MOVIES : If Everybody Had an Ocean . . . : Yes, it’s another movie about people with a love for wearing thongs. ‘Endless Summer II’ arrives three decades after its acclaimed predecessor celebrated a lifestyle

It’s been 30 years since director-surfer Bruce Brown released his epic surf film “Endless Summer,” which chronicled the travels of Robert August and Mike Hynson as they journeyed around the world looking for the perfect wave. That movie, made for $50,000 using one windup 16-millimeter camera, was one of the Top 10 box-office hits of 1964 and went on to earn more than $30 million worldwide. Released in the same year as “Ride the Wild Surf,” “Beach Blanket Bingo” and “Surf Party,” not to mention “Zorba the Greek,” “Endless Summer” eclipsed its companion surf flicks and is still hailed as one of the purest expressions of the sport.

Now, three decades later, Brown has returned with “Endless Summer II,” which opens Friday. Cut from the same cloth as its predecessor, “ES II” follows a pair of new surfers who represent the two main styles in surfing. Robert (Wingnut) Weaver is a classic long-boarder, who goes with the wave, carving graceful turns. Pat O’Connell represents the new surfing style, using a short board to “shred” the waves with sharp turns and radical maneuvers. With Weaver and O’Connell, Brown visits many of the places he explored in 1964, noting with both enthusiasm and wisdom the development in the changing surfscape.

Weekend surfers Kalle Matso and Scott White explore some of the issues surrounding “Endless Summer II” and surf films in general, including: What is the appeal of surf movies versus other sports films? How does the “surfumentary” format compare with those surfing films that have fictional characters and actors who can’t surf? And, of course, does “Endless Summer II” appeal just to surfers or is there something for inlanders as well?

*

White: What I’m wondering is if filmgoers in the ‘90s will pay $7 to see a documentary on two guys who just love to surf. The last big surfing movie was “Point Break” in 1991, and the only reason it was made was because it had this slick Hollywood story line and two popular leading men--non-surfers Keanu Reeves and Patrick Swayze.

Matso: I think it’s kind of cool to see a movie that doesn’t have some hastily constructed plot line that is just there to give a framework for the main activity. The filmmakers could have easily created a tawdry love triangle plot where some native falls in love with Pat but has more respect for Wingnut. It would certainly broaden the appeal of the movie and make it more commercial.

White: On the other hand, adding some trumped up story line would have negative effects as well. One of the cool things about the movie is that there are these candid discussions about the art of surfing with superstars like Kelly Slater, Gerry Lopez and Tommy Curren. Otherwise, you have some hack writer’s inaccurate conception of what surfing’s all about, squeezed in between scenes of Patrick Swayze splashing around like a 3-year-old in a bathtub.

Matso: Well, we’ve already established that “Point Break” sucked from a surfing perspective. But other movies, like “North Shore” and “Big Wednesday,” have been successful in combining story lines with good surfing action. The plots served as nice buffers for radical ocean scenes.

White: I’m not saying I don’t like films that mix fiction with surfing. I’m just stoked to see a documentary about surfing because it’s a misunderstood sport, and one that has spawned a large and rapidly growing American subculture. Surfing’s influences on America can be seen in everything from the way people dress to the way they speak. Still, I can’t think of any sport that has generated such a strong--and sometimes negative--image.

Matso: That’s true. As soon as people find out that you’re a surfer, or even from Southern California, they immediately decide you’ve spent way too much time in the sun and start speaking very slowly.

White: Yeah. If you tell people you’re from Augusta, they don’t ask you if you’re “one of those golfer dudes.” If I mention to anyone outside of California that I surf occasionally, I automatically inherit this lame “slacker” attitude a la Jeff Spicoli from “Fast Times at Ridgemont High.” People are very surprised that my mantra isn’t “Hey, Bud. Let’s party!”

Matso: But doesn’t every sport have stereotypical attributes?

White: No. People don’t say “Oh. He’s such a baseball player” unless they’re referring to someone who has great hand-eye coordination and is 20 pounds overweight.

Matso: But it’s not just image. Even in terms of mechanics, surfing is fundamentally different from most activities. Few sports besides surfing involve dynamic motion by both the athlete and the medium (i.e., the ocean).

White: Exactly. Surfing is completely dependent on the whims of nature and that has an effect on the surfers themselves, who are often unusually reverent of the environment, spontaneous, patient and posses a weird penchant for thongs.

Matso: And these traits come through in both “Endless Summers” and most of the other big surfing films that have come out of Hollywood in the last 30 years. “Big Wednesday,” “North Shore” and even “Point Break” throw out the concept of these deep, pensive “soul” surfers. Patrick Swayze’s character is called Bodhisattva because he’s so into the metaphysics of surfing--that and armed robbery.

White: Hollywood certainly didn’t invent the soulful quality that exudes from surf movies. All you have to do is grab a longboard, get in the ocean and catch a few waves and you realize that surfing is undeniably more spiritual than truck-pulling.

Matso: Besides surfing, I’d have to say that baseball is the only pastime that evokes these profound feelings. Look at “The Natural” and “Field of Dreams.”

White: But the reasons for that are more historical. There’s nothing empirically spiritual about baseball. Just when you really start to discover things about yourself, someone charges the mound. I really think that surfing has some kind of intangible draw. The first “Endless Summer” was released in 1964 and was one of the top 10 grossing films of the year. How do you explain that?

Matso: It was competing with “McHale’s Navy.” How bad could it do? Also, surfing was such a novel sport in 1964. Today, you can’t even call inlanders “Barney” because they know they’re being insulted.

White: I don’t think novelty is the only reason people liked “Endless Summer.” Both the original film and “Endless Summer II” can be enjoyed on many levels. I thought it was cool that the sequel follows roughly the same path pioneered by the original 30 years ago. It’s interesting to see the enormous changes that took place in the interim, especially in Africa. In the first movie, the locals were mostly agrarians. In “Endless Summer II,” they’re selling time-share condos.

Matso: It’s just hard for me to believe that this movie will be well-received by the non-surfing community.

White: Why? Surfing movies do very well in parts of the world that are extremely alienated from surfing. The title of this movie alone is enough to hook Scandinavians, most of whom would be ecstatic for a two-week summer.

Matso: That’s true. Perhaps, as a surfer from Southern California, I’m taking the aesthetics of the sport for granted.

White: Everything that is associated with surfing--sunshine, clear water, athletic people--has universal appeal. I mean, look at the worldwide success of “Baywatch.” It’s one of the best-rated series in Germany, right behind “Wolfgang and der Man.”

Matso: I’ve heard other people say that the “Endless Summer” series is like Warren Miller’s ski films, with more babes and fewer chairlift antics. But I see some real differences between the two. Most importantly, almost everyone dabbles in skiing. Surfing, on the other hand, is much more of an all-or-nothing sport. Either you don’t surf and never intend to, or you spend all your lunch breaks checking the tide chart in the Metro section.

White: Your point being. . . ?

Matso: That “Endless Summer II” might have the most polarized audience ever. Because of the very nature of surfing, people will either worship this movie, or think it’s a mildly interesting travel film that spends too much time in the water.

White: I disagree. I don’t believe that people have to have an affinity for a sport to appreciate and be moved by it. There is something inherently thrilling in watching two guys in search of the perfect ride, a search that takes them to both familiar and exotic places all over the world. I also think it’s a tribute to surfing’s dynamic quality that a film like this is even made. I doubt that we will ever see a movie about two track and field athletes entitled “Endless Vaulting.” That, to me, is the real reason that “Endless Summer” and “Endless Summer II” were made . . . to show that surfing isn’t just standing on a board.

Matso: Aren’t you just saying that surfing is much more than a sport? That it’s way of life, an attitude?

White: That’s exactly what I’m saying. Did a surfer say that?

Matso: No--Jeff Spicoli did in “Fast Times at Ridgemont High.”