Grindhouse

[adam]

The time of my life. Bliss.

[kid cue]

i'm really excited to see it!!!!!!

[viddy]

drooling....

[grady]

heard good and bad points about it, eagerly awaiting the viewing hopefully tomorrow after my grandmother's 85th b-day.

i'm wondering what kind of madness b.miller was entwined with on his viewing in RR/QT land in Austin.....spill the can of beans already brian.

[b.miller]

I just got home from it about 15 minutes ago... We had several different events going on (i opted out of the star-studded premiere a week and a half ago) but I chose the all-night grindhouse marathon leading up to the 8AM showing of the movie.

Good and bad points on the event. good: I got to see 4 amazing movies before Grindhouse. bad: the 4 movies I got to see before Grindhouse were better than Grindhouse.

I liked parts of it, but don't want to shit on anyone's good time. my movie journal will have more detailed notes for the curious... the jist is I liked Death Proof more than Planet Terror. Don't and Thanksgiving might be my favorite parts though.

[adam]

Don't worry about shitting on my good time. Just because your opinion makes me want to tear your throat out like a bear protecting her young doesn't mean you shouldn't post it.

I'm just kidding, of course.

Please, by all means. One of the best things about movie watching is discussing that movie with friends.

I'll start:

spoilers ahoy!

I do think the veins of the two films were quite different, and I'm not sure if this worked for them or if the justaposition strengthened them. I expected Death Proof to be as campy as Planet Terror and it really was more straight up.

I'm surprised, honestly, that you didn't like Planet Terror so much, because I thought it was hilarious, but then, I was entertained by things that other people might find pretty mundane. Such as as the shot of the sheriff when he arrives in town amid the burning chaos and it's a close-up where he's shouting, "What the hell is going on here?!" It just struck me as such subtle (subtle as in the joke is in the melodrama/bad script/hokey directing/editing rather than ha ha punchlines) deliberately silly shit that I thought it was great.

Plus I was fairly captivated by El Ray. He was such an interesting character because he didn't quite seem to have that typical presence that you would expect the person cast in that role to have; I mean, up until the end he still struck me as this little kid/punk, except that he was totally awesome.

They were definitely some messy bits about it: the ball-collecting, the bruce willis backstory, that I would have cleaned up, but I took them in the spirit of "we're making a film that's a wink towards bad films".

Death Proof, however, was amazing. I was played that whole movie. I just thought the pacing was brilliantly done. The slow build from the first half of the story to the masthead scene was perfect, and then I was on the edge of my seat from there. Like, the transition from chased to chaser, and all that, I just loved every second of it.

I also loved Russell's smile towards the camera before he gets in the car.

But yeah, the fake stuff: Machete, Don't, "written and directed by rob zombie" was classic.

I guess what I'm getting at is I thought Planet Terror was flawed but that though flaws were at least plausible as part of the concept, and that Cherry and El Ray were interesting enough on their own that even if those flaws were not intentional, they were definitely in the "minor" category. And I loved Death Proof. Seemed to be just fucking brilliantly paced.

spoilers end here because the post ends. obvious, innit?

[b.miller]

heavy spoiling ahead! don't read if you haven't seen!

OK, here's where I'm coming from. So they're calling the movie Grindhouse and they're saying that it's an homage or callback to 70s exploitation cinema and Z-grade stuff that would normally play at drive-ins or urban 24-hour theaters, yet the movie cost over 100 million dollars to make. I didn't so much spend the entire movie thinking about the budget but it did manifest itself in a steady series of little details.

-These movies couldn't afford 40 explosions

-These movies didn't have the schedule for an 8-minute dolly/steadicam shot of women talking about nothing

-(most of)These movies had an endearing lack of irony or self-awareness (which made them memorable in the first place)

So if you're gonna purposely write your script like it's a cheapie and it's gonna be trashy and quick and specifically designed to evoke a feeling of nostalgic experience, it kind of jumps the rails when the movies get really huge and expensive and well-made.

To my mind, it was a misstep calling it Grindhouse and playing up that whole angle. I don't think it helped them in the marketing and I don't think many (young) people nowadays knows what the hell it is and I think I wouldn't have had nearly as much of an issue with this level of the film if it was just a straight double feature. Like it's somehow impossible to say "we're doing two movies together! it's like an old-school double feature!" without any of the history or specificity that they went for. But since they did do that, I think there might be a misconception out there (since I had one) that these movies are kind of experiments in filmmaking from a bygone era when in actuality they're simply the next film from Rodriquez and Tarantino that happened to get released together (and yes, I know QT said this exact thing in an earlier interview, but I also have MUCH fewer problems with his movie than Robert's, which I'll get to... eventually).

But whatever, that's like a more theoretical level of thinking about the movies rather than when I'm actually watching them. All that stuff didn't really start to bother me until it ended and I was thinking back. This stuff, still superficial, bugged me while i watched.

-So you're going to use digital effects to age your film. I was pleasantly surprised that they looked better than I thought they would (you know that one Final Cut Pro filter where there's like the one scratch line and the one hair and it just loops?), but Robert.... he... it's like.... i mean he just doesn't get it. I don't know if this translates but it's like if you're a computer person and you watch an episode of 24 and hear Chloe say things like "you forgot to uncouple the transition matrix on the second IP address!" Taken individually, the words are real but put together they make no sense. It's the same thing with Robert's film aging. The filters change in Planet Terror from shot to shot. That makes no sense. That's like Robert shot the movie, developed the film, made prints of every take, ran them in projectors for 30 years, then edited them together. Scratch lines, levels of color fade, dust and dirt, water damage... all that stuff doesn't happen for a few seconds then immediately change. That's stuff that happens to the actual print as it ages. So... practially all of Planet Terror was immediately tarnished for me because I started noticing these effects used for corny-ass purposes, like the film stutters when there's a shock type scare, or the color all of a sudden gets red when a bad guy comes on the screen (and by the way, color fade doesn't immediately creep in from the side then bleed across the frame like computer tentacles, and it definitely doesn't slowly restore over the next 30 seconds back to pristine). Splices I can deal with, jump cuts, audio blips, all that crap is 100% fine. But the meltdown gag? UGH. It's because the scene is so HOT, right? McGowan is so HOT that the film BURNS UP!!!! It all just felt SO manipulative to me that I couldn't stop noticing it.

now, I should note that Quentin's movie does the print aging thing right on. it gets dirty at the heads and tails of each reel, there are some rough change-overs, a splice here or there, and (unless this was just my theater) an annoying audio buzz over a portion of the film that rings 100% true to my vintage-print-watching eyes and ears. Also, QT's use of the alternate title roughly cut into the print is genius. Plus Quentin's missing reel is actually a missing reel (insider knowledge: i know this because I read the script and i'm glad it was missing!).

The trailers are excused because trailer stock is so cheap and the trailers are short anyway

Now, the actual stories and direction and acting and all that stuff:

-Death Proof. I really loved whenever they were in a car or whenever Stuntman Mike was on the screen. And even the girls talking, which i was dreading, wasn't all as bad as I thought it would be. I definitely think the second group of women were much better actresses, or maybe their characters were just a little more tolerably written. The first group annoyed/bored the fuck out of me. I'm not a woman so I don't 100% KNOW this but it all sounded really artificial and quentin-y and the women I did talk to afterward all let me know that no one they know talks like that, which is good for them. But especially the Jungle Julia "attitude" character... BLAH. and couldn't you have picked a shorter poem to recite? And, being an Austinite, I found all the local place-dropping really arbitrary and foreign... like an Italian trying to be American or something. She was at Antones! Let's go to Gueros! We're at Texas Chili Parlor! (but, the establishing shot of Austin was great because it's the Alamo Drafthouse and that place is cool). I'm really glad 20 minutes of that first scene was cut out (missing reel). I wish they'd cut more.

The main problem I have with the story is how all the dialogue never goes anywhere. Sure it's strategically set up to get you to like these women so you'll feel for them when they're inevitably put into danger, but it's just so long and fruitless. it really stretched my limits of paying attention because goddamn it, kurt russell should be all over this movie! he's so cool in it and I LOVE his turn in character as he nears the end... all the car stuff I loved. I also really loved QT's soundtrack choices. i think it was shot really well, i appreciated the aging like I mentioned above, and honestly, after reading the script, this came out much better than I thought it would. I thought overall (except for the mega-long shot with the dialogue) it felt like an authentic "grindhouse" type of movie.

-Planet Terror on the other hand felt like a parody of grindhouse movies to me. I think a lot of that comes from Rodriguez being Rodriguez... it's all so over the top and blatant and in your face that it does end up being funny but in my mind it's the bad kind of funny where i'm laughing *at* the movie rather than laughing *with* it. The gun leg thing... I think is ridiculous. I laugh at that because I hate it. I actually really like all the actors in Planet Terror and I think there are maybe a handfull of good moments between people (Josh Brolin dealing with Nicky Katt definitely being one of them), but the execution of the idea grated on me and I didn't like how it developed and I HATED how it ended. it was stupid to me. very campy, very winky, like "hey, it's ok to show the camera crew in the mirror because this is grindhouse and it's ok to be shitty." I liked the characters in the movie, i just didn't like (at all) what they did or what happened to them. Especially every word Rose McGowan had to say. ugh. And if he's gonna use the "missing reel" gimmick to skip all the boring stuff in the story, why have the goddamn boring stuff like Bruce WIllis explaining where the gas came from!!! I guess by boring stuff he means stuff that's too hard for him to write like how characters come together or plot develops.

I mean, "reach up??" that shit doesn't belong in a movie like this! The whole reason to do a movie like this is so you don't have to put shit like that in it!

so yeah... didn't like Planet Terror much at all, due to a real problem with Rodriguez's "style" and the tone of the piece. The parts that are clearly supposed to be badass kinda are, they just seem like they're all stuck together to me, like it's less a movie than a picture of all the magazine clippings and posters on Robert's wall when he was a kid. Maybe I didn't enjoy it because I believe Robert wasn't trying to be funny in the level you found humor in, Adam... but I can definitely see what you're saying... I had a VERY similar experience to that watching Shooter (a really great time if you're a fan of Commando).

but lastly... and maybe this is my biggest disappointment... what the FUCK are they doing making two grindhouse hard R movies and not having ANY nudity!!?!?!?!?! seriously.

so that's my viewpoint... being someone who watches the "real deal" movies like this every week. I kind of expect people to like it more than I did though, having the whole look and feel be a relatively new thing for them and having the trailers and stuff be something fresh to see in today's movies. I'm really glad people like it and honestly hope more people see it. It's such an open-ended premise that any sort of sequel or direct-to-DVD franchise that might spring up if the movie makes money could lead to some really great stuff.

and by the way, if anyone wants a list of vintage films that inform and influence this movie, let me know The great thing about DVD is that, slowly but surely, a large amount of these movies are now readily available (if you have netflix or a really good video store)

[GreenPea]

Originally Posted by b.miller

and by the way, if anyone wants a list of vintage films that inform and influence this movie, let me know The great thing about DVD is that, slowly but surely, a large amount of these movies are now readily available (if you have netflix or a really good video store)

Please

[adam]

MORE SPOILERS

Wow. I can't say I really identify with your criticisms at all. Like, okay, if you wanted to be picky about the digital aging not being realistic, sure, I can see how if you were familiar with such things, it would bug you. But not liking the gun leg? Ummm, okay. But then, I mean, you knew that going into the movie from the preview, right? And the poem was too long? That seems like a really odd thing to find fault with.

(My questions are rhetorical.)

[b.miller]

yeah... the poem (and by extension all of his dialogue) just felt way too over-indulgent to me... and the gun leg has always been a turn-off for me. I guess they're both indicative of their movies though. if you like those things then you like the movie, if not then chances are you might have other issues.