The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

Grindhouse lacks B-movie appeal (?)


#1

<LINK_TEXT text=“http://badgerherald.com/artsetc/2007/03 … ks_bmo.php”>http://badgerherald.com/artsetc/2007/03/19/grindhouse_lacks_bmo.php</LINK_TEXT>



This guy kinda takes a shit on the idea of Grindhouse but makes some interesting points along the way… (yeah, it’s long)




[size=120]‘Grindhouse’ lacks B-movie appeal[/size]

by Ray Gustini

Monday, March 19, 2007

[size=90]

According to Acrobat Research, one of the leading companies that monitors tracking numbers for upcoming Hollywood releases, “Grindhouse,� the new picture from Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino, is the most anticipated film of the spring among the all-important demographics of 15-year-old boys, movie store clerks and anti-social, basement-dwelling shut-ins.



We could talk for a long time about the relative social merits of a movie where a serial killer stalks his victims in a tricked-out Chevy Nova and a stripper fights off zombies with a machine gun that also serves as her prosthetic leg, but really, who has the energy anymore? I’m certainly not the one to lead the discussion about the artistic responsibility of resurrecting old-school exploitation cheese, seeing as how I own an autographed poster of “Ms. 45.�



Tarantino and Rodriguez’s goal in making “Grindhouseâ€? is to capture the experience of going to an exploitation theater during the 1960s and 1970s â€â€


#2

This guy is an idiot for several reasons:


  1. He assumes that every QT fan is an anti-social, rejected person with no life. I don’t know if that was just a pathetic attempt at humor from his part. If it was, it wasn’t funny.


  2. He’s actually comparing Michael Bay movies to seventies grindhouse cinema? Did I read that right or am I just losing it? ???


  3. One of his main arguments is that exploitation movies are still made nowadays; then goes on to admit that most of them go direct to video. That’s the whole point behind “Grindhouse” asshat; to bring the grindhouse experience back to the big screen.


  4. From his description of the movie he’s probably oblivious to the fact that “Man on Fire” is a remake of a late eighties movie.


  5. Anybody who suggests that “Jack Frost” is among the best recent exploitation movies needs to die. And no, I’m not talking about the Michael Keaton crapfest here, and neither is he. The Keaton movie is a masterpiece compared to this rubbish.


  6. Love how he ends the article by saying he’s majoring in english and journalism, as if that should suggest that he knows what he’s talking about.

#3

People like that asshead just want to pick apart what theyre doing and try to twist it around to make them look bad. Does he really think QT and RR examine every little aspect of what they do THAT much? They came up with the idea in about 5 minutes. They are simply making two of their own Exploitation genre films like the ones they grew up on. Why is it a negative thing if they are paying tribute to that era and the filmmakers of the time?



Also, hes just taking any cheapshot he can to get some notice. Hes comparing and contrasting and trying to look like hes a movie geek by referencing those few exploitation titles (Ms 45, Switchblade Sisters, Gone in 60 Seconds). Which I already know because Ive seen them all and love them, so does QT and RR which is why they are making Grindhouse.



Its 2007, we’ve done the VHS thing, the straight to video thing, the Simpson-Bruckheimer high concept-no brains thing, The DVD thing. Now its time for the old school Grindhouse geeks (who are also talented writer-directors) to show everyone how it SHOULD be done.



If he feels that strongly about Grindhouse being not B-movie enough, he should stay home and watch the really good stuff like Ginger Snaps 2 and Jack Frost. lol.


#4

LOOOOOOL at anyone who likes Pulp Fiction is anti social… Article belongs to the bin… Not cuz Im a tarantino fan and Im being biased, cuz it truly belongs to the bin…


#5

That was a waste of time…


#6

what an idiot


#7

We’re going to see Tarantino and Rodriguez’s new films which happen to be their takes on the Grindhouse films they grew up on. Theres nothing else to it than that. You either love it or you dont. It is what it is. Hip or unhip. Its up to us Grindhouse geeks to decide if its B-movie enough anyways when we actually SEE it.


#8

[quote=“PopeyePete”]
Does he really think QT and RR examine every little aspect of what they do THAT much? They came up with the idea in about 5 minutes.
[/quote]

These guys are total film geeks - of course they analyze this shit to death. The problem here is that the author is criticizing Tarantino and Rodriguez for not enjoying these films the way he does. Now that is snobbery.

[quote=“PopeyePete”]They are simply making two of their own Exploitation genre films like the ones they grew up on. Why is it a negative thing if they are paying tribute to that era and the filmmakers of the time?
[/quote]

Exactly.



This guy is absolutely right about the whole grindhouse-in-the-dollar-bin but so what? How does that translate into a critique of the Grindhouse movie premise?



Shooting fish in a barrel?



If you are going to compare a Tarantino film to going fishing, then adding a shotgun sounds about right :wink:


#9

[quote=“hanzosteel”]
These guys are total film geeks - of course they analyze this shit to death. The problem here is that the author is criticizing Tarantino and Rodriguez for not enjoying these films the way he does. Now that is snobbery.[/quote]

I know QT and RR analyze the older films they love, but they dont go into it thinking about how every aspect of their movies will be PC with critics. They wanted to do a double feature, a slasher and a zombie movie BAM! they did it. There was no “oh but what if journalists go and analyze the cultural status of exploitation cinema” etc etc.



I dont goto movies to think about anything but what Im seeing on the screen. Its not about what critics think or feel, its about what those two artists are doing that I care about.


#10

did your mother drop you when you were a baby? seriously…you must be the dumbest mother-fucker to have ever made a post on this forum…and that’s a huge fuckin’ statement. Shit…Seb can name five of the biggest fools to ever post here and not one of them will compare to this fucking exhibition of sheer stupidity. Il buono…he’s got nothing on you.


#11

“HELLO MR BREAKFAST!!” “HELLO PEE WEE!!”


#12

“there are over 1,000 uses for corn. In a minute I’m going to tell you about each one of them”


#13

“Jimmy cracked corrn and IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII DONNNT CAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARE!”



“Ahhh!!!”


#14

I say we scalp him!

Then we tattoo him!

Then we hang him!

And then we kill him!


#15

“…i say we let him go…”



“NOOOOO!”


#16

well, we pretty much fucked this thread to pieces! ;D


#17

What a complete Fucktard.


#18

[quote=“SeanZombie”]
What a complete Fucktard.

[/quote]
that is an insult to the Fucktard community.


#19

Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one but some are bigger than others.


#20

Ray Gustini: I piss on your article and your Ms .45 autographed poster. Now go watch The Rock you buttplug.