comment #1

MAGGA says ...

That car chase was amazing, and again he was uncompromising, pulling out all stops to make the chase of the century so far. And foot fetshists should rejoyce

comment #2

p.Vice says ...

A wank and a tank -- pure poetry. Have an extra bowl of wheaties this morning, Jeff?

Your comments about Tarantino are dead on. From his 90s work to the 00s there was a seismic shift from inspiration and pastiche... he stopped writing characters and started writing scenarios, which accounts for why Kill Bill and Death Proof felt like 20 movies somehow shotgunned into one.

I'd wager what's happened to him is one of the more crushing disappointments of the decade, considering that his facility with the camera has actually improved considerably. Maybe he was born to make only Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, and Jackie Brown, and only those three movies. Or maybe he's just an arrogant bastard who forgot why he started making movies in the first place.

comment #3

actionman says ...

c'mon, really guys? the car chase in Death Proof was good, but not the best of the decade. No way. I was extremely diasppointed with the whole Grindhouse experience for many reasons. Just didn't do it for me at all. That film, along with Beowulf, were the two biggest let downs for the year for me. I'll admit, the first 25 minutes of Planet Terror was fun, but then it went down hill.

comment #4

Bilge says ...

On its own DEATH PROOF is a magnificent film -- haunting, exciting, and radically structured. And Zoe Bell certainly deserves some kind of award.

Too bad that PLANET TERROR is so dreadful.

comment #5

MickTravis says ...

To me, the car chase was nicely done but not nearly as taught, tense and affecting as the "Hold Tight" sequence.

At one point, Tarantino makes a cut from the girls singing in their car to Stuntman Mike roaring after them, with the camera smack on the hood of Mike's car; and there's another shot of the hood ornament when he's charging them. Those little bits, to me, are like cinematic crack. I mean they actually give me a rush to watch.

I wish there'd been a few more rocks in the movie.

I also wished I'd like the girls more. Characters don't have to be sweet and perfect, but they were either abrasive or talking about movies I didn't truly believe they'd actually seen.

comment #6

christian says ...

It's too bad Russell wasn't in every scene cause he'd be looking at a Supporting Oscar nom. He's that good. But GRINDHOUSE is still my proto-favorite film of the year despite its flaws.

comment #7

BNick says ...

Death Proof wasn't totally a Grindhouse film, because those talky moments were really Tarantino peeking through a bit. I'm not sure which style I prefer, but the mix didn't really work for me.

Don't start out with a premise of a guy who crashes into cars full of attractive women and then cut to a 15-minute scene in a diner with four different girls chatting about nothing.

comment #8

MadCrazyMovieHouse says ...

I had a great time with Grindhouse. It was a lot of fun, and even if I would have hated it, at least I got two movies for the price of one. That said, I really wish Grindhouse proper would come out on DVD. Planet Terror wasn't very good in the first place, and it loses basically all value outside the double feature. And while Death Proof is still a lot of fun on its own, the shorter version is better.

Let's face it, Jeff. Tarantino is a jerk-off filmmaker. Even just from a script perspective, he has From Dusk til Dawn, Kill Bill, Death Proof, maybe even Natural Born Killers was this way before Oliver Stone changed it... half the man's filmography is dedicated to these grindhouse/drive-in kind of pictures. And when you consider the fact that his last real movie, Jackie Brown, was ten years ago, it seems that the jerk-off is here to stay. C'est la vie. I guess if he's going to keep doing this, the best we can hope for is high quality masturbation.

comment #9

MadCrazyMovieHouse says ...

I had a great time with Grindhouse. It was a lot of fun, and even if I would have hated it, at least I got two movies for the price of one. That said, I really wish Grindhouse proper would come out on DVD. Planet Terror wasn't very good in the first place, and it loses basically all value outside the double feature. And while Death Proof is still a lot of fun on its own, the shorter version is better.

Let's face it, Jeff. Tarantino is a jerk-off filmmaker. Even just from a script perspective, he has From Dusk til Dawn, Kill Bill, Death Proof, maybe even Natural Born Killers was this way before Oliver Stone changed it... half the man's filmography is dedicated to these grindhouse/drive-in kind of pictures. And when you consider the fact that his last real movie, Jackie Brown, was ten years ago, it seems that the jerk-off is here to stay. C'est la vie. I guess if he's going to keep doing this, the best we can hope for is high quality masturbation.

comment #10

Josh Massey says ...

I'm still irritated at the lack of a true Grindhouse DVD. I missed it in theaters - mostly because I prefer my three-hour wankfests on the small screen. And now I have to wait a few years until Harvey wants to drain a few more dimes out of it to get the theatrical cut.

Oh, and Disturbia actually wasn't that bad.

comment #11

giantman says ...

You nailed it on this one Jeff, it is sad to see such potential lost to whatever it is that lost it. I won't pretend to know the reasons, but the result is easy enough for everyone to see. When you're given the keys to the kingdom and the creative freedom to go for it, you can't screw that up. Excuse me, you shouldn't screw that up.

And don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the heck out of Grindhouse, for what it was. But it could have been so much more and you could feel it brewing underneath the surface the entire running time.

Also, I still say they got the movies backwards. Death Proof would have played so much better as the first movie, followed by Planet Terror.

comment #12

Mark says ...

The stuntman dialogue of the 1st half nowhere near makes up for the stuntwomen dialogue of the 2nd half. If Russell could only have shut them up for eternity instead, the audience would have had much more joy.

comment #13

JD says ...

Creatively, I thought Grindhouse was pretty much a triumph across the board. The problem is that it primarily appealed to movie geeks 25 and up. It's a sad fact that movie geeks under the age of 25 are more a product of video games and Jerry Bruckheimer than truly cinematic film geek forces like John Carpenter, Joe Dante, and George A. Romero. It's a depressing generational shift.

comment #14

JaySmire says ...

Grindhouse made in theaters about as much as one could hope for being grindhouse films. The problem was they spent $70 million on it. $70 million? Are they insane? How about $2 million? Not only would that have been in today's market value tradition of a grindhouse film, but it would have lowered those production values right down to grindhouse level. Instead of talking about a 3-hour, over blown budget flop, people would have been raving about a low-budget 3-hour fun fest. It would have played midnight circuits for months. And Easter weekend? Who were the ad wizards behind that one? This was a dog-day August or Halloween October weekend release if there ever was one. That being said--I feel lucky enough to have seen the complete package in the theater. I saw each film separately on DVD and it just wasn't the same. And I felt Death Proof was better shorter, not with the extra scenes added in. I blame Harvey for this one. He forgot to show his dogs who was pack leader and they peed all over him.

comment #15

Sean says ...

Even for Jeff, this is unusually contrarian. "I liked Grindhouse a whole lot, but here's why it actually wasn't any good, and [true shocker] it's because it was too short."

really, Jeff? Really?

comment #16

Rich S. says ...

You know what would have been even better? If they had had Roger Corman as a consultant. Or even Coppola or Scorsese, who got their starts with Corman. Make the movies like quickies and restrict your budget to $10 mil. or so. The real grindhouse movies are the ones they show on Saturday night on SciFi Channel and Cinemax.

That said, Kurt Russell brought the goods in Death Proof, as he always does. I really hope Tarantino includes him in Inglorious Bastards (if it ever gets made).

comment #17

Sean says ...

"Death Proof wasn't totally a Grindhouse film, because those talky moments were really Tarantino peeking through a bit. I'm not sure which style I prefer, but the mix didn't really work for me."

Have you ever seen 'Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things'? Or 'Gator Bait'? Grindhouse movies are generally 90% or more extraneous filler dialogue.

When I was watching 'Death Proof', something clicked with me about Tarantino, and suddenly, it all made sense. This is a bit long, but here goes...

First, you have to posit that, despite some people's claims, Spielberg, Tarantino, guys like this are not "trying" to be popular. Spielberg makes the movies he wants to make the way he wants to make them -- his tastes are directly in line with what is popular.

In the same way, the things that Tarantino likes, the things which inspire him, they are never what is popular. (But his sense of cinema can, at times, make them so.) He really, really loves these shitty exploitation movies where most of the movie is filled with dialogue which doesn't have anything to do with the action (frequently it seems at odds with the characters as well).

And, if you remove the word "shitty", that's exactly the kind of movie Tarantino makes.

So the reason that those talky moments seem so Tarantino is that Tarantino's whole style of lengthy asides and contradictory dialogue (example: tough gangsters discussing the intricacies of Madonna) is directly derived from that kind of movie. It's just that this is the first time he has directly made a movie like this.

Note: Unlike DZ, these are not accusations, as I think Tarantino is incredibly talented. But everything he does is derived from something he loved either in specific movies or in general.

comment #18

Dave says ...

RE: Death Proof, man, I remember when you loved that movie.

Can I ask a serious question, Jeff? Maybe a request? I'd love it if you could put together a column, perhaps even a dreaded list, of all the movies that you have seen that have *improved* with age. You can limit it to 2007, or expand it to include as many years as you want. Seriously, just write off the cuff about films that you liked at first, but now love, because you found something more in them the more you watched them.

I'd pay to read that column, Jeff. Because I think you're incapable of writing it, for you are far too cynical about movies to ever revisit your old opinions in any way except to water them down and trash what you once appreciated so much.

I mean, c'mon-- you WRITE for a living, Jeff. We read your archives. We know what you thought about these movies. About how much you loved King Kong, how much you loved Superman Returns, how much you loved Death Proof. Yet, you're always willing to leave a wiggle word or two in there in order to bring down your opinion later on in case that opinion is no longer popular with the masses.

You hated Atonement before it opened. You then reversed course and loved it once you saw it. Now, you belittle it again, because it doesn't have heat.

You were blown away by There Will Be Blood. But you left your little caveat in there about finding it "diseased," and now what do you talk about? Nothing but that one comment-- forgetting everything else you loved and admired about the work.

You raved so much about Jesse James I thought you were the publicist. Now, it doesn't even make your best list.

You stuck by Zodiac-- fantastic.

That's *one*.

comment #19

Sean says ...

"c'mon, really guys? the car chase in Death Proof was good, but not the best of the decade."

Action man - I'm curious what stands out to you as better. The only one I can think of is the ridiculously amazing car chase in 'Terminator 3', and I have noticed that most movie geeks tend to ignore that one because it's 'Terminator 3'.

I really can't think of many car chases in the past decade; I think 'Death Proof' could take it by default (though I'd go with 'T3' myself).

comment #20

Gaydos says ...

Jeff's next entry will be a lament for the closing of the Celine Dion show in Vegas, pointing out that her music is crap, but if she had Dylan writing, Phil Spector as her producer and the Beatles and Stones as back-up musicians, it could have been the greatest show ever.

comment #21

Rich S. says ...

You'll have to forgive Jeffrey if he doesn't post anything for the next hour or two. He's down at the pub having a celebratory drink.

Jackson and New Line buried the hatchet and have announced that The Hobbit is going into production "immediately," without a script.

Jeffrey just got posting material for the next three years.

comment #22

Sean says ...

Rich - Too bad Spielberg isn't producing it; that would cover him for a decade.

comment #23

Chicago48 says ...

I didn't see it...I wanted to...but after I found out it was 4 F***ING HOURS LONG, I said no way. I can understand and empathize w/ Tarantino's retro strategy, but the general public cannot sit through 4 hours of movie. They should have marketed this better. Maybe released Death Proof one month and then Grindhouse the following month...with a teaser at the end of Death Proof that more was to come.
I love love Tarantino, but he's gotten to the point where he's a niche director, with a few loyal followers. And his movies become classic cult hits on cable.

comment #24

JaySmire says ...

The first time I even heard about the movie "Juno" was from Jeff. His enthusiasm for it early on is what got me excited about it. Now that it has come out and others really like it and are excited about it too, it feels as if it is on the Jeff trash list.

It's funny about those "year end lists". I'm happy if three or four films I thought were the best of the year made other people's lists. But Jeff doesn't seem to be happy unless it is a 10 for 10 with Zodiac leading the pack. Now films like Juno seem to be poison because they have a chance at getting an Academy Award nomination. I don't know what the big deal about the Academy Awards is anyway. They usually only nominate one film a year that I feel deserved it and it's been about 14 years since the last time a Best Picture winner was named that matched my Best Picture choice.

comment #25

actionman says ...

Action man - I'm curious what stands out to you as better. The only one I can think of is the ridiculously amazing car chase in 'Terminator 3', and I have noticed that most movie geeks tend to ignore that one because it's 'Terminator 3'

I loved the car/crane chase in T3, a generally underrated film if there ever was one. It was short, to the point, and loaded with amazing action sequences. The blending of physical effects and CGI was excellent as I recall. Mostow delivered a great action movie, that while not as epic in scope as T2, was still more fun than it had any right to be. Cautiously (very cautiously) optimistic about T4, if only because of Bale's involvement.

The car chase that Bay executed in Bad Boys 2 was fucking phenomenal. Truly outstanding. Almost all of it was real, taking place during the day, on a major Miami freeway. It helps having been there to see that one being filmed, but damn it's incredible to watch over and over again on a great tv and sound system. In fact, say what you want about that film, but it's still one of the ultimate R-rated action flicks ever.

The chase in the Island with the jet-bike and the train wheels, while derivitive of Bad Boys 2, was pretty explosive.

The car chase in We Own the Night, shot entirely from inside of Joaquin Phoenix's car--in the rain--was infinitely superior to Tarantino's crash 'em derby in Deathproof. What James Gray did with sound design alone in that chase was truly spectacular.

And oh, I'm sorry, both the chases in Bourne Supremacy (Berlin) and Bourne Ultimatum (NYC) are fucking stellar. No hints of CGI, real locations, amazing moves.

And while not in part of this decade, what Frankenheimer did in Ronin still stands as some of the premiere car chases ever put on film.

I could go on and on and on with this particular...

Tarantino's car chases/mayhem in Deathproof were easily the highlights of the film, but I just wasn't wowed by it as much as others.

comment #26

D.Z. says ...

p. Vice: "Maybe he was born to make only Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, and Jackie Brown, and only those three movies."

Change that to "remake obscure movies and call them 'homages' to fool the rubes", and I will agree.

actionman: "That film, along with Beowulf, were the two biggest let downs for the year for me."

I thought Beowulf was more passable than Death Proof, but I will admit that the added romantic subplots dragged down the main story. Gaiman is a decent writer when it comes to graphic novels, but he[not to mention Whedon] needs to realize that writing for the big screen requires being able to appeal to people who don't read fan fiction.

BNick: "Don't start out with a premise of a guy who crashes into cars full of attractive women and then cut to a 15-minute scene in a diner with four different girls chatting about nothing."

Exactly. It seems like he was trying to make a different movie, but the car porn was just included to sell it.

JD: "It's a sad fact that movie geeks under the age of 25 are more a product of video games and Jerry Bruckheimer than truly cinematic film geek forces like John Carpenter, Joe Dante, and George A. Romero."

You do realize that Kill Bill was almost a game, too, right? And that RD actually did get made into a game. And that Romero originally wrote the screenplay for the Resident Evil game.

Sean: "Have you ever seen 'Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things'? Or 'Gator Bait'? Grindhouse movies are generally 90% or more extraneous filler dialogue"

Yes, but the dialogue still has to be believable.

comment #27

actionman says ...

And I should point out that I am not happy to report that I wasn't blown away by the whole Grindhouse thing...I am a huge fan of ALL of Tarantino's previous work and have had a lot of fun with Rodriguez's stuff, especially Sin City and Depserado.

comment #28

Geoff says ...

I really enjoyed the experience, but I agree with Wells. Russell is just too cool for school. He's always been cool. And Tarantino only gave us a snippet of it.

comment #29

Dirty Harry says ...

The car chase was too hyper-choreographed for my taste. I never believed a minute of it and found it the most boring part of the entire boring affair.

But I agree that Russell was the greatest thing in that three-hour masturbatory session. But when isn't he?

After one magnificent cinematic achievement after another, Tarantino earned a slip and gets enormous credit for striving -- unfortunately, I think he predicted magic in the editing room and should've strove harder for it in the script stage.

Whatever he does next I'll be first in line for. A Tarantino film is something rarer and rarer anymore at the movies: a true event.

comment #30

Sean says ...

AM - that's a pretty good list. Quick response:

'The Island' - I remember the scene; it comes too late to save my interest in the movie, but I perked up during that scene, and remember thinking there was more life in that one scene than all of the third 'Star Wars' prequel (which was also out that summer).

'Bad Boys 2' didn't do anything for me, but I'm not going to argue against it. I'll add that your description of it reminded me that the second 'Matrix' movie was within the last decade, and that car chase *did* wow me [both of these are movies I saw on TV, not theatrically, and, thus, I grant that much of their power was lost].

Didn't see 'We Own the Night', but your description intrigues me.

I didn't see the third 'Bourne' because I disliked the second, and one of my absolutely least favorite scenes in it was the car chase. Too much blurry-cam. But no point in arguing. I do acknowledge it didn't seem CGI.

I would agree with 'Ronin', but I was taking decade (loosely) to mean "the 2000's", not "the last ten years".

And I totally agree with you on 'T3'. It's stupid, but it's so much fun.

comment #31

Sean says ...

"Sean: "Have you ever seen 'Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things'? Or 'Gator Bait'? Grindhouse movies are generally 90% or more extraneous filler dialogue"

Yes, but the dialogue still has to be believable. "

DZ - this seems especially hypocritical, given that nonsensical dialogue is the cornerstone of every post you have ever made 'round these parts.

comment #32

Sean says ...

Harry - I would actually say that, from the beginning, Tarantino has always been too in love with his own dialogue to know how to cut it down. [It has always stood out to me that there is a major sequence of 'Reservoir Dogs' cut out of the final product, but which still gets referred to, and that several of the little cuts made in 'Pulp Fiction' are also still referred to in dialogue, almost as if he wants to call attention to the fact that somebody said his movie had to be a certain length so that he begrudgingly cut a few words out, but he wants to make sure that you know that there was stuff cut... but, at the same time, all the best stuff in 'Kill Bill' is the stuff which ordinarily would be cut to make it down to just one movie.]

But I agree that this especially felt like a first draft.

comment #33

Howlingman says ...

Sean: "I would agree with 'Ronin', but I was taking decade (loosely) to mean "the 2000's", not "the last ten years".

Then don't forget "Ambush," the Frankenheimer-helmed segment of BMW's "THE HIRE" series starring Clive Owen, a van, and a shitload of automatic gunfire. Still my favorite car chase of the last decade and that includes 1997.

comment #34

Sean says ...

Howlingman - if we were compiling an official list, I would probably discount that, because it's not a movie, and it's not fair to compare something which is designed to just be a car chase with movies which have to justify the car chase through story, etc...

[I can't figure out a way to make this very dry joke obvious without ruining it. And if I don't point out it's a joke, somebody else will think I'm serious and make the point about 'Death Proof' being just that.]

comment #35

swordandpen says ...

I didn't think Grindhouse was bad, but just forgettable, as if they were much too successful at making throwaway exploitation flicks. I think Tarantino really needs to grow up as a filmmaker and a person (Rodriguez is pretty hopeless at this point).

Jackie Brown was, by far, his best movie. Since then, I've been watching directors like Fincher and PTA surpass him in ambition and filmmaking.

comment #36

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Dave: So saying "there's an art to making an agreeable waste of time -- a film that totally skims the surface and brings absolutely nothing to the table of any consequence, but at the same time one that people half-enjoy because it has some nice moves and (this is essential) is 100% committed to its sense of swagger and is head-over-heels in love with itself because of this" is a putdown of "Death Proof"? And saying that I "love, love, love the Suntman Mike dialogue in the barroom in the first half of this thing" is a put-down? What's WRONG with you? As to your other claims about my changing course and amending earlier opinons, let me tell you something about life & love, which is that ALL LOVE IS SUBJECT TO WHIM & CHANGE, except for the love you feel for your dog or your cat. Nothing is constant. All notions of support, admiration, love & allegiance are floating propositions -- kept afloat by warm air, stated beliefs and good, well-meaning vibes, but THEY'RE NOT BUILT UPON ROCK. Everything fades, increases, loses or gains steam. The train keeps moving. Nothing is set in stone. The love you feel for your girlfriend is here today but it may be a slightly different thing tomorrow, and a dead issue a month from now. Everything is constantly up for review, re-review & negotiation. Get used to it, pally...the world is not neat or clean or ordered. It is a wild and unruly place. NOTHING is dependable, NOTHING is for certain...there is no solid ground ANYWHERE except for the love your dog or your cat has for you...and I wouldn't trust the cat if I were you. Cats are like people that way. Got it? Deal with it. I will always love hundreds of certain films, but I can say the word "diseased" as many times as I want in discussing "There Will be Blood" and if you don't like it, TOUGH SHIT!

comment #37

Josh Massey says ...

Terminator 3 and Bad Boys 2 are the best auto chases I've ever seen, including Ronin, Bullitt and whatever others that are always thrown into the conversation.

comment #38

berg says ...

DEATHPROOF will be on my top ten list, not that that is a barometer of anything that matters; yes QT writes like O'Neill, and the full version of DP never loses interest with repeat viewings

comment #39

Sean says ...

Wow, Jeff, I guess somebody touched on a nerve.

Just for the record, the parts which read like putdowns:

titanically miscalculated
just about sank the Weinstein Co.
a wank and a tank
"There should at least be a a little retro affection"
"brings absolutely nothing to the table of any consequence"
"people half-enjoy"
dopey

Plus, I assume the part where you say it was about an idea is satirical, right?

comment #40

Sean says ...

"As to your other claims about my changing course and amending earlier opinons, let me tell you something about life & love, which is that ALL LOVE IS SUBJECT TO WHIM & CHANGE, except for the love you feel for your dog or your cat. Nothing is constant."

You know, I've been wondering why Jeff's son doesn't write for this blog anymore...

comment #41

Sean says ...

By the way, Dave, that would be a "no". He can't do that, because that would involve committing to liking a movie, and Jeff is too cynical to do that more than once a year.

comment #42

actionman says ...

"ALL LOVE IS SUBJECT TO WHIM & CHANGE, except for the love you feel for your dog or your cat. Nothing is constant"

Wells--this is awesome...so true...so funny.

comment #43

giantman says ...

Gotta keep an eye on those cats man, they are up to something.

comment #44

Rich S. says ...

Today on his website, in the "Overlooked DVD" section, Roger Ebert posts in rather timely fashion his original review of Re-Animator.

In the review, he reproduces this quote from Pauline Kael (which I've also heard paraphrased by Stephen King): "The movies are so rarely great art, that if we can't appreciate great trash, there is little reason for us to go."

Sums it up nicely, yes?

comment #45

rocco says ...

Ugh, here I go defending Jeff again...not that he wants or appreciates it, I'm sure...but jesus, who among us doesn't change our tastes regularly? Do you still dress the same as you did even two years ago? Still drink the same beer as you did in college? Still cut your hair the same way? The same wine as last month? Of course not...you think you came up with those changes entirely on your own? Like Jeff my tastes are constantly changing and evolving and things I experience today tend to affect my views of past experiences. Movies are no different...Jeff's a (pseudo) intellectual and reads and absorbs others opinions...and it's generally these educated opinions that influence us...the FIRST thing I do after watching a movie is go home and read opinions that very often enhance or detract from the film in ways that couldn't happen based on my singular experience...

Being firm and resolute in a feeling or opinion seems like a sheltering mechanism to me...this is THE WAY the world works...everything from fashion to your favorite varietal (come on, you KNOW you started drinking Pinot Noir shortly after 'Sideways) is influenced by others...to ignore those influences and their affect on you is lazy, just lazy.

On a side note...I'm a dog person, myself...my lab is turning 9 and starting to get a few lumps and bumps...I may have to take a few weeks off when he goes...seriously. I know that's silly and not very manly, but damn if I don't love that animal...

comment #46

rocco says ...

...and yes I know the difference between affect and effect...casualty of haste.

comment #47

DavidF says ...

The Death Proof car chase was damned fun but it still bugged me they didn't slam on the brakes, let Zoe Bell get off and THEN go at Kurt Russell. They went on for an awful long time with her stuck out there unneccesarily.

Others have cited some great recent car chases-Yeah, T3 is cool, if only because of that insane truck. Personally, I love the ol Blues Brothers which is a COMEDY with TWO epic chases.

comment #48

Geoff says ...

I seriously get what he's saying about cats.

comment #49

jeffmcm says ...

The thread is kind of exhausted but I have to add two things:
I love, love, love Death Proof. It was just about the most fun I had at movies all year.
And Daniel Zelter is a preening, self-absorbed ass who enjoys public masturbation in the form of blogs like this.

comment #50

Craig Kennedy says ...

Didn't like Planet Terror, loved Death Proof, but strangely after seeing Death Proof by itself in both the theatrical and extended DVD versions, I have to say I enjoyed the whole experience of having them together better overall.

Death Proof has its flaws that have been picked apart over and over every since, but Grindhouse itself was one of the most purely enjoyable evenings at the movies in 2007.

comment #51

Sean says ...

"Movies are no different"

Actually, del, movies are quite different from what you're talking about.

You say "Do you still dress the same as you did two years ago?" That's not a valid comparison. Yes, your taste has changed in two years, but Jeff is not being criticized for the fact that his opinion changes (over the course of a month). He's being criticized for the 1984 style in which he changes his opinion. It's the fact that he doesn't acknowledge that his opinion is changing, or can change.

Like when he criticizes 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' and has to throw in, "Of course, I said this 25 years ago when it came out". The way, as Dave points out, he always includes major criticisms of any movie he likes, so that if people start to not like it, he can seize on those things.

It's Jeff repeatedly saying, even now, that 'Assassantion of Jesse James' is among the best movies of the year, but not including it on his actual list of the best movies of the year.

He tries to have it too many ways. '3:10 to Yuma' was great, until it started under-performing, at which time he posts an E-mail he sent to the director where he criticizes several major problems with the movie.

We could also debate which is more pure, your actual viewing of the movie complete with emotional response, or the subsequent intellectual dissection of the movie... but then I'd feel like a real on-line dork.

comment #52

Movie fan09 says ...

I love that Jeff used the word 'pally.'

that and 'shenanigans' from Juno are oldies but goodies.

comment #53

jeffmcm says ...

Jeff gets his writing style from Jimmy Breslin and old WB gangster pictures.

comment #54

Stephe96 says ...

"Death Proof" was good but it could have been great. Here's what I would have changed:

-First hour, pretty much the same...BUT I would've had Lapdance girl survive the first crash with absolutely no memory of what happened that night.

-THEN Stuntman Mike tracks her down a year or two later and finds her out again with her new friends, the stuntgirls. Mike realizes that Lapdance girl's memory could possibly come back, so he starts cozying up to her in the bar and talking about the moment they had that first night, and how she was thinking of leaving the bar with him. For proof, Stuntman Mike shows her his book with her name and info listed in it. Lapdance Girl feels guilty because it was her drunk friends who crashed into HIM. All this happens while the Stuntgirls and Mike are sharing stories of Hollywood and stuntwork, etc.

-Lapdance Girl decides to leave with Mike and GETS INTO THE DEATHPROOF CAR!!! She's trapped, and now Stuntman Mike decides to wait until her friends leave the bar so he can hunt them down as well.

-The Stuntgirls leave and Mike attacks; they realize their friend is trapped so they decide to RESCUE HER. This is why Zoe Bell is out on that hood, as she and the driver attempt a high-speed rescue. (Why not use the deathproof car concept again?)

-The insane rescue is successful and now the hunted turn into the hunters....and the rest of the movie plays out the same way, except now Lapdance Girl takes the place of the Rosario Dawson character.

-Stuntman Mike is killed. Fade Out. The End.

This is just my 2 cents, obviously, but I think the movie would have been much better had the story followed at least one of the characters from the first half. You could hear the audience's attention begin to fade once Tarantino hit the reset button halfway through the flick.

For what it's worth...

comment #55

bluefugue says ...

Tarantino is what he is and does what he does, but within those bounds I think Kill Bill Vol.2 is a worthy successor to the Res Dogs/Pulp/Jackie Brown trio. It contained some great dialogue and the final encounter between Uma Thurman and the kung fu guy was wonderfully laid out -- masterful control of tone & pacing. That might be my favorite film from the year in which it came out. Unless it came out in 2004, in which case my favorite film would be the Incredibles.

comment #56

Sean says ...

Stephe - Tarantino wasn't interested in making that movie you're talking about. He did a Q&A, which I have read on-line, and it's really amazing how much thought he actually put into the structure (it's a testament, I think, that it doesn't show and seems so haphazard).

I'll try and find the link but, in the meantime, here are two things to chew over:

- He specifically chose to kill all of the girls because he wanted it to be an unpredictable movie, and he wanted to convince the audience that one or all of these girls were going to be the main character before they ALL died, so that, for the rest of the movie, you could genuinely believe Mike might kill some or all of these other girls [specifically, he pointed out that, structurally, the movie could be building to Zoe Bell dying just as easily as her living].

- He specifically designed the chase so that first they are being chased and then second they are doing the chasing, because (this is according to him, based on a lot of consideration of the best car chases of all time) people get more invested in chases when the hero is the one doing the chasing, for whatever reason.

comment #57

Sean says ...

Here, I found the link (this is the first part, which links to the next; three total).

http://thunderpeel2001.blogspot.com/2007/09/tarantino-death-proof-q-part-1.html

comment #58

BurmaShave says ...

Stuntman Mike's turning into a crying bitch-baby was perhaps my favorite character moment of the year, the culmination of a brave and bold turn by Russell.

comment #59

D.Z. says ...

del: Good luck to your dog.

blue: What kung fu? All they did was block.

comment #60

Sean says ...

moron: you are so aggressively anti-Tarantino that you have to willfully misinterpret a reference to David Carradine just so you can criticize the martial artistry in Tarantino's movie.

He said "that kung fu guy". As in, the guy from the television show kung fu.

comment #61

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Too bad that PLANET TERROR is so dreadful.

Too bad he didn't make MACHETE instead.

comment #62

Spicer says ...

I re-watched both Planet Terror and Death Proof when they appeared on DVD this fall, and I was really surprised at how much they both suffered when removed from the whole Grindhouse conceit. The Thanksgiving trailer was by far the highlight of the double feature. The Grindhouse experience was a blast. Death Proof is obviously the better of the 2 films and it held up a lot more by itself.

comment #63

D.Z. says ...

Sean: "you are so aggressively anti-Tarantino that you have to willfully misinterpret a reference to David Carradine just so you can criticize the martial artistry in Tarantino's movie."

True, but I'm still right about the action not delivering.

Mgmax: I'm still waiting for the home video spin-off myself.

comment #64

guideman says ...

can't figure out a way to make this very dry joke obvious without ruining it. And if I don't point out it's a joke, somebody else will think I'm serious and make the point about 'Death Proof' being just that.
Do you guys find him our at http://www.richromances.com?

comment #65

jeffmcm says ...

"True, but I'm still right about the action not delivering"

No you're not. You need to understand that other people are allowed to have opinions besides yourself and that you could learn something from listening to them.

"Mgmax: I'm still waiting for the home video spin-off myself."

No you're not. You hate these movies, like 99% of everything you comment on.

comment #66

D.Z. says ...

jeff: No, I actually liked the Rodriguez stuff.

comment #67

jeffmcm says ...

Hard to believe, since you're well-established as intellectually dishonest and fundamentally untrustworthy.

comment #68

DarthCorleone says ...

Thank you, Mr. Wells. I must admit that I find your changes in film adoration mystifying at times, but that was an elegant and outrageously humorous defense.

And it really made me miss my dog. :- (

P.S. Whether your love for There Will Be Blood perseveres or not, it's probably my number one film for the year, and I think "diseased" is the perfect word.

comment #69

Sean says ...

"True, but I'm still right about the action not delivering."

You're correct that it wasn't an action-based scene. Kudos for noticing. Everybody who has ever seen the movie also noticed that, surprisingly, that scene was not an action-based scene. Only you seem to be judging this as a negative about the movie.

I think it's pretty funny that you keep going to Tarantino movies. You know what I do when I don't like a filmmaker? I go see all of his movies and obsessively talk about them all the time. It makes much more sense than not seeing the movies which you don't like.

comment #70

D.Z. says ...

Sean: "Everybody who has ever seen the movie also noticed that, surprisingly, that scene was not an action-based scene. Only you seem to be judging this as a negative about the movie."

I'm judging it as a negative, because the ads proclaimed I was going to get an action-filled finale.

"I think it's pretty funny that you keep going to Tarantino movies. You know what I do when I don't like a filmmaker? I go see all of his movies and obsessively talk about them all the time."

Hey, if Jeff can endure 30 minutes of a Michael Bay movie, I can try to sit through Quentin's school plays. It builds character.

comment #71

Lisha says ...

How sweety they are!Last week I get more secret infornation about them at "RichLoving.com" But I can not sure it is ture.