Comments on: Grindhouse: Who Needs Chris Masterson?

By: michelle lee

michelle lee — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 23:27:31 +0000

I would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in publishing this article. I am hoping the same best work from you in the future as well. In fact your fanciful writing abilities has urged me to start my own blog now. Actually the blogging is spreading its wings rapidly. Your write up is a fine example of it.

By: J

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 19:52:10 +0000

It was filmed at the Omelettery.

By: Rafael Kayanan

Rafael Kayanan — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 15:11:02 +0000

…DON’T…

By: Jamie Coville

Jamie Coville — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 11:06:00 +0000

Rivkah: It could have been. I doubt the inside of Zedler mill was used for the restaurant. Inside the mill is probably a bunch of wood working tools all strung together so they could run via the river dam. I doubt there was room to set up a bar and tables. Especially the part where Cherry is sitting at a table by the window. That part may have been filmed at The Omelettry, it looked pretty modern.

By: Rivkah

Rivkah — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 03:33:00 +0000

Jamie: Wasn’t part of it shot at The Omelettry, too? I actually live right up the street from there and remember going by once and seeing these HUGE lights all set up in the middle of the night, half the road blocked off, and tons of people milling around . . . and it all being completely silent. It was creepy.

http://www.texasnationalpress.com/texlog/article.php?story=20070329160725817

By: Randall Kirby

Randall Kirby — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 01:18:21 +0000

The grindhouse preview on Spike TV showed clips from lap dance scene in Death Proof, and Stuntman Mike having a fascination with Jungle Julia’s feet.

So expect those missing reels to be found by the time the DVD is released.

By: DCMovieGirl

DCMovieGirl — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 01:12:17 +0000

“…Since when did femininity include hanging by a couple of belts on the hood of a car while it careens down the road at high speed?”

Since Zoe Bell, a woman, does that for a living why don’t you ask her? :-)

As for the first group of girls, we are meant to get to know them and care for them, in all their beauty and flaws.

We are supposed to want to crash to happen only to feel regret/disgust for it (that’s paraphrasing Mr. Tarentino, himself).

It’s not pointless interchangeable women, mutilated and murdered for our entertainment. It’s supposed to be provocative.

That it wasn’t for some, I think is more a failure of Tarentino’s dialogue-writing skills, in this instance.

Th second group do leave behind the “Hollywood airhead”, symbolically the simplistic character we used to seeing get used, raped, mutilated, and killed in these types of movies.

Instead we get three women who are despite their differences, strong and feminine in their own ways. They are the ones who do the (metaphorical) raping, beating, and killing.

And I must add, they were very likable to boot.

By: Anun

Anun — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 19:09:08 +0000

Thems who calls it “macho and masculine” are assigning gender roles where others may see none. Jackie Brown showed one kind of powerful woman, sure, but to say that’s the only template for a powerful woman to be is quite limiting. Aggression and a capacity for violence just aren’t male-only traits, and it’s detrimental to believe otherwise.

This just in: chicks like to punch things too!

By: MBunge

MBunge — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 18:34:31 +0000

DCMovieGirl – “(quoting me)“Feminine = victim. Meanwhile, being macho to the point of stupidity is empowering and admirable. Masculine = hero.”

What?

You are the one assigning those gender roles, not Quentin. On this point you are very wrong.

The power these women exude comes from their femininity. That includes heroics, courage, and their sexuality.

None of those qualities are mutually exclusive nor innately masculine or feminine.”

What’s the difference between the first group of girls who get killed and the group that lives, particularly the two who actually battle Stuntman Mike in the car chase? Since when did femininity include hanging by a couple of belts on the hood of a car while it careens down the road at high speed? Or how about chasing after a guy who almost killed you, like you’re living in a video game? That’s feminine? The fact that Tarantino specifically leaves out the most sterotypically feminine character from the big chase only underscores the point he’s trying to make.

Tarantino proved he could give us a real and powerful woman in JACKIE BROWN. In DEATH PROOF (and KILL BILL), he gave us “powerful” women who’s power was defined in masculine, macho terms. Just like the biological determinism of KILL BILL, DEATH PROOF only looks like there’s any feminism at its heart.

Mike

By: Brian Spence

Brian Spence — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 18:25:35 +0000

My brother and I saw it this weekend. It was fun, but definitely not one of the best entries in either filmmaker’s library. They wanted it to look like a crappy 70’s flick, and it worked. It looked crappy.

My bro and I also noted that they never resolved what happened with that girl who was left behind (I don’t think it’s fair to call it a “rape” scene. Nobody knows what happened).

I don’t know about Tarantino’s “track record of brutality to women.” I just don’t think that Tarantino differentiates women from men in his movies. They’re all on equal footing, and therefore will get treated the same. Who ISN’T brutalized in a QT movie? Overall, I don’t think Quentin makes his women the “poor defenseless” types.

By: Adam

Adam — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:09:58 +0000

Actually, scratch that. Chris Masterson is the brother of Danny Masterson from “That 70’s Show.” Chris is the older brother from “Malcolm in the Middle.” Silly me.

By: William Gatevackes

William Gatevackes — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:07:42 +0000

I think that Death Proof was better. Not that I hated Planet Terror or anything, I liked it too, just that I thought DP was better. I agree with Jimmy that the dialogue of the women’s scene were not boring. For me, it was a way with the first set to make them less of nameless victims and make them in characters you care about and in the second setting up some exposition to go with the characterization (IE. that Kim had a gun, that Zoe was, in essence, Death Proof herself.)

As for the “Tarantino as a feminist argument”. I think the missing reel from his film adds fodder to that. He spends most of the movie up to that point selling the lap dance, doing a hard sell right before it. When it comes to delivering it, “missing reel” (at least in the version I saw). It was similar, yet opposite, to what he intended with the crash. You want to see the crash? I’ll give you the crash, worse than you can imagine. Want to see the hot girl give a sultry lap dance? Well, you’re not going to get it. Think about your wanting to see both those things afterward.

On a personal note, I love the scene with the shots of Chartruese. Chartruese is a shot my friends and I use as a badge of honor. If you drink it with us, you’re part of the group. And it is horribly foul. Think Aqua Velva with some black pepper mixed in. It’s great.

By: J

Mon, 09 Apr 2007 16:45:12 +0000

I think Death Proof is a good movie and definitely the better film although not as much fun as Robert’s. It makes some interesting comments on the genre, has incredible car and stunt work, and a good ending. But the reality is that the first half of the film is punch-yourself-in-the-face boring. So does the good stuff justify the boring stuff? Yes. But barely. The arguments that I’ve heard for the large amount of not-as-clever-as-it-thinks-it-is dialogue are that they make the characters round and make us care about the victims before they are slaughtered. Well, there’s some merit to that but people have been making films for years with rounded characters that we care about without making the audience sit through forty five minutes of blowjob and pot smoking pseudo realistic Austin name dropping girl talk bullshit. I found the film to be good but definitely not great and ultimately pretty disappointing considering what the man’s capable of. The film is extraordinarily indulgent and unfortunately his aesthetic doesn’t work as well here as it does in, say, Kill Bill, which was pushing it in the first place.
It’s a strange thing because the “fuck everybody else” artist in me applauds Quentin’s apathy for his fan base’s perceptions but that doesn’t change the fact that the talky parts did reach the point of being unbearable for me personally.

But again the good parts are very good. The stunt work and car crash/chase sequences are amazing and girl power flip of the genre is well executed.

I also was fortunate enough to have worked on the production which was probably the most fun job I’ll ever have so I have to thank Robert and Quentin for that.

And thanks to Heidi as well : )

By: Ralph Mathieu

Ralph Mathieu — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 15:38:08 +0000

I enjoyed all of Grindhouse also, but Death Proof got a stronger reaction out of me and this will be a movie that sticks with me for a long time. When I walked out of the theater I felt like I’d been on some kind of crazy rollercoaster. And I wasn’t bored by the talky stuff in Death Proof because like others have said they make what happens later in the film have more impact (no pun intended).

By: Adam

Adam — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 14:44:11 +0000

Nice wrap up, Heidi!
But wasn’t it “Chris Simonton,” or “Simonson?” I think there was a joke about them calling him “Christan Science,” or something. Masterson is that actor from “That 70’s Show,” starring the Kutch and future Eddie Brock Topher Grace. Still, as I said, nice wrap up!