Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Wanna see the cover to Quentin Tarantino's DEATH PROOF script? I promise you effin' do!

GREAT! Now how can I get RIP my spec. remake of... by LilOgre	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:00:11 PM
DEATH CAR ON THE FREEWAY.
and FIRST by LilOgre	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:01:01 PM

First? by chaos731	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:01:08 PM
Looks good. Love QT. Love Rodriguez. Good stuff.
cool by Rupee88	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:01:16 PM
Tarantino's last 3 films have sucks, but his first two were beyond amazing, so I'll hold out hope for this one.
they "sucked" even by Rupee88	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:02:04 PM
typos suck more
ive always felt that by litzapalooza	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:04:25 PM
i missed out on the grindhouse experienc. hopefully, this flick will give me a taste of it.
Rourke is the coolest fucking actor on the planet by indiephantom	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:23:42 PM
and that poster is amazing. God bless Grindhouse and the QT.
I'm in love. by irc-Hollywood	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:33:24 PM
with that front page.
Sorry, this looks terrible by El Scorcho	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:33:39 PM
And I love horror.
"An RIP Release"..I find that hard to say. by Sworn42Enemy	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:34:59 PM
I don't like when people become the grammar police, but shouldn't that be "A RIP Release".
Don't be sorry, by butnugget	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:41:31 PM
you're just ignorant. Uh, yeah, about this one picture, it looks like the movie will suck. Yeah, I'm apparently fucking clairvoyant. Fucking naysayers.
An not A by CoursinLarry	Apr 23rd, 2006 03:55:54 PM
No. It should be AN RIP Release. Spell out how the letter "R" sounds. Arr. It has a vowel sound. Thus, the AN.
love the poster by samsquanch	Apr 23rd, 2006 04:21:18 PM
and the first part of this grindhouse thing will be a zombie movie by Rodriguez? I'm there. I just watched the Road Warrior again for the first time in many years, holy smokes- what a fucking masterpiece. Am I naive to believe that there will be anything so viscerally satisfying again? Will "Death Proof" deliver?
stupid ass poster by shalashaska	Apr 23rd, 2006 04:34:05 PM
maybe i just dont "get it"
Give us a link to the whole script, why dontcha? by Nate Champion	Apr 23rd, 2006 04:36:49 PM
Seriously, Harry... It's just not fair to dole out these scraps. The thought of Mickey Rourke making mincemeat out of big-tittied, barely-dressed nymphos with that car is enough to get me excited about this. Too bad Rodriguez is involved... I'm worried this is going to be another of those great ideas ala Four Rooms.
I thought this was a SCRIPT COVER... by nomihs	Apr 23rd, 2006 04:43:41 PM
Some of you are calling it a "poster." Just wanna be sure. Anyway, just wondering how the cover and not the WHOLE DAMN THING didn't get one here. OH WAIT, Harry is the whipping boy of many a Hollywood elite. "Here is an inside scoop to my next film Harry, put it up and get the geeks all crazy man." Quentin says... "Okay man, just as long as you keep dropping my name to Bob and Harvey." Harry replies. C'mon Harry, and Co., how close am I?
Will he write AND direct this? by crackerfarmboy	Apr 23rd, 2006 05:26:49 PM
If not then I don't care, he attaches his fucking name to everything, yet makes nothing. Amazing!!! So much talent and so little product!
Will he write AND direct this? by crackerfarmboy	Apr 23rd, 2006 05:27:02 PM
If not then I don't care, he attaches his fucking name to everything, yet makes nothing. Amazing!!! So much talent and so little product!
Four Rooms was great, and this isn't Four Rooms. by irc-Hollywood	Apr 23rd, 2006 05:38:51 PM
it's more like Dusk Till Dawn 2.
I don't get it.. by MaulRat	Apr 23rd, 2006 06:02:07 PM
Yeah yeah yeah I'm an ignorant slut.. I just don't see the 'movie geeks' fascination with Grindhouse cinema.. I want someone to explain thier fascination to me so I can try and see thier point of view, not being a smart ass, I genuinely want to know. Oh, and as for the grammatical error some of you folks are talking about, you're focusing on the wrong thing.. the real error is the lack of periods separating the R,I, and the P... as in 'rest in peace' (or pieces.. hardy har), then "An R.I.P. Release" would be grammatically correct, I think you're thinking of the word "RIP" in which case "A RIP Release would be correct.. it's an easy mistake to make.
Clerks 2 will rock by spindude	Apr 23rd, 2006 06:03:57 PM
This looks cool too.
yeah, i wanna' see a script...? by future help	Apr 23rd, 2006 07:55:30 PM
where's that script Harry? QT ROCKS...all the movies he directs.
hell yeah THAT WOULD ROCK by future help	Apr 23rd, 2006 09:12:40 PM
great idea
I've never not liked Tarantino. by beastie	Apr 23rd, 2006 09:16:07 PM
It's easy to want to not like him because all of the film school kids love him, but, everytime he works, I just about cream.
off topic by thebearovingian	Apr 23rd, 2006 10:24:25 PM
Great. DeathProof. My life is now almost complete. Harry, what movies have you been in/ had a cameo? Everyone else is free to answer that question if Mr. Knowles doesn't get back to me. Still kind of a newb on AICN and kinda curious.
Mickey Roarke is DUKE NUKEM by Zeke25:17	Apr 23rd, 2006 10:43:00 PM
And if it ain't true, it oughtta be. Cool script cover by the way. Grind House will rock hard. And speaking of rock hard, if it's true that Rodriguez was shagging Rose McGowan, who the hell can blame the man? Sexy voice and quite tasty-lookin to boot...
it's Tarantino ... y'know you're gonna buy a ticket by emu47	Apr 23rd, 2006 11:03:32 PM
And you should. Even his weakest is worth owning. I will be there, even though I know (big sigh) that Tarantino is not really a fan of horror so much as he's a fan of camp. But this looks like camp of the absolute best kind. I can't wait. (But someone PLEASE make sure his next film is INGLORIOUS BASTARDS!)
by MaryTylerMorbid	Apr 23rd, 2006 11:55:56 PM
It's kind of pointless to poke fun at Tarantino at this stage - he does a good enough job of that himself - but this sounds and looks about as entertaining as a turd drying in the sun. And yes, it appears he's ripping off Death Car on the Freeway, one of the great TV movies ever made. But that's nothing new, he's been ripping off other films for years, which is okay anyway. But this one looks bad. Seriously, kids. This one looks REAL bad. And how are you supposed to watch a grindhouse movie in a state of the art digital cinema with stadium seating and Dolby surround sound. Maybe buy a $10 bucket of popcorn?
1 T & R combo platter please! by donkeypark	Apr 24th, 2006 12:09:59 AM
Grindhouse. The title says it all. Set expectations at 0. I have to admit that I'm not that psyched up over this project. But I'll let the T&R combo do what they do. Bad head is still head.
Mickey Rourke... by Bootskin	Apr 24th, 2006 02:14:17 AM
...always had the potential to be our generation's Steve McQueen. Bruce Willis ALMOST had it, but his tough guy image kinda went away with 6th sense,the whole 9 yards and "Friends" appearances. The bad, bad drugs n boxing and whatever the fuck got in the way finally over now,It seems like Rourke may finally be living up to it.
Um by Ipitythefool	Apr 24th, 2006 02:33:15 AM
Isn't this the very definition of trying to judge a book by its cover? I love QT but who fucking cares what's on the cover of the script? Just sayin...
Interesting title page... by deanamatronix	Apr 24th, 2006 03:18:42 AM
.. BUT THAT'S IT. All these fanboys creaming themselves over it. For fuck sake, it's just a title page. Calm the fuck down.
So is the working title "Christine: Fully Loaded"? by Mr. Profit	Apr 24th, 2006 09:01:16 AM
Or how about Highwaymen 2?
And his worst mistake was.... by Mr. Profit	Apr 24th, 2006 09:06:07 AM
Splitting Kill Bill into 2 movies. I loved Kill Bill 1, but then Kill Bill 2 disappointed me. 2 movies and The Bride kills him with a move stolen from Xena: Warrior Princess?
QT is becoming self-indulgent. by brycemonkey	Apr 24th, 2006 09:29:56 AM
I'm not saying that he should only make movies for the masses. Make what you want but don't expect everyone to want to see it. It's the sort of thing studios/distributors seem to take notice of though. I love QT and Robert Rodriguez but does anyone else think that they need to put in more time before being allowed to go off and make stuff that might be important to them but no-one else cares about? For example Spielberg and Gibson have started doing this (and in a more grown up manner too). However I think Quentin and Robert need to give us about 5 more really good flicks (each they can't double up) before they should be allowed to go in this direction. Fanboys set phasers to 'Flame'. Peace.
emu47, it's Tarantino, the reason I will NOT by Blue_Demon	Apr 24th, 2006 09:58:27 AM
be buying a ticket. Got a burned copy of the Kill Bill dvd and realized that Tarantino has pulled one over on us. Every piece of trash movie that came out in the 70s is now cool because he says it is. Oh, and Mickey Roarke is becoming the new Bruce Campbell. He can do no wrong in the eyes of film geeks. I'll pass.
Agreed Brycemonkey by CaptDanielRoe	Apr 24th, 2006 10:01:03 AM
At least Tarantino has to flee to France following some "youthful indescretion" before he starts making one inscrutable, self-indulgent movie every 22 years.
brycemonkey "becoming self indulgent"??? by modlight	Apr 24th, 2006 10:31:30 AM
He started Kill Bill with the phrase. The 4th Film by Quentin Tarantino. then proceeded to give us the biggest directorial Jerk off session that was only trumped by King Kong (massively I might add) and only redeemed by the far superior Kill Bill 2.
hmmm, self indulgent... by brycemonkey	Apr 24th, 2006 10:59:20 AM
Given my earlier thoughts, are ALL directors self indulgent? I suppose there are 'journeyman' directors who direct shit they don't care about just for the money. Rather an intellectual bind I've got myself in. Perhaps I should have called this movie making direction something else... Wank?
that poster is so russ meyer! by thegoldencalf	Apr 24th, 2006 11:25:44 AM

Death by Stereo Logo? by bigj3rk77	Apr 24th, 2006 11:37:01 AM
The skull logo on the hood is the logo for the hardcore band, Death by Stereo...whats up with that?
i was just about to bring up the death by stereo thing by dubsy	Apr 24th, 2006 11:57:06 AM
that looks exactly like their logo
Does Tarantino do anything original? by r3sp3ctm3	Apr 24th, 2006 12:08:11 PM
Or does he relentlessly mine bad 60's and 70's trash-heap garbage, that without his efforts and the calm determined writings of a few internet geeks - never, ever would see the light of day in modern 'cinema'. Hmmmmmm.
Not Russ Meyer... by jazzbox2	Apr 24th, 2006 12:56:28 PM
The cover is Roger Corman! If was Russ Meyer, it's have clevage.
QT has sunken to a new low by phanboi	Apr 24th, 2006 01:09:00 PM
Aren't there any decent actresses out there to cast instead of a friggin STUNTWOMAN. Well, lil Zoe probably whoop my ass big time ... but c'mon that's just ridiculous. And Rourke isn't even funny anymore ... his shtick is just annoying.
So is QT's half gonna be shot digitally? If so... by oceansized	Apr 24th, 2006 01:18:08 PM
and he makes the switch permanently like his buddy Robert, it could mean not having to wait so damn long between each flick he makes. Of course it's only a good thing assuming he's technically adept enough.
I did a Google image search on Bell. Man she's Fug.... by Mr. Profit	Apr 24th, 2006 01:57:56 PM
So this film is gonna be Hot Cars and Ugly Chicks? That doesn't go together.
I Love Quentin Tarantino! by Wee Willie	Apr 24th, 2006 02:05:14 PM
THe man has glee, baby, glee.
Poster reminds me of... by StigMata	Apr 24th, 2006 02:20:23 PM
http://tinyurl.com/j7g62. Click on "See larger image" and compare these bad boys. If QT comes close to the 1971 "Vanishing Point" in spirit...or the other 1970's existential car chase film, "Two-Lane Blacktop" -directed by Monte Hellman who also Exec Produced...Reservoir Dogs (!) then I'll be shit-stain happy.
Not particularly caring for something... by Childe Roland	Apr 24th, 2006 02:24:34 PM
...does not equal not getting it. It's entirely possible to understand something completely and simply not enjoy it. I can think of any number of jokes that qualify. Very little of what Tarantino has done is inaccessible either aesthetically or intellectually. Some of his movies simply aren't as enjoyable as others. And that's really a matter of personal taste. People who say "If you don't like/love it, you don't get it" are pretty fucking insecure in their own personal tastes and sensibilities if they feel the need to try and invalidate others' simply to make themselves feel better about what they enjoy. I don't "get" those people. Nor do I appreciate them.
Good point Childe, but... by oceansized	Apr 24th, 2006 02:29:44 PM
Take that away and much of the discourse in these talkbacks is gone. And the ultimate example of the phenomenon you speak of is Paul Thomas Anderson, in an interview promoting Magnolia, saying something to the effect of "people who don't like this movie are just wrong."
QT needs to start crankin' more of his stuff out there by donuts	Apr 24th, 2006 02:33:33 PM
One film a year, two guest director episodes for TV. That's all I expect. The Industry needs him, The Box Office needs him, and last but not least, Movie Goers need him. www.theweeklydonut.org
Would shrunken talkbacks be such a bad thing... by Childe Roland	Apr 24th, 2006 02:46:55 PM
...oceansized? I mean, if Darwinian dynamics apply and the least asinine commentary is what survives, wouldn't they be more fun to read and participate in? Well...except maybe for the SNakes on a Plane or Aquaf@g talkbacks. Those need the silly. And any Indy IV talkback where a thousand different titles are proposed. And any outright hateful indictment of the AVP or Star Wars prequel franchises. Come to think of it, forget my moment of clarity. Talkbackers please resume saying stupid shit for my amusement.
Tarantino is such a hack by zacdilone	Apr 24th, 2006 03:03:46 PM
Blockbuster called...they're holding your job for you.
Can we get a real f'ing Tarantino movie now please? by dr_buggerlugs	Apr 24th, 2006 04:35:36 PM
Now this will probably turn out to be bags of fun, but I really don't care for a pointless vanity project like this...I want to see a real honest Tarantino film, not another excuse for him to tell us about the films he's seen...amongst the homage that Kill Bill was full of, there seemed to be a hint of heart in that film and thats what I want from his next...not another homage, another tribute...I want to see something that's a step forward, uncharted territory for a guy now in his 40s - he needs to take some fucking chances and not rely on 'hip' 70's references anymore. I think it's time he stopped playing up to the pop and geek culture iconography and start making the damn great films he should have been doing for the last decade.
So you have the F you money... by Red Ned Lynch	Apr 24th, 2006 07:50:47 PM
...and you have guys who will bankroll just about whatever movie you want to make. And you're not going to make what you want? You're not going to indulge the cinematic fantasies that burned through your head when you were watching the films that filled your youth? You know, if you wouldn't, you probably don't love movies enough to be here.
I'd rather have no Oscar nominations... by zacdilone	Apr 24th, 2006 09:15:16 PM
...than have the reputation Tarantino will have as future generations of film lovers look back on his work. And besides...you aren't REALLY going to argue that an Oscar nomination means anything, are you? (cue Forrest Gump music)
i was thinking of the font... by thegoldencalf	Apr 25th, 2006 04:20:03 AM
...when i compared it to russ meyer.
by dr_buggerlugs	Apr 25th, 2006 08:49:32 AM
I absolutely and utterly respect that viewpoint, but at the same time as a fan and more pertinantly as a moviegoer aren't I or we allowed to want more from a filmmaker? Is it wrong to want to see someone like Tarantino get out of his comfort zone and maybe not adhere to the 'formula' for once? I'm glad he's making the stuff he wants to and he's celebrating the genres he loved, but as a moviegoer I'd rather see him taking a route less travelled and I want to be surprised. That's the way I look at it I guess. And if that's an opinion that doesn't warrant one being here, I wouldn't want to.
So, let me get this straight, AshokO... by Childe Roland	Apr 25th, 2006 10:25:09 AM
...you've taken the tried and untrue talkbacker bastion of demanding that a naysayer make his or her own movie before daring tocriticize another's work and upped the ante to require that all film critics be former Oscar noms? Is there a term for a phallacy on steroids? I mean other than "extra-lame fucking arguement?"
Rourke isn't worthy... by NightArrows	Apr 25th, 2006 01:23:31 PM
...to clean McQueen's toilet, were he still taking dumps. Rourke in Diner was great. Rourke in Year of the Dragon was good. Rourke in Sin City was good. That's about it. He's no McQueen, and never will be. And anyone who thinks Kill Bill 2 is better than 1, IS FUCKED IN THE HEAD. 2 was the cinematic equivalent to a rectal sedative.
Sweet Cover by Juvenal	Apr 25th, 2006 01:30:57 PM
How about the insides...
uh, judge a script by its cover much? by newc0253	Apr 25th, 2006 05:30:55 PM
so let me get this straight: this is an item about the cover of a movie script. not the movie. not even the making of the movie. not even a review of the script. no, it's a story about how the script has a cover with a picture of a car on it. it's a cool looking car, i'll give you that. but, sweet jesus, it's a fucking script cover. take a pill already.
Ashok0, are you aware... by one9deuce	Apr 25th, 2006 11:09:56 PM
that Stanley Kubrick is dead? So Quentin Tarantino can't be "to date the most talented, brilliant film maker alive. Alongside Kubrick, David Fincher, and Chris Nolan". In fact, he just isn't even close to the greatest filmmaker alive, and neither are either of your other choices. Although Kubrick would be, if he was alive. Because a filmmaker shoots something that is "edgy" or "dark" doesn't make it great. A "great" filmmaker has to have at least one masterpiece to his credit and Christopher Nolan most certainly doesn't. David Fincher almost has one with Se7en. I really liked that film when it came out, but I had NO idea that it would become so influential. Not quite a masterpiece though. Quentin Tarantino does have one great film and one masterpiece to his credit, and they are respectively Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. But he has fallen so far, so fast that he certainly isn't in the ranks of the greatest directors working today. I don't think you really know what makes a movie great.
Ashok0 by one9deuce	Apr 26th, 2006 07:35:16 PM
Memento is a damn good movie. Fight Club is a damn good movie. Batman Begins is a good movie. None of those are great movies. And I did mention Pulp Fiction, just scroll up and you'll see that you are wrong. You wrote: "Something that is "edgy" or "dark" is brilliant". No, something that is brilliant is brilliant. The reason I'm sure you don't know shit about films is because you are easy to confuse because you think edgy translates into good. But there are brilliant edgy films and shitty edgy films. Try to learn to make the distinction. And you think that I am watching Tomb Raider and Charlie's Angels 2 DVDs? You couldn't be farther from reality. Then again, I already knew that because of your ignorant proclamations. I will give you a break though since I am sure that you are only 19, and probably haven't seen over 90% of the true masterpieces in the history of film.

Talkbacks

Wanna see the cover to Quentin Tarantino's DEATH PROOF script? I promise you effin' do!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks