The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

Fdtd 2 and 3


#1

I noticed that this part is called ‘From Dusk Till Dawn (1-3)’ but what exactly was QT’s role/part in part 2&3? I once read on a dvd case that he was producer or executive producer, but how is he exactly related to these moveis i.e. what did he do? he must’ve been pretty involved or else they wouldn’t be mentioned on this forum ???


#2

FDTD2: QT thought of the story and produced it. He had the idea of vampires robbing a bank and decided it would be sufficient enough for a straight-to-video flick



FDTD3: i dont know HOW they came up with this (i love the movie) but he produced it again.


#3

when you say he came up with the story, do you mean that he thought of a concept and other people wrote the screenplay and stuff or did he write it?


#4

He didn’t write or direct either sequel.



He financed them with Robert Rodriguez


#5

aha ok, interesting. they always looked like cheap moneymagnets to me, you know cashing in on the succes of fdtd 1. maybe I’m gonna check em out though.


#6

[quote]aha ok, interesting. they always looked like cheap moneymagnets to me, you know cashing in on the succes of fdtd 1. maybe I’m gonna check em out though.[/quote]

Check out PART 3 : HANGMAN’S DAUGHTER



don’t waste your time or money with PART 2: TEXAS BLOOD MONEY


#7

Texas Blood Money was pretty bad, and Hangman’s Daughter was ok.


#8

I thought both of them were pretty cool. I haven’t seen them in a while though.


#9

has any one seen them and are they any good, and are they still about the vampires?


#10

they’re both pretty fuckin awful honestly don’t waste your time watch pulp fiction instead


#11

2 starts off good. 3 is all around bad. 2 lead you to belive that Bruce campbell is gonna be in it.


#12

I enjoyed no. 3; it was a really fun movie. Two problems with it. 1.) The ending sucked, 2.) The special effects were way too cheesy.  No. 2 was just awful and boring.


#13

I liked the 2nd one…it played like one of those movies u watch on a road trip…and your sitting in your motel room and u see that From Dusk Till Dawn 2 is on your free HBO…so u watch it…go to bed…and forget u ever saw it…but u remember you enjoyed it.



I havn’t seen the third one, but the second one was a “Fun” movie in my opinion. But I don’t think I’ll need, or want, to see it again.


#14

number 2 had a great story i like how they go into the bank then leave the bank vampires killing all the cops…but over all the movie wasnt that great



number 3 i actually liked…the bad priest was great he kicked some ass in the bar


#15

[quote]
number 3 i actually liked…the bad priest was great he kicked some ass in the bar[/quote]

Michael Parks really owned that movie


#16

i’ve seen bits and pieces of the third, and it’s not too bad, just don’t expect it to be a complete masterpiece, because it’s pure entertainment, and that’s it.

number 2 has never been edited here,not even on vhs, so i guess i’ll never get the chance to watch it…


#17

[quote]i’ve seen bits and pieces of the third, and it’s not too bad, just don’t expect it to be a complete masterpiece, because it’s pure entertainment, and that’s it.

number 2 has never been edited here,not even on vhs, so i guess i’ll never get the chance to watch it…[/quote]

ah just import them. they’re worth owning. I always tell people I watch them with, that both of them would’ve been worth being in Theaters if they’d invested a bit more money and would’ve not fucked up that bad.



FDTD 2 bad things:

  • the bizarre camera positions
  • the bizarre cutting
  • the trashy FX
  • the ripping-off of other movies’ sound, aspects, ideas etc
  • the shameless ruining of FDTD1 ideas



    FDTD 3 bad things:
  • the cheap opening titles
  • the partially cheap production design
  • the very cheap vampire FX (the snake out of head, the snake out of belly)
  • the superficially told story of Esmeralda/Pandemonium



    —>> if they’d improved it just a bit, it would’ve been great. I mean, both are fun watching and part 3 is really very good entertainment (a great western) but it’s missing the dot on the i

#18

Never saw the third, but all i really remember from 2 was that Kevin Smith had a 1sec cameo, and Danny Trejo was a bat.


#19

When did Kevin Smith appear? I didn’t notice him.


#20

[quote]—>> if they’d improved it just a bit, it would’ve been great. I mean, both are fun watching and part 3 is really very good entertainment (a great western) but it’s missing the dot on the i
[/quote]

agree…part 2 is a waste of time…but you should definatly watch fdtd 3…it has its weakness…but i still think its a good movie.