I went into Grindhouse ready to laugh and cringe, and Planet Terror delivered. I liked Death Proof, but I need to see it again. I knew I loved Planet Terror right off the bat.
Loved both, but considered Death Proof to be the better of the two. Plan on going to the theatre for a second viewing soon, since unfortunately this won't be staying around for long due to the poor box office returns.
"Death Proof", and having seen GRINDHOUSE twice now, the gap between the two has widened. I love them both, but DP is amazing.
For me, and this is not meant to disrespect people who love it, Death Proof was awfully awkward to watch. It starts out a little talky, starts to get really good, starts to get talky again, completely switch gears on character development and end on a note I never thought it would. Maybe it's just me. I enjoyed it, don't get me wrong... Kurt Russell is amazing, Quentin is a fabulous director, there was great cinematography and use of music... I just didn't get it, I suppose. Planet Terror on the other hand is balls-to-the-wall zombie action. Loved every millisecond of that film.
So we agree to disagree on the print damage issue. No prob, Bob. Pop quiz time, kids. The subject: Reading comprehension. The question is: When did I ever comdemn Death Proof? A few hints, keeping in mind what we've read so far. -My second sentence was "Not that I at all disliked Tarantino's effort." -No where did I state that I would've liked Death Proof MORE had it looked worse-for-wear. -No where did I state that I liked Death Proof LESS because it didn't look worse-for-wear.
No, but you sure decided that you would like to scuff up the print more in order to make it a more authentic experience. In fact, the only real critique you offered up was in regards to the look of the film (with some general comment on the audio). Obviously, this distracted you (which is somewhat ironic when you think about it) and therefore upset the viewing experience. Did you condemn it? No, you did not condemn the film, I overstated myself - I've never been one for subtlety. A glance at my previous posts, or anything I've ever written will illustrate that. Did you offer up anything outside of the gimmick to support your feeling? Not really, so that's what I based my thoughts on. But #6, I really have no gripe here. I simply think the complaint is silly. In fact, I think it's more silly that my comment bothers you so.
I forgot to say that I've never seen FOUR ROOMS, so okay, that might be worse. I just hope I'm not forced to decide whether or not to purchase this on DVD in order to get the fake trailers, because I wouldn't buy DEATH PROOF on its own. Maybe used.
I'm one who love DEATH PROOF and for me it was the highlight of the film. I can understand those gripes of people who didn't, but I honestly feel that you may eventually grow to love this film. I've seen GRINDHOUSE twice now, and I was more bored by PLANET TERROR the second time around (not saying I didn't love it) but I feel DEATH PROOF is more complete, and the fact that it subverts our expectations a little with regards to "grindhouse" as a concept, only made it more thrilling. I just fucking love that film and I can't deny it.
"Thrilling" is not a word I would use. In fairness, though, I watched TWO LANE BLACKTOP last night, and it seems like the movies he was emulating in making DEATH PROOF had very similar pacing--lots of scenes of nothing in particular and then occasionally something happening. I guess if I ever do buy it on DVD I'll just turn it off about halfway through.
If I had a quarter for every time I have heard: 1. Girls really talk like they do in Death Proof. Really. They do. 2. Death Proof is the only one that willl stand the test of time. I would have a nice chunk of change saved up for the inevitable Army of double dips coming for this title.
I completely agree. Death Proof was a far superior film in my opinion. Rodriguez tried so hard to make a film that was cool and hip that he ironically created something that actual grindhouse films never could have. Too much CGI and overkill for me. Tarantino made a complete and total homage to what grindhouse films were and the highs in Death Proof are so far superior to anything in Planet Terror that it really isn't fair. People were expecting Tarantino to go over-the-top, instead, he created a true replication of grindhouse cinema. The problem is that most people don't like grindhouse cinema! So naturally, Death Proof isn't going to click. Tarantino isn't stupid. He knew what he was doing and I think on a certain level it took a lot of balls to make Death Proof, knowing full well that audiences wouldn't react to it like the would Planet Terror. I think people's distaste for Death Proof is what makes Planet Terror look "better" by comparison, along with people's natural desire to have to compare the films on an entertainment level. I'm not saying Planet Terror sucked or anything, I thought it was alright, but I agree with you in thinking Death Proof was the "better" film. I found myself zoning out multiple times during Planet Terror.
"Bothers" me? That would be silly, were it true. Need I another critique of Death Proof to justify why I would vote, on an internet message board, against it in a popularity contest? It's not like I'm a professional film reviewer. I had more fun watching one movie than another-and looking at the totals thus far, I'm not alone. I didn't bring up the print quality, nor the viewing order, to suggest that it would improve Death Proof as a film. Rather, how it would, IMO, improve *Grindhouse* as a film. I realize now, and acknowledge, that in my post-event buzz, I failed to make this point clearly. A pisser too, that missing a simple paragraph break has caused such a flap. As they say, "My bad." Upon a second viewing, however, I did find that DP runs about 10 min. too long. (Maybe, subconsciously, I picked up on that the first time and used it as the basis for my vote. Unlikely, but not implausible. The subconscious can be weird.) The scene after the hospital with McGraw and Son, when the "new" girls (Dawson, Bell, et al.) are in the car...? Pointless. All it established was that two of them were stunt-women, which could've been addressed in two lines of dialog in the diner. Very typical Tarantino really, and I'm a huge fan of the guy. Except Jackie Brown; that movie's crap. But I'll stop now before I REALLY tick people off. XOXO:banana:
No worries. I like hearing the "Whys?" behind the "Whats." I'm glad I got you to elaborate. Yep. Them's are fightin' words.
"crap"? No, I disagree. Flawed, definitely, but not crap. Not to turn this into a Jackie Brown defense thread, but it's a movie that has grown on me over time (and believe me, I thought it was TOTAL crap when I saw it on X-mas day 1997, so I see where you're coming from). My biggest complaint about JB is having the climactic scene (the final money exchange in the mall) happen with more than 45 minutes remaining in the movie! And it really drags to a halt in those final 45 minutes. Yet I can also see why QT did that, as he much more successfully pulled off the same tactic in Pulp Fiction. The confrontation between Pumpkin/Ringo and Jules is tense, but not exactly action packed. And it ends on a slow note, not an exciting pay-off. Yet it somehow works. I think he tried to do the same thing with JB with lesser results. The way to look at Jackie Brown is two-fold. For one, it's a typical Tarantino exploration of the day-to-day lives of petty criminals. Instead of exposition where they "plan the job" or talk tough, you have discussions of aging, poor lifestyle choices, CDs vs. vinyl, etc. He's always wanted to put a human face on his criminals, and Jackie Brown probably does it the best. Secondly, and more important, the film is an extrapolation of the blaxploitation classics of the 70s. While many "urban" contemporary crime films are also influenced by those films, they keep a young cast. Quentin wanted to know, what happens to these people (Coffy, Foxy Brown, etc), 20 years later??? And it turns out, some (Ordell) are still trying to make a buck in the crime business that has passed them by. He's also exploiting the criminal youth by marking up his gun prices on the "popular" weapons. And if someone from that era were to "go straight", what kind of job could they realistically get? No education, no work experience that you could put on a resume. So Jackie is relegated to being a stewardess on a second-rate airline. It's a fascinating character study that drags on a bit too long, but is still a worthy film.
Planet Terror for me. It had everything I love in films and Death Proff was way too talky. Don't get me wrong, I love me some Tarantino and his dialogue but only when he has the actors to pull it off. This time he most certainly did not.
As stated in another thread regarding this movie today- I liked Death Proof a little more than Planet Terror- now I could change my mind on a second viewing cuz Planet Terror had a lot of great cheese action- but for now Death proof over Planet Terror- but I loved the whole thing
