Seen: April 10th, 2007
Format: Theater
Rating: 9
Where do you start?
Like many, I anticipated Grindhouse for a while. I thought I understood the premise and expected it to be a bit contrived in some ways. In some ways, it was. But what I didn't expect was the attention to detail and the sheer love that went into the production.
Act I - The Setting
The whole idea of creating the Grindhouse feel to film generally works.
The Trailers are a gas. The film ideas vary from bad to atrocious. The trailers carry authentic feels. If I didn't know and recognize some actors and anachronisms, I might actually believe they were really trailers from this era. Little details form this realism. The fonts used, the copyright lines, the editing style and the music all add up. I'll admit that I did sneak out during the "Thanksgiving" trailer to hit the head, which is all a part of the Grindhouse experience, I'm sure.
Distressing the film works as well. It was novel at first, and drew attention to itself. Eventually though, it faded into the experience, with a few notable exceptions. The distressing seemed less prevalent in Death Proof, though I'll admit I was pretty far into that segment and may just have been tuning it out.
The lead ins for coming attractions and the main feature are ones I remember from my childhood. Their impact is startling. The missing reels did nothing for me. It's an interesting device, and helps keep the overall presentation to manageable length. I didn't have trouble following the films through each of their missing reels, but did feel that I'd rather have seen the complete segment. Maybe this is, again, an intended part of the experience.
Act II - Planet Terror
Roriguez's segment is exceptionally true to form. Planet Terror is pure 70's schlock horror. Some anachronisms aside, this film could have been made in the 70's.
The thing that's truly amazing is way Rodriguez has captured the feel in this film. The camera angels and moves, editing, scene pace, they combine to capture the actual style of the era. It's strange to watch, as it all seems so familiar but we know, and are reminded by anachronisms, that it's new. It's not just an homage, it's an actual 70's film made in 2006.
The actual meat of the film is authentic too. The plot is thin and disconnected. The dialogue is stilted and the performances naively dramatic and earnest. There are moments which surprise you, but all still runs true to form. It's a mixed bag of zombie horror, conspiracy, rekindled romance, apocalyptic deliverance and Alamo-style self sacrifice, all wrapped up in layer of sleaze.
The makeup effects are downright disgusting and made me cringe more than once. At times they're played for over-the-top comic effect. It all runs linearly, start to finish. It's never complicated, never cryptic. What you see is what you get, and there's a lot to see.
Ultimately, this segment was the less interesting for me. Once the novelty had worn thin, I grew a bit dis-interested.
But it stays true to the not-so-bitter end.
Act III - Death Proof
Unlike Planet Terror, Death Proof seems more an homage than a faithful recreation.
This is not to say that it doesn't have a similar, though distinct flavor. Costumes, acting, set decorations and camera angles all suggest the 70s. But the dialogue is much better and feels more contemporary. The acting is generally intentionally better. The actors don't "play" their characters as much here. The distressing of the film is still present, but is generally less obtrusive and even seems to fade out in the final act of the segment, letting it stand on its own.
Death Proof is a solid segment that could easily stand on its own, whereas Planet Terror would seem much more out of place outside this milieu. Tarantino has crafted a simple, straight-forward, but compelling story here. Things flow well and there are very unexpected turns as the film picks up pace and begins to become belligerent. There's nothing really over-the-top about the film, which contributes to its menace. It all feels a bit like Stephen King.
There could be some more exposition, more background about Mike. Again, the missing reel segment suggests this possibility. But that would be frosting, as the lines are clearly drawn, and there's no doubt who's on which side.
The whole segment, while an homage, has a distinct Tarantino feel, and that's a good thing.
Rating Grindhouse is difficult and I really can't recommend it for most. It'll be recognized for it's artistic merits for a long time. The content is not so much the point as the way it's presented, which will alienate the majority. Some parts are inspired genius, some are artful deception, but its all completely original.
In a recycled kind of way.
The Good: Fanboy mayhem
The Bad: Too much of a good thing
The Ugly: Pus flingin' zombies
No comments:
Post a Comment