Posted by Neil at term3-076.speakeasy.net on February 07, 2000 at 21:30:33:
In Reply to: brouhahahaha.... posted by chronic*girl*brig on February 07, 2000 at 21:00:20:
: it wouldn't be too far-fetched to assume that rene & brandi have left the boys in the dust (depending on how long after the original the sequel is set - you've gotta assume like, a week after the end of mallrats, brodie did something stupid and rene was like - "get the fuck out, bitch!")... and who knows what could've happened to gwen... but without t.s. a general problem comes up with the plot.
I disagree. I think that MALLRATS was the story of both of them coming to terms with what their relationship meant. If they simply returned to where they were two weeks later then the movie has no dramatic purpose.
Now, mind you I'm really not trying to heap up the rather simple little film with great importance, but it isn't without substance, and the substance it has is about the importance of love and one's willingness to work for it and fight for it. I also think that's the quality that makes it so re-watchable.
I'd simply hate for Kevin to make a sequel that undoes the first movie as a cheap gag and then moves on. I'd love to see Brodie-man in action again, but I'd rather he just end up somewhere alone for the day and have another story to tell that doesn't relate to Rene. I don't want to see the sequel play to the worst aspects of the orginal, but rather to the best. Make it fun and frivolous... not as substantive as the other three films, but not at the expense of the characters' basic truths.
That's my opinion, at least.