Zombies for Resurrection Day! Trash, slash and sexploitation, baby!

[tiggymalvern]

We went to see Grindhouse this afternoon with king_chiron and darthhellokitty - well, what could possibly be more appropriate for your Easter entertainment? XD Tarantino and my beloved Rodriguez pastiching cheap 70s mass murder flicks, it had to be done!

The two-films-in-one have had generally good reviews, but nobody can agree on which half works better. Everyone agrees the overall package is too long, but there's nothing close to a consensus on what to cut. Some people love Tarantino's completely plot-pointless, rambling dialogue about the minutiae of his characters' lives, others say what the hell's he holding up the action for? (I fall in with the former.) No real spoilers here, just general chat.

For myself, there are things to love about both sections, and I don't think I'd pick one over the other - both films are doing the same thing, but have different approaches to it. Rodriguez has gone for the non-stop-action gore-fest of a zombie invasion, while Tarantino takes the slightly more psychological stalk-and-chase approach, at least initially. Rodriguez' film could never be considered slow in any part(!), and there are moments that literally made me laugh till I felt I couldn't breathe, but there are some too that just don't come off - I haven't found anyone yet who thinks the thing with the kid in the car works, the main reaction seems to be 'Huh?' I'd say too that his plot suffers from an over-abundance of psychopaths - it's not enough that the zombies are killing everyone in town, the people who aren't zombies have to be keen on a spot of murder too? This is one small town, how come it breeds quite so many weirdos?!

There's nothing in Tarantino's section to make me laugh that way, but the result overall is more consistent in tone. There are some genuinely creepy and thoughtful moments that are missing from Rodriguez' zombie slasher flick, but also big gaping plot holes that lowered my involvement in the final sequences. Rodriguez' film is so manically OTT that it just rides high speed over any minor irritations like plot-niggles - by taking itself more seriously, Tarantino's film asks the audience to take it more seriously too, and as such he can't get away with ignoring logic for the sake of a good action stunt.

Inevitably, a big part of the fun of Grindhouse is spotting the references, both to older films and to the directors' own works. Like the double feature, the other little add-on 'trailers' have mixed results - Thanksgiving is too obvious is to work as a whole, though there are a couple of witty lines.

Grindhouse has officially confirmed, if it was ever in doubt, that Rodriguez' mind is a very very sick place XD And Tarantino's foot fetish continues to get more obvious with every film!

Overall, if you're a fan of schlock-horror, it's gotta be done :-)

Comments

[king-chiron.livejournal.com]

My objection with Tarantino's rambling dialogue is that it didn't fit in with the whole theme. I mean, Grindhouse? Kids seeing a double-feature in the 1970s never would have stood for his lengthy bits of character building, or perhaps they would have just used it as an excuse to make out. Cut out about 20 minutes and his film would have been fine.

Interesting bits I found out after the movie - The babysitters are Rodriguez's nieces and Kiki stuntwoman in the second film was Lucy Lawless's stuntwoman and later Uma's for Kill Bill.

[tiggymalvern.livejournal.com]

My objection with Tarantino's rambling dialogue is that it didn't fit in with the whole theme.

Yes, that's the big problem with it. Rodriguez made a grindhouse feature, Tarantino made a Tarantino movie. Whether that's a good thing or not depends on your initial opinion of grindhouse, and I think that's where the main difference between critics comes in.

Ah, I was going to check up on the Zoe Bell background, but you've saved me the trouble :-)

[king-chiron.livejournal.com]

Apparently outside the US they're going to be shown as separate films, released a few months apart. That's really a shame, defeats the whole point of it I think.

[tiggymalvern.livejournal.com]

It sounds like all the big English-speaking countries are getting the double feature, but many non-English-speaking countries with no cultural exposure to the 'double feature' tradition will get two separate films. That strikes me as a great shame, and leaves me to wonder what those countries will make of the fake trailers, if they even get to see them.

[king-chiron.livejournal.com]

Err, that should be KiWi of course, not Kiki. :)

[fuzipenguin.livejournal.com]

:^) I highly enjoyed Grindhouse. I went with my husband and afterwards he just gave me a lot of weird looks, but whatever. He's not a fan of B movies, or even horror. Sometimes you just got to sit back and go with it.
Personally I think the OT dialogue was a bit much, especially two times running. I would have preferred more background on Mike's character, including his motivations. It felt like there was a story all it's own in there.
But overall, highly enjoyable. I don't think I ever like Rose McGowan before.

[tiggymalvern.livejournal.com]

Yes, some background/motivation on Mike would have been a big benefit, that seems to be a common opinion. Kurt Russell really made him work rather well despite it, but all we got in the way of a reason was that one throw-away line from the cop. I'd say either put the whole deal in, or put nothing in, but don't just try and get it out of the way like that!

[mistressrenet.livejournal.com]

I hope this will turn people away from the torture/snuff movies that have been passing for horror lately. I want fun with my carnage, dammit!

[tiggymalvern.livejournal.com]

Fun with the carnage is a Rodriguez speciality XD Tarantino's takes a little longer to deliver on that front, but it gets there in the end :-)