April 06, 2007

Grindhouse REVIEW

(Posted In Action Box Office Comedy Cult Drama Exploitation Horror Martial Arts Reviews Thriller Trailer Alert USA and Canada )

Grindhouse.jpgBy now everyone probably knows that the movie “Grindhouse”, Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino’s two-fisted ode to the exploitation films of yore, is actually two movies, plus fake trailers. Each director has created a full-length feature that fits into the mold of what is known as “grindhouse cinema”, which seems to refer to not only a no-holds-barred, shameless level of filmmaking that can encompass any number of genres, (but often favoring misogynistic horror and butt-kicking babes-in-peril,) but the type of low grade movie-going experience that one endured to see these flicks theatrically. Likewise, “Grindhouse” is not so much about emulating these old-school films to a tee so much as it is about the experience of seeing them. Rodriguez and Tarantino employ fake scratches, washed-out color, amateur film splicing, and vintage-style theater announcements to make their newly created films, “Planet Terror” (zombie horror) and Death Proof” (babes-in-peril) better fit the grindhouse mold. The question becomes how successful is this nutty little project in truly re-capturing this long-gone experience.

There is no question that both feature films are highly entertaining, good-time films. They are distinct enough that most viewers will come away clearly preferring one over the other. This is to the credit of what the filmmakers are trying to do in terms of presenting the diversity of the grindhouse. These guys clearly know their stuff in this department, each with a filmography overflowing with modern-day revisionist grindhouse work. Rodriguez’s “Desperado” and “Sin City”, and Tarantino’s “Reservoir Dogs” and “Jackie Brown”, just to name a few, fall into this category. Among the key differences between these films and the vintage grinders, however, are the obvious higher budgets and studio production values, as well as their reflection of modern-day values in terms of cinematic exploitation. Sex and nudity clearly take a back seat to guns, violence, and explosions, although Rodriguez is definitely more prone to depicting all of the above than Tarantino, who has instead brought to the table sharp yakkity-yak dialogue spiked with his own cinematic obsession. So where do “Planet Terror” and “Death Proof” fit in? Clearly, for better or for worse, they fit in quite comfortably with their older siblings on each director’s respective filmography. They are, in many ways, simply the latest modern day exploitation films these guys have made, only this time more dressed up with deliberate pops and scratches, to the point of distracting self-awareness. This is made painfully clear when “missing reel” cards tend to pop up in order to self-censor sexual material.

But don’t take all of this the wrong way – as stated before, both features are entertaining, rock ‘em sock ‘em flicks. 191 minutes never went by so fast in the movie theater, and that’s one of the highest compliments one could pay this work. As for which film is better, this reviewer absolutely gives the nod to Tarantino’s high-octane “Death Proof”. Granted, I’ve always been a Tarantino fan, whereas the only Rodriguez film that’s won me over has been “Sin City”, which only half counts, since it was co-directed by Frank Miller. Tarantino is a genuine, hardcore film buff, the likes of which so many of us only wish we had the time to become. This quality and essence – the love of cinema above all else - shines through in all of his films. “Death Proof” is no exception. Ever emulating his favorite directors and genres, this time the target is early 1970s car-sploitation, ala “Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry” and “Vanishing Point”, the latter of which should be pre-requisite viewing. Its famous white Dodge Challenger does more to set the tone for this film than its much-hyped star, the capable Kurt Russell.

Russell is Stuntman Mike, the psychotic driver of a Hollywood stunt car that serves as his murder weapon of choice. While it is refreshing to see the actor back in a balls-out butt kicker of a movie, his presence has probably been oversold, as his screen time is particularly limited, with him sometimes dropping off the radar altogether. The movie actually focuses on two separate groups of young women that Stuntman Mike stalks before striking, “Duel” style. Both groups engage in long-winded rounds of snappy banter – it wouldn’t be a Tarantino movie if they didn’t – in both cases detailing their love lives ala “Sex in the City”. It is interesting to note the differences in the mores of each group, and how the movie ultimately treats them in terms of playing on the sympathies of the presumed mostly male audience. In the interest of not revealing spoilers, that examination will have to wait.

Because of all the chattiness and lack of major violence, there will no doubt be many who feel that “Death Proof” is a big come-down from the crazed pyrotechnics and gore of “Planet Terror”, the lead feature. But fans of purer cinema will recognize that Tarantino’s film, while never blatantly reaching the levels of greatness he has in the past, is the superior of the two, and yes, the most honest to its roots. Viewers are lulled very subtly into the rhythm of this film, and when the stops are finally yanked away – and rest assured, they are – it becomes a type of audience torturing endurance test, as the heroines in peril hang on for dear life. This is no slasher film where we are subversively intended to root for the deranged killer.

Tarantino, like Rodriguez, has taken a Director of Photography credit, which in this case perhaps explains the lack of precise lighting. The first half hour in particular wallows in that kind of washed-out sleazy look one associates with those drugged-out AIP features watched on UHF stations late at night as a kid. From the opening frames of “Death Proof”, the director’s notorious foot fetish is right out there, and continues throughout the film. Tarantino-movie Easter eggs abound, as do bizarre connections to “Planet Terror”. This film is almost certainly destined to be dismissed as a lesser work by film historians and critics, but that might just be a wrong-headed move. Although a shallow thrill ride on the surface, “Death Proof” provides an experience all its own, and is quite successful in that regard.

“Planet Terror”, on the other hand, is more of a mixed bag. If Tarantino is the premiere hardcore film buff, then Rodriguez is the perpetual twelve year-old boy with a movie production company. His films have never ventured beyond the scope of cool action posturing and glorified firepower displays. Occasionally this works to great success, but on the whole, movies like “Once Upon a Time in Mexico” and “Shark Boy and Lava Girl” go down like empty calories.

If “Planet Terror” is any kind of step forward for him, it’s in his ability to mock his own tailor made filmic reputation. This latest work plays like a Rodriguez spoof dressed up as some kind of crazed Italian zombie film. Nothing wrong with that, but the filmmaker seems to use an overabundance of dark humor to cover for the fact that he can’t do solid characters that resonate. That these characters weather a militarily fueled bio-chemical zombie outbreak, suffering some of the worst losses one could suffer, all played for laughs, points to either an inability to truly commit to the grindhouse tenor of intensity, or a greater lack of confidence in his material to the point that he must hide behind a veil of often non-appropriate humor.

This is not to say “Planet Terror” sucks – it is a lot of fun for what it is - but on the whole, it suffers from the pile-on factor, like much of Rodriguez’s other work. Too many undefined characters running around, too many explosions going off all the time, too many strangely cast, distracting stars, and too much flash and chaos for its own good. By now, we’re all used to this in Rodriguez’s work, and may even come to expect it. But that doesn’t quite account for the notion that his idea of making a grindhouse flick is to make a goofy version of his more straight-faced work, add lots of blood and gore, and scratch the living daylights out of the film. Yes, Rose McGowan with a machine gun leg is an inspired wacky idea – enough so to hang the whole marketing campaign on (and I can’t say I blame them), but when that’s as good as it gets, Rodriguez better be happy he has the budget to light a lot of fires and blow up a bunch of crap. Through all this, there is an attempt to hit on the inherent political nature of zombie films, but, perhaps successfully to the grindhouse model, this element comes off as perpetually half-baked. Not even Tom Savini in a supporting role can ultimately elevate “Planet Terror” to where it should be.

In between these diverse exercises in old-school excess are three fake movie trailers by some of the up-and-coming extreme filmmaking talents currently perched to knock Tarantino and Rodriguez out of their top spots in the film geek pantheon. The trailers rank as follows:

1. “Thanksgiving” by Eli Roth. The only piece in the entirety of the “Grindhouse” experience to truly push the envelope in terms of content and good taste, Roth nails it by warping a beloved holiday into a killing spree, ala “Black Christmas” or “Halloween”. His use of a faded, grizzly film look accompanied by a deep unaffected voice over do more to sell the false authenticity than the ultra gratuitous nudity and acts of violence - but those factors are of course in his favor as well. There is at least one “did I just see what I thought I saw?!?” moment, and no, I’m not referring to the naked girl trampoline/stabbing bit. If the mission of all of this was to make the most twisted, tasteless bit of business one could commit to film, all in the name of good fun and early 1970s cheap aesthetic, then Roth has delivered the goods more so than any other director in the long “Grindhouse” director list.

2. “Don’t” by Edgar Wright. Probably the single funniest thing in all of “Grindhouse”, the less said about this one the better. Marred only by freeze-frame graphics that look more modern retro than authentically retro, and a general lack of grindhouse believability, all of that is easily forgiven in light of the sheer zaniness it drops in our laps. Unlike my criticisms leveled at Rodriguez for hiding behind comedy in order to soften up his grizzly material, “Don’t”, being only a minute or so long, aspires only to make us laugh, and certainly does.

3. “Werewolf Women the S.S.” by Rob Zombie. It may have the most memorable title in all of “Grindhouse”, but Zombie doesn’t quite nail it like he should. Yes, this has gratuitous nudity and over-the-top torture, but the filmmaker strangely relies on a cast role call for his big bang. With Udo Kier, Bill Moseley, and an unforgettably wacky celebrity cameo I won’t reveal, it IS a memorable role call, but somehow this particular device seems to lack the true grindhouse spirit of no-name actors taking a back seat to sleaze and violence.

Robert Rodriguez also has his own fake trailer called “Machete” that plays before “Planet Terror”. Appropriately starring Danny Trejo as the wronged titular hero, Machete indulges in all manner of topless women and psychotic revenge on a familiar villainous white dude.

In the end, the double feature “Grindhouse” is a great time at the movies, even if it doesn’t always completely live up to its high level of anticipation. The debate can rage over how well the filmmakers have lived up to their mission of recreating the grindhouse experience for a new generation – albeit one with no real point of reference for what it is exactly that’s being recreated. Have these guys given birth to a new style of throwback exploitation, or have they simply made the latest Rodriguez and Tarantino films, awkwardly dressed up with bad lighting and fake print damage? Effective arguments can be made for both positions, but one thing is for sure - no one will leave the theater feeling they haven’t gotten their money’s worth in some way. Unlikely to be duplicated in this manner on home video formats, “Grindhouse” is a theatrical must-see for any serious genre film buff.

- Jim Tudor

» Posted by Jim at April 6, 2007 01:40 AM
Digg This / Add To del.icio.us

Reader Comments

very nice review... the only i will read before going to check the film out. i'm convinced, totally. it will r-o-c-k. thanks.

» Posted by logboy at April 6, 2007 02:53 AM

Over here in Europe it's split in two halves.

The distributor claims that because we didn't have drive-in cinemas in Europe we're unfamiliar with the grindhouse double-bill experience anyway, hence there is no reason to release these as a single 4 hour movie.

Which makes commercial sense (lets face it, a lot of people aren't keen on watching a movie for four hours straight) but I think it was the intention of the directors for these to be seen together in a single sitting. Unfortunately they're being released a month apart from each other, which is pure sabotage in my view.

Ah well, there's always hope some cinema's will feature double-bills once the second one gets released.

Or could I make a suggestion: release the Rodrigues one as a single movie AND for the few dedicated fanatics some midnight double-bills with the second, and then release the Tarantino as a single movie a month afterwards.
This would give everyone a choice and would build up word-of-mouth for the Tarantino, which I think a lot of people would like to see standalone (you'd be surprised how many people hate zombies), also because of the decent acting and serious finale.

» Posted by Ardvark at April 6, 2007 05:08 AM

Ardvark, I believe while you may be getting separate releases, you will be getting the full-length of each feature, including the missing reels. And the actual length of the double-feature here in the States is only three hours (maybe five minutes over).

» Posted by dullboy at April 6, 2007 09:45 AM

3h11min, according to AMC.

» Posted by Kurt at April 6, 2007 09:50 AM

The missing reels exist? I thought them missing was part of the script!

What you're saying is that the standalone movies would be quite a bit longer than the double-feature versions. I hope that's true but this is the first I've heard of it.

If they remove the scratches as well it's a cool idea though: the US had grindhouse cinema, therefore they get a big 3h11min grindhouse epic called "Grindhouse", scratches, dirt and all. The rest of the world didn't have grindhouse so they get two new genre flicks,modern and clean.

Interesting. Screams for a hell of an Ultimate Edition DVD later on!

» Posted by Ardvark at April 6, 2007 12:40 PM

They should release it on used VHS tapes.

» Posted by swarez at April 6, 2007 12:58 PM

I'm guessing that "did I just see what I thought I saw?!" moment in the 'Thanksgiving' trailer is the one in the very last two seconds, which might be the gonzo genius moment of the entire 3 hour bonanza.

» Posted by Hallick at April 6, 2007 01:12 PM

Hallick - You're right, that's what I was refering to.

» Posted by Jim at April 6, 2007 01:21 PM

Jim - good review, sums up my feelings on the Rodriguez and trailer portions, though I feel the Tarantino film is much stronger than you do. For me, it transcended its sources and fits perfectly into QT's very limited range. Barrels of fun, and galvanizing: it left me feeling charged up and cheering. Admittedly, I'm a huge fan of those 70s car chase/fetish movies, so that may account for some of my enthusiasm.

I checked the running time, and 3 hrs 11 min looked correct according to my watch. The Rodriguez was fine for about half of its running time, but needed the machine gun leg to be introduced sooner to jack up the action, which tends to play out without much zip. Little vim, little vigor, a lot of gore.

Not that there's anything wrong with that...

» Posted by Peter Martin at April 6, 2007 09:40 PM

I loved it. Pretty much the entire experience. Except that I thought Zombie's trailer was AWFUL, as was the voiceover from Thanksgiving.

I think PT was a great "bad" movie. So much fun, very cool, though I could have done without the crappy attempts at emotion towards the end. And, I think they needed someone more believeable as the badass that El Wray was supposed to be.

I absolutely loved DP though. I thought it was amazing. Especially the second half, which was some of the most intense shit I've experienced in a theatre. Fucking loved it.

What i DIDN'T love was that my theatre didn't get the Halloween trailer OR the new Live Free or Die Hard. But we DID get Hobo With a Shotgun. It was a lot of fun to see on the big screen, but the problem I had watching it on a really small screen was magnified. I think the print was TOO 'grindhoused' with the marks and scratches, it was MUCH too long, and it was cut more like a modern, MTV editing trailer than an old b-movie trailer. But still, lots of fun.

» Posted by Garth at April 7, 2007 12:13 AM

Great Experience all around. Death Proof is easily the better film. both in spirit and in execution...

Anyone notice the very showy "Reservoir Broads" scene in Death Proof.

Russell rocked the house in this one. And that closer scene in DP...sweet.

I'm pretty sure the missing reel from Death Proof exists, as there are scenes from that reel in the official trailer for the film!!!

I also thought Rodriguez may have gone a tad much with the scratches...I don't know if it was a good or bad idea that many of the damages to the print are tied to the rhythms of the narrative...is that cheating or trancending? Not sure...

» Posted by Kurt at April 7, 2007 12:24 AM

Oh and HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN was actually lumped in with the 'regular trailers' and not the GRINDHOUSE PROGRAM...It was weird to see the trailer for "NEXT" followed with HOBO. My money would be seeing Hobo if the film existed.

» Posted by Kurt at April 7, 2007 12:27 AM

I read somewhere that while Rodriguez actually wrote the 'missing reel" into PT's script (ie. he intended it to be where it is and didn't actually write or shoot what happened during that time), Tarantino wrote the whole script for DP and decided where the missing reel would be after the movie was done, or at least close to done.

Also, saw the Halloween trailer on Yahoo. Wow...how boring.

» Posted by Garth at April 7, 2007 04:06 AM

I was really hoping we would get the films together with the trailers as one thing here in england...im pretty p***ed off we aprntly won't be.....dammit!
i mean, seriuosly, 3hrs 10mins isnt too long...everybody managed to sit through 'return of the king' right? jeez..
it just sort of defeats the overall objective of it being the 'grindhouse experience', something ive missed out being only in my early 20s.
Being a fan of some of the original trash these new movies are influenced by ive gotta say, im more than a little dissapointed- maybe the dvd will sort it out for us?

» Posted by Cassel at April 7, 2007 10:18 AM

I wonder how it will play here in Iceland. We have a rather shitty cinema heritage over and have never had the Grindhouse experience as well. But they did show some god awfull films back in the day. But people managed to sit through THREE Kung fu films presented by Quentin Tarantino last year, mainly because he was there but still.

» Posted by swarez at April 7, 2007 11:19 AM

I'm glad to know that with whatever Tarantino throws out, people will literally empty their nuts over it. DP was a boring gabfest, lousy dialog that seems to continue the streak of Tarantino's hackiness started with the shite that was Kill Bill. Doesn't matter, it could have been the greatest or worst film of all time...people will defend Tarantino to the death. Rodriguez on the other hand makes something entertaining which clearly doesn't make up for his hack-tastic past (Spy Kids, El Mariachi and Sin City fit into this category).

The nerve of you people.

» Posted by Fallister Twarson at April 7, 2007 01:32 PM

Did anybody catch what the "original" title of Death Proof was, before the hasty title card edit? It was just a quick flash... anyone catch it?

» Posted by Jeff at April 7, 2007 05:03 PM

It went by awfully quick, but I'm pretty sure the "original" title for DP was "Thunder"... something. Sorry. I'm sure some sharp-eyed geek will come through...

» Posted by Jim at April 7, 2007 06:43 PM

I believe the actual title was "The Last Ride"

» Posted by Sean at April 7, 2007 07:49 PM

Thought I saw "THUNDER" myself...

» Posted by Kurt at April 7, 2007 10:04 PM

Definitely said THUNDER...something.

Anyway, DEATH PROOF was just about the dullest thing in recent memory. As a standalone, I'd feel completely ripped off. Absolutely horrible dialog, annoying actresses, the whole thing was grating. Except of course for Kurt, who is still rocking the mullet, and the final chase and fight.

I can't help but think that the entire thing was meant to bore us to death so we could feel a surge from the chase.

Probably not though. I think Tarantino's lost it. He lost it after JACKIE BROWN.

» Posted by philip at April 8, 2007 08:18 AM

Oh, I forgot...

Tarantino needs to stop acting. Right now. As an actor, he's nothing but a distraction.

I enjoyed the hell out of PLANET TERROR, but when he showed up, the whole film screeched to a halt for those five or so minutes.

» Posted by philip at April 8, 2007 08:24 AM

One thing I forgot: at the sparsely-attended 4:00 pm screening I attended on Friday afternoon, one couple left after PLANET TERROR. Now was that because they only like zombie movies, or because they thought the movie was over? It did say, "The End."

» Posted by Peter Martin at April 8, 2007 10:56 AM

That "Europe doesn't knows the grindhouses" is bullshit. I can't talk for other countries, but in Spain we had our own grindhouses on the 70's and 80's, with double seasons for all kind of B movies: italian horror and action flicks, cheap kid movies, any Bronson, lame kung-fu... They're had all the proper scratches, bad sound and sleazy trailers. So fuck you, Mr. Tarantino.

Mr. Ego heard all people had a blast with Planet Terror, while everybody gets Death Proof as a joke without a punch line. So then Quentin decides not only to take to Cannes HIS movie, but also talks with Dimension and fucks for Europe the very first idea on Grindhouse: the double feature. Oh, and he wants HIS movie to be released prior to Planet Terror. Please, Tarantino... you may be great as a filmmaker, but you are a big sucker. Grow up.

» Posted by Aureal at April 8, 2007 09:28 PM

Anyone else notice Jack Burton's tank-top hanging on the bar wall in Death Proof? Yes, Jack Burton from "Big Trouble in Little China."

Hell yeah...

There were a TON of little details and references to older Tarantino/Rodriguez films. Just one example: on Dr Block's to do list, it says Kill Bill at the bottom.

» Posted by Drebacca at April 8, 2007 09:58 PM

I thought Tarantino's was the weakest of the whole thing; the car/sex/death metaphor/symbol-thing was done better by Kenneth Anger in about 10 minutes without the self-referential dialogue.

The thing is Rodriguez actually made a grindhouse film -- a pretty fun one at that -- where Tarantino made something *about* the grindhouse experience. Kinda like Kill Bill 1 -- which I love -- which isn't so much a good kung fu/yakuza flick but is about kung fu/yakuza flicks.

The Thanksgiving trailer was as disturbing as the old tv commercials for Happy Birthday to Me; the Don't trailer was hysterical; and Machete and Werewolf Women of the S.S. made me wish those films actually existed.

I really, really hope that the DVD has tons of bonus stuff cause 4 fake trailers are hardly enough.

As someone who thinks Tarantino's peaks are the wildy dissimilar Jackie Brown and Kill Bill 1, I can't say how disappointed I was with Death Proof -- not as "mature" as Jackie Brown or as balls-out cheesey fun as Kill Bill 1.

Death Proof reminded me of True Romance which I really hated apart from the Gary Oldman scenes.

» Posted by glenn at April 8, 2007 11:14 PM

What a bunch of cry babies!
The experiance as a whole was great!
And as someone posted before, people could sit through 3 hours of Lord Of The Rings, but not two original features?
Christ!

» Posted by BloodOnFilm at April 9, 2007 12:00 PM

Preach on BloodOnFilm!

» Posted by Drewbacca at April 9, 2007 12:44 PM

"There were a TON of little details and references to older Tarantino/Rodriguez films"

Tarantino's homages (ehem, ripoffs) finally came to a head. He no longer has anything else to ripoff, so he rips himself off. I say it's fair game.

» Posted by Fallister Twarson at April 9, 2007 01:10 PM

I'm looking forward to watching this movie...it's probably the only movie that i have waited for with sheer excitement;I remember the first time I read an article about tarantino making a double feature with rodriguez(must've been the summer of 2005 or 2006 , don't remember quite well) and upon reading the article, i was like "wow , a slasher with a car instead of a knife?can you do that?";guess you can...you can't imagine the great feeling i had when i first saw the teaser trailer...I remained quite stunned;in the meanwhile , i familiarised myself with the grindhouse phenomena (a little google , a little youtube and wikipedia;although nothing compares to experiencing the real thing...hey , don't blame me , I live in Romania)...which leads me to an issue that has been bugging me since I starded beeing a fan of good made movies:it take a whole freakin' year , or maybe more for a movie to get in my hometown and I only have one darn cinema house left...so you can't blame miserable teenagers like myself who download the movies from the internet and can't afford to buy the movie or go to the cinema(our allowance from the government is around 10 dollars a month and the price of a movie ticket is 4 $ )...talk about seeing the movie split in two...like it isn't enough that it takes a year to arrive...anywho , I'm looking forward to seeing it , very good reviews from the critics , seen the trailers more than a hundred times and loved the soundtracks(A+ if you ask me ; thumbs up for Tarantino for bringing us yet another excellent musical score)

» Posted by Ady at April 9, 2007 06:19 PM

Will Tarantino EVER make a film that isn't a pastiche/homage/celebration of someone else's work? He seems to believe he is distilling the true essence of these genres when all he is doing is diluting them. What's the point of making a "Grindhouse" experience and spending $40m to do it? The films he is referencing probably cost a tiny fraction of that. And to digitally add scratches, pops etc?!?! The reason these films are so bad in the first place is because they were shot on minuscule budgets with no-name actors and probably scripted the night before. If he wanted to stay true to the original "Grindhouse" experience he should have shot it for $400,000 and used some kids fresh out of drama school.
Honestly, every movie he makes is just some masturbatory, self-indulgent series of in-jokes, banal pop-culture refrences and the word ni**er thrown in every five minutes.
I welcome the QT backlash if it ever materialises.

» Posted by giant-killer at April 13, 2007 04:50 PM

I found the experience on the whole to be extremely gratifying - it was exactly what I thought it was going to be and more.

Hell, I refused to read anything about either films before I saw it and even though I am a HUGE zombie fan, I had no idea that Planet Terror was a zombie flick until I got there. The back-flip off the wall to double stab in the zombie's chest is one of the finest moments I've experienced in cinema in quite some time. El Wrey is pure bad-ass - and that's coming from an actor that I'd never guess I would see in that light. I am in the smaller camp in that, though I really enjoyed Death Proof, I found Planet Terror to be a much more exciting ride.

DON'T miss this one.

» Posted by Silent K at April 17, 2007 09:45 AM

Post Your Comments

Remember Me?   

(You may use HTML tags for style.)

  

Buy DVDs At The Twitch Store

Our Latest Reviews

Archives

Our Latest Interviews

Archives

Our Latest Entries

Stuff We Like

Shop at our affiliated sites and support Twitch while feeding your pop-culture addiction.

Find your favorites


eThaiCD