The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

Where does Grindhouse fail?


#1

We know how great the film is. That’s a given. But does it have any problems? Script trouble? Pacing issues? Questionable performances? What are some of the problems with:



Grindhouse?

Planet Terror?

Death Proof?


#2

Both films have problems but no one, except the directors, can say if its on purpose or not. Dialog in both films is weak in some spots. I think its on purpose just like some of the bad camera angles QT used in DP. He would never shoot a film the way he did in some scenes unless he was doing it to keep the feel of a shitty director doing a B flick. It was great to see the 'round the table cam pop up again. Havent seen that since Dogs! But… none of this makes either one fail, Theyre so bad theyre good!


#3

I dont think QT could make a terrible film, hes just too smart and loves film too much.



I was sort of bored by the first 30-40 minutes of Planet Terror. Nothing during that time really interested me much. Once the action and the craziness started it was alot of fun. Although as I said before, while I was watching it, I was anticipating Death Proof. So when it was over I was sort of happy.



Werewolf Women of the SS was my least favorite of the trailers.



Death Proof was great all the way through for me. I was actually waiting for a scene to bore me or irritate me and none of them did. I’ve been a Tarantino fan for many years now so listening to people talk alot in his films is a given. It felt refreshing to watch a QT film based mainly around girls rather than a bunch of guys too. I had no problems with the dialogue, it seemed VERY realistic to me actually. Instead of just being a bunch of one liners about TV and movies, it felt like these were people that were as real as anyone Ive known. The scenes with the girls driving in their cars talking and listening to music were so good because we’ve all done that. And it was EXACTLY what its like when youre with your friends cruising. Not every line you say is a brilliant Shakespearean solioquy, you just talk to each other. Thats what QT captured. In Pulp Fiction, Vincent talked about Royales with Cheese in the car, in Death Proof the girls talked about guys in the car.



QT can do more with little mood scenes than most directors can do with huge action sequences. And when he does do action scenes, they are awesome. No CGI and explosions. Just pure visceral excitement at 110 mph.


#4

Lets not start sucking each others dick just yet…


#5

“Planet Terror” was fantastic the first time I watched it, but now I’ve seen it all five times, and let me tell you, “Planet Terror” doesn’t age like wine. It gets stupid on repeated viewings.



“Death Proof” on the other hand, get better each time you watch it. It’s almost like “Jackie Brown” in that sense, except I still prefer “Jackie Brown”. The only part of “Death Proof” that I didn’t like was the logic of the first portion of the car chase.



When Stuntman Mike is first chasing Zoe’s group, the two cars are side by side. Mike keeps turning into them, trying to push them off the road. The whole time I’m watching them in this position, side by side, I’m just thinking to myself, “STOP THE DAMN CAR. Let him blow past you. He’s going fast as hell. He will go past you. Then turn around and speed away.”



It’s a very, very minor quibble. I still think “Death Proof” is fantastic.



My least favorite trailer was Edgar Wright’s “Don’t”. It was funny, but the other trailers were golden. I would say “Werewolf Women of the SS” was my least favorite, but Nicolas Cage’s cameo makes it worth it (except I still have no fucking clue what he’s yelling).



Overall, that first sold-out 9:30 PM screening of “Grindhouse” with all of my friends was the most fun I’ve ever had at a movie theatre.


#6

[quote=“KillJackieDeathPulpReserv”]When Stuntman Mike is first chasing Zoe’s group, the two cars are side by side. Mike keeps turning into them, trying to push them off the road. The whole time I’m watching them in this position, side by side, I’m just thinking to myself, “STOP THE DAMN CAR. Let him blow past you. He’s going fast as hell. He will go past you. Then turn around and speed away.” [/quote]

LOL! I thought the same exact thing. STOP THE CAR!! But then it wouldnt be a movie right? Its one of those scenes where you gotta just go with it. It makes it more fun that way. :slight_smile:


#7

[quote=“PopeyePete”]
I was sort of bored by the first 30-40 minutes of Planet Terror. Nothing during that time really interested me much.
[/quote]

The opposite for me. I mentioned in one of my reviews that the movie loses momentum right after Louis melts/gets blown away (Which is only about 10 minutes left)



Like KJDPR said, I liked Death Proof a lot more on 2nd viewing. Just the only thing I find an obstacle is the heavy conversations involving girl group #2. A lot of people are always quick to point out the diner scene, but for me, it’s previous scene in the car with the 4 girls chatting which is followed by the diner scene. I thought it was a real bold move of QT’s part to put two lengthy dialogue sequences back to back so late in the film. It really isn’t the dialogue, per se, just this structure of “getting to know” the girls. For instance, on one of the deleted scenes, you hear Abernathy telling Lee to get her ass off the hood of Kim’s car or else what. That already tells you that Kim can be a firecracker who isn’t afraid to put a beatdown on Mike rather than just hearing her say that she isn’t afraid to bust a cap in somebody.

But then again, all the discussions involving girl group #1 breezed by very nicely on 2nd viewing (I absolutely love the entire bar scene now) so hopefully in time, the same can happen for me with girl group #2.



Two other complaints that I still hear about which bug me:



“Stuntman Mike vanishes in the 2nd half of the movie”

Wrong.

Do these people NOT see Mike in the diner eating in the background while looking and listening to girl group #2? Mike is always around, he just doesn’t have any lines on camera. That’s enough presence for me.



(And as already mentioned in this thread)

"STOP THE CAR!"

Well, you can’t just slam on the breaks because, you know, there’s someone on the hood. But yeah, there’s 2 moments in the chase where Kim loses Mike and I guess you could’ve had Kim slowly pull over and try to get Zoe back in…

[quote=“PopeyePete”]
But then it wouldnt be a movie right?
[/quote]


#8

For me, Death Proof is like a strange delicious snack someone made at a party and I want to have it again. I really think I’m gonna like this one more and more as time goes on.


#9

Exactly. Just like Texas Chainsaw Massacre - I doubt that it did well at the boxoffice - but how many other movies from that year can you name? It will be a classic - give it time.


#10

Well, despite the premise of this thread, I still kind of knew that it would still become a lovefest to the film, but I’ll try to adhere to it none the less. In Death Proof, when we meet the 2nd group of girls at the round table via ResDogs shot, although I really liked the way Quentin drops exposition nuggets in and out, some character/plot points that might be just random character stuff and/or very crucial to the subsequent plot, for instance Kim’s concealed weapon and Zoe’s tendency to always land on her feet. Most films drop nuggets of exposition and you know, “oh, they’re going to have a pay off to this” but here, you don’t know that, it could be character stuff that is never ever mentioned again or end up being very crucial to the subsequent plot. Quentin masterfully handles exposition as opposed to most filmmakers who handle exposition very transparently. Well, that’s the good. Here’s the bad.



In that same scene, the coffee shop round table ResDogs shot, although the conversation is very entertaining and well written, the subject changes were kind of obvious. I felt this way in the film but am referring to the script for this post. It starts on page 98. That’s where the scene starts and I like how we just jump into the dialogue. We have the “INT. COFFEE SHOP - DAY” slugline followed by no description, we just jump right into the dialogue with Abernathy’s line: So Zoe, Kim, and I are in the Phillippines at an outdoor rave." That I liked, we just jump in. But a few pages later, on page 100, notice how abruptly and awkwardly Zoe changes the subject by delivering the closing line to that subject by saying “I resemble that remark.” Which is like the closing line/punch line to that whole subject, and in the next beat all of a sudden saying “So Kim, still pack a Roscoe?” Roscoe being the gun.



It just felt kind of abrupt and unnatural. I’m sure there’s a proper defense for it but Quentin so cleverly manages exposition in that scene that you would think he would deal with the subject changes just as cleverly, like dropping the gun line earlier into the last subject and then having Zoe ask her about as opposed to just changing the subject to the gun with no notice.



Then the next awkward subject change happens. In the film and in the script, in the script on page 105 where they finish talking about the gun where Kim’s last line on the subject is “But until that day, it’s Wild West motherfucker.” Then without missing a beat, she awkwardly changes the subject by saying “So Zoe, you thought about whatcha’ wanna do first?”



With that said, I still liked the scene, lots of good character stuff, cleverly disguised exposition, love the one take circling ResDogs camera, loved seeing Stuntman Mike in the background, just thought the subject changes were kind of forced. You might feel the same way the next time you watch it.







Again, I thought Quentin’s subject change stood out more and he could’ve done it more seamlessly. So now they’re talking about Zoe’s plan and I could see why the subjects in the whole scene are broken up so carefully for audiences to follow but they’re broken up too carefully. Again, it just seems like an easy transition and it seems like Quentin could’ve disguised it a little bit, like perhaps transition to that subject more seamlessly than just have every new subject start out like this:



“So Zoe, Kim, and I are in the Phillippines at an outdoor rave.”



“So Kim, still pack a Roscoe?”



"So Zoe, you thought about whatcha’ wanna do first?"



Subject changes seems to come much more naturally than someone completely stopping talking about something and then saying “So, blah blah blah.”


#11

So, it didnt bother me enough to notice. :slight_smile:


#12

[quote=“PopeyePete”]
I think its based more on how real people talk, not how we think theyre supposed to talk or change subjects. When you talk to people, do you follow a pattern or do you randomly bring things up due to things popping up in your mind? Im more random than A B C.
[/quote]
apparently so.


#13

Kilgore, the thing I dont like about you is that you come in here to talk shit more than you talk about movies. Cmon man, grow up.



You didnt even see Death Proof but you’re in here trying to be part of the conversation. WTF is that about?


#14

IM me if you have a beef.


#15

Im not IMing you, I just dont understand what your here for. You want to crack jokes and talk about movies you havent seen I guess.



If you were an actual QT fan you wouldve gotten in your truck and driven an hour to see Grindhouse at least. I know I would have. Damn.


#16

[quote=“PopeyePete”]
So, it didnt bother me enough to notice. :slight_smile:
[/quote]

Me too. I didn’t even notice it the first time. Only the second and third time, and really, if you miss it the first time, it doesn’t count.


#17

[quote=“PopeyePete”]
I think its based more on how real people talk, not how we think theyre supposed to talk or change subjects. When you talk to people, do you follow a pattern or do you randomly bring things up due to things popping up in your mind? Im more random than A B C.
[/quote]

That’s what I’m saying. In that scene in Death Proof, the subjects go from A to B to C, very cleanly, but in real life it’s more random and doesn’t follow such a strict pattern. For once, Quentin’s dialogue isn’t so realistic.


#18

Yeah but that was random too. He wasnt following a pattern. He was having them switch subjects like people really do. Real Life isnt about clean speech patterns, its random.



So, you goin to see Grindhouse?



So, did you get that DVD?



So how was that restaraunt you went to?



Everyone talks like that


#19

Movies are an escape from reality - that is why they aren’t random - they have…PLOTS!


#20

Again, you havent seen Death Proof! Why are you in here? Go try to fly a plane without taking a flying class! Same idea!!



QT doesnt follow MOVIE RULES, he does movies the way HE WANTS!!! These are realistic everyday characters that get thrown into incredible situations!!