Even though it’s better than the last one, the humor still feels really dumb. When I first saw “Clerks,” I thought it was pretty impolite and dull, with endless conversations that felt boring. Honestly, I wasn’t expecting much from this film either. But it did manage to surprise me and give me more than I anticipated. The story is set about ten years after the initial movie – which lines up because the sequel came out a decade later – and shows Dante, the main character, leaving his unpleasant convenience store job to work at a fast food restaurant. He isn’t interested in this new job either and hates it, but he's engaged to a beautiful woman who plans on taking him to Florida, where her father will provide them with a place to live. However, someone destined to be an ordinary person can’t expect too much good fortune, and he ends up losing everything in one day. Naturally, Randal, his longtime friend, is partly responsible for what happens. If the first film didn't work because it lacked a script, just relying on clever but rude and uninteresting conversations, this movie fixed that problem by giving the characters some kind of story. But decent doesn’t equal good: while this was a significant step forward, the film has a lengthy romantic subplot that seems like something written in high school, and it doesn't really work or feel believable. Another issue is the quality of most of the characters; they all seem underdeveloped, one-dimensional, and uninteresting. Some are just there to deliver jokes that would be more at home in a military base or college dorm. This brings up the humor! It was supposed to be a strength of this film, but the comedy relies on crude, sexual, and unsanitary gags. Jokes about poor hygiene in a restaurant, bestiality, and various other sexual topics are abundant, like a flood after a heavy rain. There are also references to other films—like “Lord of the Rings” and “Star Wars”—most of which aren’t very flattering. Regardless, this humor isn't just rude; it's simply foolish. The actors from the previous film (Brian O'Halloran, Jeff Anderson, Jason Mewes, Kevin Smith) return to their familiar roles and do what they already did. The biggest improvement comes from O'Halloran, who seemed more capable and showed some real talent. But Rosario Dawson really deserves attention: her character is believable, likeable, and smarter than the others, while still being funny when she wants to be (it seems intelligence and humor can go together, take note, Kevin Smith). Ben Affleck also appears in a brief, unimportant, and forgettable cameo. Trevor Fehrman’s performance was truly disappointing; he didn't seem like an actor at all and couldn't get beyond the most ridiculous silliness.

Source on TMDB