[quote=“PutneySwope”]
Mike: Very true, thats a good point. Im trying to decide whether or not to add it. I kinda dont feel like its a true grindhouse film. Whereas I do think Friday the 13ths 1-5 are, even though Paramount released them. Weird.
[/quote]
Add it. It’s definitely more grindhouse than Escape From NY. Christine’s as grindhouse as Carpenter got, I think
The major studios started distributing exploitation films when they saw what kind of a box office result the smaller indie studios were getting. That’s how Paramount acquired Friday the 13th.
Unless you do want to make another section for exploitation films after the grindhouse era, I don’t know if I’d add Christine. But the grindhouse era didn’t really die until the VHS boom, although the Liberty Theater held on longer than any grindhouse on the Deuce. The last film to play there was Falling Down.
GRINDHOUSE: 1977, Id say its a Grindhouse flick. I havent seen it though.
^ It’s a really good scary movie. Must see.
I can’t find an English version trailer on youtube for the Sentinel, but here is a french one. I don’t know french, but you get the idea on the trailer of what the movie is.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=9dX97ySK9YI
[quote=“Bleach”]
Add it. It’s definitely more grindhouse than Escape From NY. Christine’s as grindhouse as Carpenter got, I think
[/quote]
I dont know about that. Christine was a bigger studio film based on a Stephen King book. EFNY was an original low budget action-adventure film with offbeat characters. Its more of a real Grindhouse film to me.
I think Carps really genuine grindhouse films were assault on precinct 13, halloween and EFNY.
If the grindhouses were still around today Vampires and Ghosts of Mars would definitely play in them, and it would be my pleasure to watch them within that venue.
Being an adaptation of a novel doesn’t make Christine any less an exploitation film. Remember, the only thing that made an exploitation movie a grindhouse movie was the theater it played in.
Theres always exceptions but Christine just isnt a Grindhouse film IMO. Its too mainstream-horror or something. I actually like the movie alot too. It has nothing to do with that.
Grindhouse is a certain kind of cinema, its not even about the studios, or the actors, its the films themselves. You def know when youre watching a Grindhouse film.
That’s exactly what I’ve been saying. Christine is an exploitation film, but it is not a grindhouse film, because a grindhouse film played in a grindhouse theater. That’s the only reason a movie is a grindhouse movie. If it played in a grindhouse theater.
The studios were making exploitation films after Jaws and Star Wars blew up. Exploitation films are just B movies with exploitable elements, after all. And the big shift in the studios back then was to make more B movies with A budgets than A movies.
yea but then again like QT said you would get some mainstream movies playing there on the end of there theater runs.
Heres something else I gotta think about:
Horror films are exploitation films because they are sold on the gore/sex etc in them.
What about The Exorcist? That was made in 1973, its def Horror and has lots of nasty stuff in it too, but I really dont see it as a Grindhouse film. Why?
Yes, Jjp, that’s true. The movies played in grindhouses weren’t just exploitation films, but they were the majority. Which is why you can’t just look a movie and say this was a grindhouse movie. The only factor that made a grindhouse movie a grindhouse movie is that it played in a grindhouse theater.
Oh I definitely know that Grindhouse theaters played all kinds of movies. Thats very true. They didnt just play exploitation. Thats an area Id like to explore actually. For right now, I want to stay on the track Im on though. The majority of the urban grindhouses played sex and exploitation films. There was also other kinds of films playing too, but thats another story.
Did The Exorcist play in a grindhouse theater? That’s the deciding factor.
Is it an exploitation film? It’s a demonic possession movie. It did inspire a slew of exploitative ripoffs that could be programmed together. If you talk to William Friedkin about it he’d tell you he didn’t make a horror movie. He made a drama with scary elements. But directors like to say that when their movies hit the award circuit and they don’t want to be known for making a horror movie. Look at what happened with Silence of the Lambs and The Sixth Sense. Suddenly they’re not horror movies anymore because they’re nominated for Oscars. They’re psychological thrillers. Now when it comes to Silence of the Lambs, I don’t personally see it as a horror movie. I see it as an American giallo. But giallos have been crossed into the horror genre, so I guess it still in a way qualifies.
[quote=“PutneySwope”]
Oh I definitely know that Grindhouse theaters played all kinds of movies. Thats very true. They didnt just play exploitation. Thats an area Id like to explore actually. For right now, I want to stay on the track Im on though.
[/quote]
Then Christine shouldn’t be an issue.
[quote=“PutneySwope”]
Heres something else I gotta think about:
Horror films are exploitation films because they are sold on the gore/sex etc in them.
What about The Exorcist? That was made in 1973, its def Horror and has lots of nasty stuff in it too, but I really dont see consider it a Grindhouse film. Why?
[/quote]
I’m sure that I’m leaving a lot of good ones, so Ill just list 10 of the horror movies that could never be called “grindhouse”.
NOTE: I have a blaxploitation-demonic posession film listed on the site: Abby. A rip off of The Exorcist.
Jaws would not go on The Deuce, but Pirahna, a ripoff of that would.
OK. Lets stay on the track.
For now, Id pass on Christine.
Gimme another title Bleach. Anything else. Theres a million other actual films Id consider Grindhouse. Look at the ones on the site. You mustve seen at least one of them.
[quote=“Kilgore Trout”]
I’m sure that I’m leaving a lot of good ones, so Ill just list 10 of the horror movies that could never be called “grindhouse”.
Psycho – a tranvestite killer with mommy issues. Do you know the effect that movie had on audiences in 1960?
The Silence of the Lambs – Again, a serial killer using fat girls to make a skin suit. Since it was made after the grindhouses were dead, it isn’t a grindhouse movie because it didn’t play in a grindhouse theater. But it can play as an exploitation movie. Show it with some giallos.
Christine – We covered this one.
The Shining – Definitely an exploitation film. Would have played great in a grindhouse.
Seven – released after the death of the grindhouses. Riffs a lot on the 70s serial killer movies.
Poltergeist: Did it play in the grindhouses? Don’t know. Definitely a scary fuckin horror movies, showing that there were PG horror movies that did scare the shit out of you. Lost art.
The Omen: Did it play in the grindhouses? Don’t know. It could have.
The Sixth Sense: Again, released way after the grindhouses died, so not a grindhouse movie. Another PG-13 movie that still can scare the shit out of people.
The Village: Again, released way after the grindhouses died, so not a grindhouse movie, because… wait for it… it couldn’t play in a grindhouse theater.
Theres films we consider “grindhouse” and theres films we consider “mainstream”. Because a big budget film played in a grindhouse for a week doesnt make it a “grindhouse” movie per se.
RR and QTs Grindhouse was named after the kinds of films we’re covering right now. I think everyone whos seen it understands what it means now. I think QT even put a definition of what grindhouses are in the trailer. Thats where we’re coming from with this project.
I quote Harry Knowles:
Movies like JAWS literally did play in some Grindhouses… but they’re not primarily GRINDHOUSE films… to earn that label, they had to be films that you just weren’t likely to see at any other type of theater at the time… aside from Drive-Ins.