. It makes no sense, maybe it is supposed to be ironic. The original message seemed to be that everyone sells out in the end, and this could act as a meta proof of that, if so it is genius!

I was glad when it was over.

I wonder why anyone would make such a listless movie.

The characters each seem indulgent yet none are developed to the point where they provide any interest.

The usefulness of a car ride as a sort of journey device is marginalized by the redundant and boring settings.

The production value is mix and match mediocre.

The narrator's bad acting is creepier than the creepiness of employing a dead narrator character.

The climax of the story is not even anti climatic, but at least you know the end is near.

To be honest, this movie isn't a sequel to the first film in any relatable sense. Some characters appear with the same names as some in the first film, there is some narration that happens, a goth kid goes to a punk show, gets hammered, has a revelation while getting the hell beat out of him, and end show? SLC Punk! was a surprisingly great film. This one? Not so much. The production values weren't good, the acting was uninspired, and the direction was horrible. The original was one of those films better left on its own. It was like they were pressured to make it at gunpoint and this was the post-mortem product.

This is what happens when you try to recapture lightning in a bottle while standing in a half-full kiddy pool.