Grindhouse

Phil Elmore

Phil Elmore

Joined
Feb 28, 2002
Messages
7,636
I went out to the 11:30 pm showing of Grindhouse on its opening night, deliberately courting a late-night weekend crowd to get the full effect. For those of you who do not know, Grindhouse is a collaboration between Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino. Tarantino is definitely the alpha of that pack of two and seems to call the shots, and he is the driving force behind this attempt to recreate the B-movie double feature experience. The gimmick is that it's two movies -- Rodriguez' zombie flick Planet Terror, followed by Tarantino's Vanishing Point-inspired Death Proof.

There are previews for movies that don't exist, directed by real movie directors such as Hostel's Eli Roth (he supposedly is doing a movie called Thanksgiving, about horror on the fourth Thursday of November, ha ha) and Rob Zombie (who really is directing a remake of Halloween, according to the real trailers that came before my showing of Grindhouse).

Planet Terror also has a lot of missing reels of film and artificial scratches on the movie print. These are done for effect. One missing reel makes the audience laugh when it comes at just the moment when we're supposed to learn the mystery behind one of the main characters. Then movie characters start thanking others for telling them the secret, after the supposedly missing scenes. You get the idea. Tarantino's film has a lot less of this type of thing, but still has some artificially induced film mistakes to keep the illusion going. Both the movies and the trailers feature gratuitous T&A because, well, that's what movies like this were like back then.

Of the two, Planet Terror is the cheaper thrill. It has a lot more comedy and a lot more action, and would be, I would say, the faster crowd-pleaser. All the characters are deliberate stereotypes, self-parodies of characters from the action-horror-survival-B-grade-sci-fi genre. They're also fairly aware of this. Rodriguez gives them plenty to laugh about in the midst of the carnage, and the blood and gore are so over the top you can't possibly take it seriously.

Tarantino gave many interviews in which he called Rodriguez' film a "horror film, because it couldn't really happen," while his own film is "a terror film, because it could really happen." He takes a lot more time building his characters and setting the scene. It's a typical Tarantino slow boil, as we get to know the characters intimately (there are two sets of them, actually -- two sets of women who are terrorized in succession by Kurt Russel's "Stuntman Mike," an aged movie stunt driver who likes to murder women with his car). Their dialogue (which Tarantino is known for, of course) makes them real people to us and makes Death Proof feel a lot more substantial as a movie.

By "substantial," I don't mean "better" -- Planet Terror is more immediately fun and has a lot more action (though the action is much more shallow). It's a lot more real, though, and when the payoff finally comes (boy, does it), Death Proof had the audience clapping in delight. They clapped for Planet Terror, too, but this felt more wholehearted. At least, that's how it felt to me. Rarely do I clap in a movie, as there seems no real point to it, but I couldn't help myself.

Both movies are excellently cast, though the male lead in Planet Terror sure did remind me a lot of Jamie Kennedy, for some reason. The second set of women in Death Proof was absolutely perfectly portrayed by actresses who seem awfully familiar to me. The only one I know is Rosario Dawson, though the other two have been in movies I have seen, I'm fairly sure. We come to know them well and we are not disappointed at how they handle themselves.

This was a great movie... er, movies. If you have the chance to see Grindhouse in the theater, you owe yourself the experience.
 
Somebody at the Zombie Squad Forums asked this question:

Here's my biggest question, but i don't think it has an answer.

Grindhouse, I'm guessing is suppose to be a Spoof/Homage to the B movies of yesteryear. These movies were great for how bad they were.

Now I understand the crappy film, bad cuts, and cheap jokes. But did Rodriguez & Tarantino plan on making two good movies wrapped in B movie gimmicks. Or did they just plan on making two bad movies?

So the real question is, were these movies good because they were bad? or were they just a poor attempt at making bad movies?

Its like taking a sip of milk and asking yourself "Is this milk sour?" if you have to ask if this was a bad movie, it probably is.
Click to expand...

I answered as follows:

Planet Terror is a well-made spoof. It is enjoyable not because it is bad, but because it parodies why all those B-movies were bad. As a movie, it and its characters are self-aware. They are deliberately behaving as B-movie horror denizens are supposed to act, but with a wry edge. The movie also includes lots of touches that are just plain well-done -- clever, funny, and definitely in the category of homage, while bringing something interesting to the movie. The people watching it in my theater absolutely loved it. They had a lot of fun, and not the kind of fun that comes from making fun of a Rocky Horror crapfest. It's a well-made movie that does what it does on purpose.

Death Proof is a very different film. It's not a parody at all. Rather, it's Tarantino being Tarantino, both homage and entry to the genre. If you've seen Duel with Dennis Weaver, or Vanishing Point, you've seen films into whose genre Tarantino is trying to submit his movie. This is classic high-octane suspense, which is why the movie goes slowly and builds to a boil over the long term. Because Tarantino is, well, Tarantino (there is nothing subtle about him, even when he thinks he is being subtle), Death Proof turns those other movies on their ears by giving Kurt Russel's "Stuntman Mike" victims who are every bit as predatory as is he (which is the payoff of the film).

The first film is well-made satire that is also homage; the second is well-made homage that contains elements of satire and wry humor, but that is ultimately meant in earnest. They have a B-movie flavor, but at their core they are more than this.
 
Not quite though. Can't live up to the realism of Road House! The action of Road House! The enthusiasm of Road House! The sentimentality of Road House! ...............Road House!
 
I hear Dame Judi Dench has a juicy scene in the film.

While Alan Alda and Ed Begley Jr. play psychopathic twins with the largest gun collection in the Northern hemisphere.


Any truth to those?
 
I enjoyed Grindhouse. The main reason for me is that I actually remember back in the '70s to early '80s going to the downtown grindhouse theaters to watch the old kung fu, action and horror movies that would never be seen in mainstream theaters. As cheesey as the made-up previews were, the spoof was right on the money; very accurately portrayed as they were. Also I remember watching scratchy films, and films getting stuck in the projector and breaking, burning, etc.

A lot of the experience back then was the seediness and potential danger in frequenting those places/areas. Most patrons of those places seemed to be gangbangers, pimps, potheads, drunks/addicts, but also lots of Navy personnel. You'd walk out of a triple feature stinking of pot. Some of my most memorable movie experiences were watching certain horror or kung fu movies that particularly resonated with a certain crowd, and the over-the-top audience responses. Sadly, those days are pretty much gone forever.

Although I liked the pacing of Planet Terror better, I felt greater satisfaction with Death Proof (once it actually got going). What I did not like in Death Proof is exactly what makes Tarantino's films popular; the loooong stretches of nonstop, often meaningless chatter. It works in a lot of his films, but became restlessly boring in this one until Kurt Russell's character showed up. The first group of women, with exception of one, were very unlikeable and it was hard to feel any sympathy for them. Of course, in Tarantino's films all characters are varying levels of "not nice people". My favorite character is the lady from New Zealand who previously stunt-doubled Uma Thurman in Kill Bill.

I do see Tarantino's very real love for movies, with all his references to old films or series. Also interesting is in Death Proof, he includes the same sheriff and son characters last seen at the beginning of Kill Bill 1, thus creating a reality overlap between the two films. I bet it was fun as hell to film these movies.
Jim
 
I saw Grindhouse last night with 5 other people, and it's funny how mixed the opinions were. I loved it, two of my friends liked it, two hated it, and my friend's girlfriend was so grossed out by Planet Terror that she left 45 minutes into it!

Planet Terror is just funny and awesome in the same way that I liked Slither, and 8-Legged Freaks.

The "extras" were really funny too- the retro titles for the "prevues" and the feature presentation and the mock trailers were hilarious.

Death Proof had some really cool characters and action. Tarantino did a good job making the audience support Stuntman Mike sometimes and want to see him get his just desserts other times (like when he trashed a beautiful '70 Challenger!).
 
If you're a Tarantino fan, it won't disappoint you. If you're not, I can see why it might not rev your engine. Pardon the pun. I would say to give Death Proof a chance if you're already in the theater. The payoff is worth it.
 
Planet Terror is pretty fun, Death Proof is OK if you can sit through a bunch of crap to get to the last 15 minutes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top