. I know that when my wife has a bunch of her friends over I have to either leave the house or retreat into my den, otherwise it's like having bamboo shoved under my fingernails. That's when the action begins. Regardless of this, Death Proof is meant as a piece of entertainment. Whenever he arrives in a new town he selects a group of girls and sets his perverse plan into motion.
If you want real Grindhouse get some originals or see 'Devils Rejects' or 'House of 1000 Corpses' as Rob Zombie seems to have done this already to much better much more extreme effect. This is all laced with his wet dream on how he thinks women talk when he's not around. Cut: Stuntman Mike is hospitalized, but alive and kicking. I know he's made a career out of this but in previous films most of the dialogue was in short snappy burst with outside views on mass pop culture and it was charmingly woven into strong individual characters that moved the plot and story along. Don't ask why, though - there is no explanation given consists of two cars crashing headfirst and what amounts to about three seconds of gore. I understand that there's no explanation for his actions, there doesn't need to be, it's supposed to be exploitation. And unless he runs into someone who is as crazy or drives as well as him, there is no way to stop him.
It all started as an homage to old exploitation cinema and double feature screenings. Death Proof attempts to do something similar with the likes of the American revisionist road movie, the B-cinema of Roger Corman and the femsploitation subgenre of films like The Big Bird Cage 1972 , Caged Heat 1975 , Day of the Woman 1978 and Ms. When I first heard of Death Proof, I was therefore understandably excited. Interpretación: Kurt Russell Stuntman Mike , Sydney Tamiia Poitier Jungle Julia , Rosario Dawson Abernathy , Vanessa Ferlito Arlene , Jordan Ladd Shanna , Rose McGowan Pam , Tracie Thoms Kim , Mary Elizabeth Winstead Lee , Zoë Bell Zoë , Omar Doom Nate , Michael Bacall Omar , Eli Roth Dov , Quentin Tarantino Warren , Monica Staggs Lanna , Michael Parks Earl. I don't want to labour the point about the dialogue but feel i have to as it is painful.
But, without wanting to sound like a sadist, if it is supposed to be exploitation then where was it?. With this in mind, it seems hard to understand what people are complaining about. Stuntman Mike is a serial killer using his car as a weapon. It's not interesting, not over-the top surreal, nothing. In fact all of his original work aside from Kill Bill is male based, but even the Bride is merely an action revenge figure in female form so the scripting here would have worked either way. He's just there for the sheer fun, like everyone else.
I'm talking about films such as Two-Thousand Maniacs 1964 , Ride the Whirlwind 1965 , Manos: The Hands of Fate 1966 , Satan's Sadists 1968 , The Big Bird Cage 1971 , Boxcar Bertha 1972 , Fight for Your Life 1977 or Satan's Cheerleaders 1977 ; low-budget films made with often-non-professional actors, little in the way of conventional film logic, and highly controversial in terms of plot, theme and content. Tarantino has never been able to write for women. His half of the exploitation double-bill Grindhouse concerns a serial killer called Stuntman Mike who offs girls with his indestructible car -- a blend of no less than three B-movie staples that provides a perfect vehicle for a perfect soundtrack, which comes pretty close to being. The effect is reminiscent of Kill Bill 2003 , which at times felt superficial or perhaps even too knowing for its own good, but still demonstrated to us the filmmaker's great use of tone, texture, colour and movement, as well as turning many people on to a whole new world of cult Japanese cinema; from the works of highly individual filmmakers like Seijun Suzuki, Kinji Fukasaku and Takashi Miike, to cult performers like Sony Chiba. I really cannot remember a single sentence of note said in this torturous first hour for the protocol, I cannot remember anything said in the second half either , but I am fairly sure that it involved some kind of prank about a lap dance one of them don't ask me for the names pulled on one of the others.
Am I the only one that thinks Quentin Tarantino's 'Death Proof' is a piece of junk? However, this does not mean Tarantino has set his visual or verbal obsessions aside: the dialogue is as imaginative and surreal as it has always been, and there are enough shots of bare female feet to keep fans happy. Even at the 'Grindhouse' 90 minute mark it would still have been 10 minutes too long and it's a shame it's been taken out of it's context and elongated to it's detriment. After another hour of talking - mind you, this time, it's an entirely different deli! The fact that there is film running through the camera is proof enough that something is happening, with the hilariously bland dialog deconstructing the film in much the same way as the purposely amateurish composition, editing and sound all intended to fracture the cinematic language in the same way that Godard did; by reminding the audience that this is the film and the point of the film is to experience the sights and sounds that unfold before us. Buy the soudtrack, put that on and listen to your girlfriend chat with her friends on speaker phone, at least the conversation will be more realistic. I love movies in general. And I like Tarantino, but this is not good, not good at all. It's not sloppy film-making, but rather, a purposeful appropriation of sloppy film-making geared towards appealing to the kind of obsessive movie aficionado who gets the references and can appreciate the joke that Tarantino is attempting to pull.
The use of quotation marks is deliberate, since the much anticipated murder scene didn't I tell you? What they are talking about, I have no idea. This again allows Tarantino to put words in their mouth so he can have a conversation with himself about his favourite muscle car movies for another hour. Worst still amongst all the talk Tarantino self references his own films in it, even when he's doing one of his useless cameos he references Pulp Fiction! Other reference points are more obvious as they're mentioned explicitly in the film; notably car chase cinema such as Vanishing Point 1971 , Two-Lane Blacktop 1971 , Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry 1974 , Gone in 60 Seconds 1974 and even Spielberg's Duel 1971. However it turned out to be one of the most boring movies I've seen in my life! Here one woman is much the same as the other and by the time a brief anti-climax comes along involving Kurt Russell i want them all to die! The trailer promised a wildly fun B-movie, and that's exactly what Death Proof is: a movie like they don't make anymore, old-fashioned, irony-free and exciting as hell. But from there we have another cameo from Russell who disappears until the end, a clean up of the reel and 4 more women, impossibly more annoying than the last. Tarantino is undeniably a pro director, and though I personally think his trademark elements - bizarre dialogue about pop culture, foot fetishism - are somewhat annoying, I was willing to give him a try. No payoff could have been big enough for having been subjected to about a full hour of excruciating boredom except for maybe, the credits to roll.
It was, in a word: bizarre. Sorry, ladies but I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. Nobody can accuse Tarantino of repeating himself! When Russell does pop up again for the final pursuit he's inexplicably turned into a groveling whining bitch. A car chase ensues, mostly consisting of the two cars driving alongside each other at high speed, with the women yelling at Stuntman Mike to cease the hostilities - during the chase, one of the girls lies on the hood and has some difficulties maintaining this condition - and for some reason refusing to, uh, stop their own car and thus prevent their friend from falling off. Far and away the worst scenes in terms of dialogue in Pulp Fiction are those involving women.
Sure, it can be seen as self-indulgent, but surely those of us familiar with the style of film-making being referenced here will revel in this particular kind of extravagance, loving everything from the continually inane female banter to the awesome scenes of high speed carnage. Then they get killed by a mysterious guy called Stuntman Mike Kurt Russell. Suffice to say, he could. Avoid it at all costs. There's no real desire here for Tarantino to prove what kind of filmmaker he is because he's already done that with the number of great films that came before.
Then we have the fact that films like Reservoir Dogs - which takes place almost entirely within a single setting - and Jackie Brown - which places emphasis entirely on character - use dialog to not only create the characters but to also tell the story. There's no shame in that. With Death Proof 2007 , Tarantino creates such a loving homage to a notoriously cult cinematic sub-culture that many people seem unaware of how to approach it or even how to appreciate the sheer fact that the film purposely goes out of its way to ape the style of late 60's and early 70's exploitation cinema in look, feel and content. I love obscure B-, C-, and Z-movies in particular - the dumber the plots and the less coherent, the better. When Stuntman Mike does finally appear it's good but too brief, in fact it's a cameo role. There's more sex and violence in Bourne than in this! In Reservoir Dogs one of the only women characters that doesn't get shot was cut from the final film.