my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Grindhouse (Page 0)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Grindhouse Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 04-16-2007 07:41 PM                        In the "trailer" section, why did they put the "starts Wednesday" dater _after_ the trailer? Normally, the dater would go before. Same with the "Get more out of life" trailer--that shouldn't have come after the "Feature Presentation" Astro-Dater. WTF? Anyway, it was an interesting attempt at doing something different and I give the filmmakers all the credit in the world for doing something creative. Unfortunately, the films, while fun, weren't really my cup of tea. Both were too long to be "grind house" material, especially if the missing reels were put back in (though neither could possibly have been a full 20 minutes). Agreed with all the comments about the fake-looking film damage. Sound mix should have been mono and should have had noise to correspond with the "print damage." Oh, well. I'm glad to have seen it, but have no desire to see it again anytime soon.  |  IP: Logged Mike Heenan Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1896 From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 04-16-2007 07:58 PM                     I pretty much agree with Scott's second paragraph, just saw it this weekend. Was ready to walk out of Death Proof but had a date so I couldn't and she loved it naturally. One thing I didn't get was why RR's movie had all the wear while Tarantino's didn't really, was that because RR pretty much hates film? What's ironic is he harps about the limitations of film, but film for his movie would have been technically more accurate, I guess.  |  IP: Logged Richard Greco Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1180 From: Plant City, FL Registered: Nov 2003 posted 04-16-2007 09:34 PM                     When did Rose McGowan become hot! I loved this!!! After the intermission, I stretched and was ready for part 2. I loved em' both! So bloody and gory  |  IP: Logged Keith Peticolas Expert Film Handler Posts: 108 From: Eagle River, Alaska, USA Registered: Aug 2001 posted 04-16-2007 09:50 PM                     Ick. Thank the makers this trainwreck is pulling out of here on Thursday night. 2 weeks of an empty room is enough, what a waste of seats. Death Proof now stands with Eragon as my biggest loser movie of the last few years. We had a big number of folks leave during DP every show. Big being 3 out of the 7 that might be in the house on any given showing. Fortunately most of them enjoyed Planet Terror enough not to bitch about refunds. Mr. Tarantino you now suck...big time.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 04-17-2007 11:01 AM                     Location: Carmike 8, Lawton, OK Auditorium: #7 Format: 35mm, Optical Stereo Rating: 2.5 stars out of 4. Planet Terror This half of the show was deliberately ridiculous, but at least it was fun for what it wanted to accomplish. I liked the movie digging up actors we haven't seen in a while like Michael Biehn and Jeff Fahey. The gore and gross out moments were over the top, well past Sam Peckinpah level, for comedic effect. For the "out there" nature of the movie, no one will really care too much just how Cherry Darling is able to make the gun on her leg actually fire. Does she use "the force" to telekinetically pull the trigger? Overall, the show seemed like an effective satire on lots of different genres, everything from horror movies to daytime TV hospital soaps. Still, this part of the show was "good" but not really "great." I could only get into the movie to a limit. That's a usual cost of spoof and satire. Some movies, like Doctor Strangelove have managed to rise to levels of greatness despite their satirical tone. On its own, I'd give Planet Terror three stars, but only just barely. I also found it strange how the simulated film damage on Planet Terror was so much more pronounced than on Death Proof. The 2nd feature only seemed to have a few simulated problem spots in the beginning, but looked OK for the most part. Maybe this is just Robert Rodriquez making a statement on how much he hates film. The problem is many of the simulated film damage effects do look very simulated. I've seen enough film prints with real damage to know the difference. There's all sorts of very realistic things they could have done. Dirt and other debris just shows up black. Not strands of yellow or other colors. They could have simulated a bad reflector burn on all of one reel, put some deep yellow-layer scratches throughout and finding a better place to use the effect of the film jamming and burning in the gate. I would have had the film jam and melt effect placed at "The End" title card instead of sticking in the middle of the show. It would have made for a more believable transition to the middle trailer pack. Fake Trailers I found the fake trailers more entertaining than the two "features." Lots of cameos. The Machete trailer (featuring Danny Trejo and Cheech Marin) at the beginning was gory and funny, which did a good job of setting up Planet Terror. The trailer pack in the middle was even better. Werewolf Women of the SS was zany. The trailer for Don't had me laughing pretty hard, but not nearly as much as Eli Roth's Thanksgiving trailer. I thought I was going to bust a gut with that one. The combination of the announcer's low, deadpan voice and the comedic way people were getting killed (often while taking part in sex acts) was simply great. And it effectively spoofed shitty horror movies from decades past. Death Proof This is the first Quentin Tarantino movie I just didn't like very much. By itself, I give it 1 star out of four. I think QT's movie failed on a lot of different levels. On the whole, this movie seemed like something he threw together at the last minute like an overdue term paper or something. The material just has that rushed "all-nighter" feel to it. Good scripts demands lots of time, work and re-work. This movie had more dialog in it than some bad off-Broadway plays. Screenwriting 101 teaches you to keep dialog to a minimum. Audiences can retain only so much of it. You have to "show, don't tell." Good movies will use action more to define their characters than long passages of dialog, especially when it's dialog that doesn't really have any useful function to the story. Tarantino is usually pretty good with writing lots of snappy dialog, but much of what he had in this movie was goofy at times and forgettable much of the rest of the time. It seemed more like it was just filling space than providing any other function. And that took the extra toll of bogging down the pace of the story to painfully boring at many points. The only relief was when other characters that played in Kill Bill appeared in various points in the story. I also didn't like how the Death Proof effectively took the story back to square one about halfway through the film. A bunch of time is spent on one group of ladies only to see them all exit. Another groups of ladies come in halfway through, but not a damned thing is done to connect the two halves together. Sure, some people will try to bring up Psycho as a comparison, where 40 or so minutes is spent on Janet Leigh's character only to see her get killed in the famous shower scene. However, Psycho revealed a whole new story and continued in that direction. Death Proof did not. It just went back to square one, which also meant going back to more marathon talking sessions. But not as many shots of bare female feet. Maybe Tarantino guessed if he had pretty ladies on screen spouting all this endless dialog we wouldn't mind it. We would just sit there and admire the looks of Rosario Dawson and Vanessa Ferlito. Um, Quentin, guys don't want to listen to ladies yammer away pointlessly for hours on end over made up stories we don't know or care about. We're just vamping until we can get to the good part. And that brings up the car chase that FINALLY comes at the movie's end. You know what? Even that got boring at times and also did things to get me irritated. Real life stuntwoman Zoe Bell was playing herself, but not with herself even though that would have been more interesting. Zoe straps herself to the hood of a car to enact a stunt when the woman-hunting Stuntman Mike shows up to try to make her fall off the vehicle and proceed to killing the two other ladies. Question. Why didn't the ladies just slow down and stop? The lady driving the vehicle was packing a gun. Why wasn't see shooting at Stuntman Mike or handing the "Roscoe" to the chick in the passenger seat to take more carefully aimed two-handed shots? Even though the car chase scene had some pretty dangerous stunts and spectacular crashes, much of it defied logic. In fact, much of the movie defied plausible logic. Hot women in their early 20s, especially in a place as happening as Austin, will have no shortage of guys their own age wanting to drive them home -in a car that actually has real passenger seats. The climatic fist fight at the very end didn't deliver any real satisfaction to it since there was no connection to the previous half of the story. The characters had no idea they were delivering any justice for anyone else but themselves. The abrupt ending with its kooky vintage music just didn't work. It seemed more like the tail end of a chewing gum commercial than a movie. Ugh. End Titles were kind of interesting. Was kind of expecting some other trailer or funny moment on the end of the credits.  |  IP: Logged Mike Heenan Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1896 From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 04-17-2007 07:29 PM                     They also failed Roger Cormans #1 rule... always have a few breast shots per reel.  |  IP: Logged Chris Hipp Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1462 From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas) Registered: Jul 2003 posted 04-18-2007 11:43 PM                     I've never even heard of a grindhouse theater before this movie. However, it would seem to me that if you go to see a double feature you kind of have to accept the fact that you are going to pay for the good movie that you want to watch and get stuck with the second one. Is it possible that Tarrintino considered this and made Death Proof suck on purpose? Basically, you are paying to see Planet Terror. I only watched Death Proof, because every other screen in the building was down. I am going to hold off judgement until I see the missing lapdance scene. I will add that I hate Grindhouse for the simple fact that it keeps me at work until 2am.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 04-18-2007 11:57 PM                  quote: Mike Heenan They also failed Roger Cormans #1 rule... always have a few breast shots per reel. I always thought it was Roman Polanski that had that rule... Example: "The Fearless Vampire Killers"...GREAT film!  |  IP: Logged Jennifer Pan THE JEN! Posts: 1219 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: Nov 2003 posted 04-19-2007 10:35 PM                        What annoyed me the most were the fake scratches. It was ok 30 seconds into it but after that I felt like I was at a dollar theater for 3 hours. The regular trailers before the actual presentation started out of frame and huge shadows on the right side and top of the screen. Annoyed me to no end! Even after several times that the workers would come in to check on the presentation it was never fixed! Yeah, I should have complained and kicked the crap out of whoever started the film but I wasn't in the mood to miss any parts of the movie. Or talk to some projectionist who was asleep in booth. (Yes, the movie started late as well.) Planet Terror: I was expecting it to be more humorous... indeed I do love my fair share of zombie movies... wait or was it aliens... or mutants... I dunno. I guess I some what enjoyed it. It didn't live up to the hype. Death Proof: From the look of things and from what I've heard people say... I figured this one was going to be worse. But I enjoyed this much more and there were several times I laughed out loud. Dialog seemed much more appealing to me than shooting mutant zombies. Plus the car chase scenes kept me on the end of my seat. Loved the ending. Planet Terror: 1/2 out of 5 Death Proof: out of 5  |  IP: Logged Tracy Bellar Film Handler Posts: 72 From: Sciotoville, Oh. Registered: Mar 2005 posted 04-20-2007 01:02 AM                        Blair Witch Project meets Faster Pussycat Kill! Kill, with a touch of high school film class movie done by a D student.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Sisemore Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day! Posts: 3061 From: Rockwall TX USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 09-29-2007 05:29 PM                     Bump for the UK re-issue of the two films as separate features.  |  IP: Logged Damien Taylor Master Film Handler Posts: 493 From: Perth, Western Australia Registered: Apr 2007 posted 10-08-2007 04:54 AM                     It's not even here yet, all the lobby promo stuff was packed away months ago, maybe it got axed for its Aussie release? I heard they were chopping it for over here too, so I would be boycotting anyway. I can understand however, as anyone who hadn't researched, wouldn't know what a grindhouse was since its a totally unknown foreign concept here.  |  IP: Logged Michael Brown Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1522 From: Bradford, England Registered: May 2001 posted 11-09-2007 02:47 PM                     I'm in the UK and I've just come back from watching 'Planet Terror' (It just opened today). I have a technical question about the grindhouse release. When I saw 'Death Proof' a few month ago it was a Scope film and I was assuming that 'Planet Terror' was also going to be in Scope to match. However it was in 1.85 flat format. How did they work around this for the full grindhouse release. Was 'Planet Terror' show as 1.85 (with a lense change between the other feature) or was it printed as Scope (just not filling the full image width)  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 11-09-2007 03:04 PM                     Planet Terror was cropped down to 'scope dimensions. You may have had sharper image quality watching it in 1.85:1 given that segment of Grindhouse was not shot using HDTV-quality digital cameras.  |  IP: Logged Michael Brown Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1522 From: Bradford, England Registered: May 2001 posted 11-09-2007 08:31 PM                     quote: Bobby Henderson .....not shot using HDTV-quality digital cameras. Are you sure? It was shot with Panavision Genesis according to the end credits.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.