Grindhouse

I went into this film with expectations for an extreme amount of campy senseless gore and violence - and it was delivered as promised! A WARNING: Know what to expect when you go see this movie, or you might be surprised/disappointed. There is no moral, no good sense or life lesson to be taken from the story lines or characters. Sometimes things don't make sense and this is all done on purpose in homage to original exploitation films Warnings aside, Grindhouse is a lot of fun, there were as many "ooh" and "ahh" moments as there were "oh my god why did they show that?" moments. All of the actors' performances were right on and the action directing was excellent. My only negative comment is that Tarintino's film dragged a bit in the middle, but he more than made up for it. I couldn't help but raise my fist in the air and shout out "yeah!" at the end of his flick.

You will be surprise, you will be disgusted and you'll enjoy the hell out of it.

A unique cinema experience indeed.

I'm commenting on the double feature version of this rather than the separate films. I do have quite separate impressions of these but I do believe that the original intent was that they be seen together, and with all the interstitial matter.

When you approach films from certain filmmakers, you do it on a basis of trust. Its a matter of how willing you are to allow yourself to be.

Rodriguez has never betrayed my trust, so each time I encounter him, I am willing to play the game by his rules. That allows me to take more chances about the balances he chooses to make. Its a matter of yielding in the collaboration, so when he makes a cinematic joke or comment, I don't fight it. Trust.

In this case, its sharpened by this phenomenon I notice a lot: he's directing a lover. It is obvious of course, but even if it weren't, it drives him to make ever stronger chances, on the edge of his emotional horizon.

I think these two factors would make me like what he has done here regardless of all other factors. I do see the interior nature of the cinematic world. I do settle into the thick web of narrative threads. I do cheer when his love kicks ass.

But the opposite is the case with Quentin. I cannot trust him. It isn't just because he's made some bad films. Its because he sets himself aside. He doesn't include the viewer: he preaches. All of the cinematic effects are delivered as monologues not as a collaboration. So we are never in on the joke, never in on extending the nature of the world.

So I truly disliked his film. Sure, there's an empowerment story, and a sort of male's view of female bonding. But its all from the outside: the current of fate, the access to the group, the folding of all the principle characters being in the movie business. The actual camera-work of the stunts is from a discrete viewer, where Rodriguez puts the camera jumping around in the midst of the action and the emotional space.

Both films play with the joke of what constitutes good and evil. But they themselves represent this as well.

I will give Rodriguez a 3 and Tarantino a 1, but having Tarantino to have to go through increases the value of Rodriguez' effort. Bless him. I hope he does well with this woman.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

I won tickets to the world premiere of Grindhouse in LA this past week and it was the best 3 hours of my life in recent history. The stories of the two movies combined with the detail and inventiveness of Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez brought together 3 hours of action packed fun. The two directors updated the sleazy grindhouse movie experience from the 70's and commercialized it so that we can all enjoy it. You won't find some greasy guy with his pants around his ankles sitting next to you, but you are probably going to be able to sit through all 3 hours of these movies.

I want to compliment the directors for having a unique cinematic vision (and the Weinsteins for funding that vision). I don't always agree with the choices made with either of the filmmakers, but I think they are two of the hardest working most innovative people in Hollywood today. I add this because most film studies students love to hate both of these people and in most conversations suggest that they would be able to do a much better job than either. I disagree.

Planet terror is a gross out flick that has appropriate amounts of gore and guts. If you like Rodriguez, then this movie fits in with all of his previous works. No real surprises here, but fun fun fun!

Tarantino surprised me. I liked the first movies from Tarantino because his movies were set in realities not far from our own. I doubt that it would happen in a weekend, but Pulp Fiction is a semi-believable good story in Los Angeles with unbelievable dialog. Same with Reservoir Dogs. (Jackie Brown is too believable and therefore, uninteresting) As he has progressed, his movies became fantasy, e.g., From Dusk til Dawn and Kill Bill 1 & 2 and WAY too over the top for a "Tarantino" flick.

Death Proof brings it all home! I don't want to spoil any of the movie, so just go see it! It's a simple plot with unbelievable suspense and decent dialog. I have never been so nervous in a film in as long as I can remember. Its no secret that the movie involves a car -- but Tarantino has taken a "classic" car scenario using a classic car and updated it for the new millennium. One only has suspend belief "just enough" for this mix of reality and fantasy to suck them in. It was Tarantino at his best.

Both movies were well executed, well scored, well written, and well played. The extra's and cameos are icing on the cake. No Oscars for either director, but that isn't why you went to see these movies in the first place, now is it?

Grindhouse is all about excess. Excess blood, gore, puss, explosions, near non-stop laughter and violence. The only thing you will find little of in it is nudity. It's typical Tarantino-paranoid-about-nudity and what we get are two distinct halves to one great film.

If you loved Tarantino's "Jackie Brown", then you'll love "Death Proof". D.P. is basically Jackie Brown on wheels. He rambles on and on and on about completely un-funny and pointless things for nearly 50 minutes with little else happening. I am quite disappointed with QT, as he is my favourite director/writer but I think he is stretching his limit a bit too far. He has fallen into a self-indulgent groove of non-stop banter or over-the-top violence. The end is capped off with probably one THE BEST car chases in history that lasts for about 20 amazing minutes that will undoubtedly give you a heart attack it's so well made. Also, Kurt Russell is NOT the main star of it as many people believe and I'll leave it at that.

Rodriguez's "Planet Terror" on the other hand is a completely off the wall, no holds barred shmorgassboard of absolute cinematic enjoyment. People blow up when shot with revolvers, gore is splattered at least every couple minutes once it gets past the first two minutes and it will have you laughing harder than any Tarantino film ever has. It is so freakin' good that I think my eyes fell out and had an orga*m due to the cinematic bliss that is "Planet Terror".

Rose McGowan will undoubtedly become the new pin-up girl and sex symbol due to her role of Cherry Darling; a Go-Go dancer (unfortunately not a stripper) that eventually gets an assault rifle for a leg. Who knew that an assault rifle for a leg could ever be THAT hot?

There are no words in the history of mankind that can help me explain to anyone the awesomeness that is displayed in "Grindhouse". "Death Proof" may drag it down a bit, but is nonetheless essential for the film as a whole. This is exactly the movie that Hollywood needed to have kicked up it's butt. Hopefully this will pave the way for more "extreme" films or higher rated films in general; although I'm still unsure if it would be a good idea to go to the extremes that French cinema is experiencing at the moment, but would nonetheless be welcome.

IMO, "Grindhouse" is THE BEST FILM since "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" in 1966 for pure filmic enjoyment. Sit back, relax, and prepare to have your head explode! Go see it now or you'll regret it!

Tarantino's critics do not seem to fully understand what he is up to. More than "making movies" he "makes movies about movies", in this case the B-movie genre.

This is what Igor Stravinsky did with music. He would take some genre(baroque, 12 tonal or even jazz music), break it down into the essence of its component parts and then put them back together in different ways. What you got was no longer baroque, 12 tonal or jazz. It made you stop to wonder what those styles really were and why they appealed or didn't appeal to you.

In a way, Tarantino is doing the same thing. He's making us question why we go to these movies and what the process of watching a film is all about. As a result it is not fair to criticize him because "the girls should have just stopped the car". In B-movies the girls just don't stop the car! It's like criticizing a serious drama for not having enough good jokes. He has really captured something about why these movies get audiences and are such intense fun to watch.

Now that Tarantino has dabbled with films about B-movies, kung-fu movies,action movies,revenge movies, etc. it will be interesting to see if he can extend into other genres. Will we ever see a Tarantino musical, serious drama, love story or western?