PDA

View Full Version : Grindhouse


Debaser
17-05-2007, 13:34:10
Anyone seen it yet?

So far I've only watched the Robert Rodriguiez part, but it is absolutely superb, like a proper shit early 80s film. I actually can't wait to watch the rest of it. The fake trailers are all excellent too.

And fan of slightly shoddy Dawn of the Dead type films is missing out if they haven't seen this yet.

MOBIUS
17-05-2007, 20:58:03
Looking forward to it.

Saw 28 Weeks yesterday, which I thought was fairly average as well as being 110% predictable...

King_Ghidra
18-05-2007, 15:31:37
I haven't seen the film but it absolutely belly-flopped in america.

Opinion seems to be very much divided, some people love it, some people think it's gash. Personally it amuses me to see tarantino fail because i think everything he's done since pulp fiction is bollocks. Anyway, the chat about it is funny to stand back and watch - The Guardian's varous blogs recounting the progress of film from first discussion to release have been either loving or loathing, depending on the author.

e.g. http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/film/2007/05/control_and_grindhouse_the_tal.html

Debaser
19-05-2007, 06:52:33
Yeah, they're considering re-releasing the two films seperately. People were walking out after the first film unaware there was a second apparently.

I can see why people loath it, it's very much an indulgant geeky fanboy tribute to what is a ultimately a pretty geeky and unwatchable (if you don't 'get' it) genre anyway, but if you have fond memories of watching all those Killer Clowns/Nostril Picker type films in Nil's back room with a massive spliff and tumbler of whisky then it's pretty much the best thing ever.

And I disagree that all QT post Pulp Fiction output is bollocks, Jackie Brown is by far and away his best film, utterly superb in every way. Kill Bill was wank though, not even just too long, too long and style over substance gash.

Fergus & The Brazen Car
19-05-2007, 09:11:29
I didn't enjoy 'Pulp Fiction'- I thought it was cliched and predictable.

I did enjoy 'Jackie Brown', but thought it could have benefited from much tighter editing, and that the soundtrack was obtrusive. It really was a case of 'Oh look- he's seen 'Across 110th Street'- how astute of him to reference it on the soundtrack and thus connect with the Blaxploitation films he's rippi- sorry, making an homage to.

As for 'Grindhouse'- from what I can see of its depiction of the treatment of women even if Tarantino is going to use the 'I'm being post-modernly ironic' get out clause, I suspect it's much the same emotionally retarded stuff one expects from a video fanboy geek who is still having growing pains.

King_Ghidra
21-05-2007, 09:34:15
jackie brown was good for two things only - pam grier and the bondsman chap's acting.

samuel l jackson = shit, robert de niro = why? story = meh.

Debaser
21-05-2007, 09:59:22
Well I liked it. *sulks*

Samuel L Jackson does = shit though.

Funko
21-05-2007, 10:00:57
Robert De Niro's part is even more disappointing if you've read the book where it's actually a really interesting character.

I enjoyed the film though. Mind you, I enjoyed Kill Bill so :nervous:

novacane
21-05-2007, 10:20:41
for my two cents, I thought Jackie Brown was OK. Pulp Fiction better.

I agree that L Jackson was decidedly ordinary in Jackie Brown. De Niro's was a nice cameo I thought. Never intended to steal the show. More to play L Jackson's bungling, past-it, pothead old friend and reluctant accomplice. Probably my favourite scene of the movie was De Niro and Fonda trying to find the car after the swap at the mall.

"Is it this aisle Louissss, is it this aisle Louissssssssssssssss"

...and he just loses it and pops her.

As for Pulp Fiction, I think its suffered from its own popularity in some respects and it almost begins to look like a parody of itself when watched again. The quotable lines, the posters in student living rooms and so on. I think calling it "cliched and predictable" is all too easy now. I don't think that was the case at the time.

King_Ghidra
21-05-2007, 10:24:15
well i don't really think kill bill is irredeemable, i thought bits of it were spot-on, but as a whole, didn't like it.

i don't find pulp fiction cliched or predictable. it was clearly heavily referential, and you might argue it created some cliches of 'cool' film since, but what did it do that was already cliched? and what was predictable?

King_Ghidra
21-05-2007, 10:25:12
x-posting with novacane. i think we're making the same point about PF

Funko
21-05-2007, 10:33:09
I do agree that Kill Bill was about 1.5 hours too long, they could have cut out a lot of the shit and made it 1 film instead of a 2 parter. It was very self indulgent.

Reservoir Dogs had stood the test of time last time I watched it.

novacane
21-05-2007, 10:36:22
Definitely. I can see why those comments might be made now, 13 years on, but taken in a 1994 context, I disagree.

I think its easy, retrospective, bashing and I don't like it one bit.

Fergus & The Brazen Car
21-05-2007, 10:42:05
Originally posted by novacane
for my two cents, I thought Jackie Brown was OK. Pulp Fiction better.

I think calling it "cliched and predictable" is all too easy now. I don't think that was the case at the time.


I did- I knew, just knew, that Ving Rhames would swear Bruce Willis to secrecy over the anal rape and let him off as a consequence.

And, lo, it came to pass...

Like much of Tarantino's work I find it's mostly surface, with little or no depth. And he still needs a good editor.

novacane
21-05-2007, 10:44:01
I watched Kill Bill vol. 1 on TV a week or so back, and I was bored. (Self-)Indulgent is the most fitting description.

I'm quite sure Vol. 2 was the last film I saw at the movie house. Only because I had seen Vol. 1.

novacane
21-05-2007, 10:57:35
But Fergus, so much happened before and after that scene. In an unpredictable order. I don't really buy it.

I agree with your last point that there is maybe a lack of depth (which is OK sometimes) and the editor comment moreso with post-Pulp Fiction work.

Nills Lagerbaak
22-05-2007, 16:28:28
My mate reckons it's one of those films where they spen shite loads on trying to make it b-movie. Annoying.

Still he says there is an awesome bit where a woman has her leg chopped off and replaced witha machine gun...

Debaser
22-05-2007, 18:29:58
Well they do spend loads on trying to make it look like a b-movie, but it's so well done and obviously from a place of love. Try it, I reckon you'll approve.

And yes, her false leg gradually get replaced by bigger and bigger guns as the film progresses.

King_Ghidra
23-05-2007, 11:46:41
http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,2085892,00.html