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

The Weinsteins to separate GRINDHOUSE here in the US?

first by adamthelegend	Apr 9th, 2007 03:01:10 PM
cant wait for grindhouse here in the uk!
I think he should have kept in the lapdance... by fractureJonze	Apr 9th, 2007 03:02:31 PM
With Kurt Russel laughing really hard the whole time.
Panic by ProfGriffin	Apr 9th, 2007 03:02:44 PM
Funny, I just posted this in Harry's Grindhouse Talkback! LOL.
Let it run 3 1/2 hours by LUZER	Apr 9th, 2007 03:02:50 PM
It's such a badass concept. Don't back down.
Dumbest idea ever by nexus420	Apr 9th, 2007 03:05:06 PM
Stupid fucking movie execs....if it was supposed to be two movies, they would have made two, not one. Releasing it Easter weekend is something a 13 year old would think was hilarious. No one has any patience anymore. I remember when movies used to be in theaters for months (even bad ones); now some are gone in a couple of weeks.
What Happened to GRINDHOUSE? by ProfGriffin	Apr 9th, 2007 03:05:09 PM
As we all know by now...Grindhouse opened very poorly, #4 behind Are we Done Yet? (Ice Cube sequel to Are we There Yet?) Meet the Robinsons (#2) and Blades of Glory (#1 for it's second week) I guess that means one of three things: The country wants lighthearted, laughter...not blood soaked exploitation over the Easter Weekend. The general public did not want to make a three hour commitment and sit through two movies. Or what I like to call the... 'Snakes on a Plane' phenomenon. Pre-release publicity, BIG HYPE...ultra cool and hip...EDGY (catch-phrases like that) are blasted at us for weeks...but when the time comes...no one goes to the theatres. This movie(s) is a great time and fun...but in the end...does NOT break new ground. (Especially to someone who wallows in Exploitation) Weinstein Co. has reportedly spent more on advertising on this film, than any in their short history. The movie's budget was 53 million, and it pulled a rather low opening weekend at 11 Mil. Are We Done Yet? beat Grindhouse.... Words fail me. Look, as a Grindhouse Guru....and lover of Double, Triple, and all-nighters in the style that you mentioned...I heartedly adore what was attempted...but the numbers speak for themselves. There is no excuse for it. Do something original, make it appealing and people will come. Blades of Glory beating Grindhouse is like, 'Skatetown U.S.A.' beating 'They Call Her One-Eye' in box-office. And you know what? We should have seen it coming. They last time I was this dissapointed in my own enthusiasm for a film was Snakes on a Place...and before that? Van Helsing (my secret shame and my crow that I ate). I now spend my days counting down to mindless summer blockbusters like Shrek 3, Spider-man 3 and Pirates of the Carribean 3. Mindless? Yes...but FUN and exciting and THRILLING and wonderful. Everything movies should be. Grindhouse will make it's money back...but not until overseas release and Home Video. A sad state of affairs. And speaking of affairs...Robert Rodriguez and Rose McGowan probably feel karma biting them on the ass right about now. Shame Shame Shame. Prof. Griffin Fangoria TV
You said it Quint by hargon27	Apr 9th, 2007 03:05:18 PM
I can see what Harvey thought, "Our only hit at Weinstein Co. has been Scary Movie 4 which came out Easter Weekend... lets do the same with Grindhouse!" Personally I am just happy to see the Weinstein company failing with box office bomb after bomb after they held the Oscars hostage for so many years by pouring money into oscar campaigns for shit films (eg. Shakespeare In Love, Chicago)
BIG MISTAKE!!! by KosherWookie	Apr 9th, 2007 03:05:20 PM
Saw this movie twice this past weekend and LOVED IT!!! It REALLY evokes the grindhouse memories, crappy prints, scratches, exploitation trailers and all! This from a veteran of the Times Square grindhouse experience at the Rialto and the Liberty back in the bad old 70s.
F the Weinsteins. by Frank The Rabbit	Apr 9th, 2007 03:05:34 PM
This is how QT and RR wanted it to be released. Besides Harvey already made double money off of us all for Kill Bill! REMEMBER?! This makes it even!
Word of mouth will help Grindhouse grow by Brendan3	Apr 9th, 2007 03:08:39 PM
This is a mistake on their part. I'm willig to bet that this coming weekend will do bigger numbers as people go back to school or work and talk about it. They need to have faith in their film and not panic. Suckass movies need to worry about opening weekend numbers. This baby's gonna snowball.
Too late by whatcokes	Apr 9th, 2007 03:11:08 PM
Honestly, I think it's too late to save either film at the box office. If they cut it in half, both movies will just flop individually. I think they should just let it run its course in theaters and worry about the dvd release. That's where, if they're smart, they'll make their money.
Its the same stupid bad release dates that kill movies by godzillasushi	Apr 9th, 2007 03:11:18 PM
Like, freaking they put out Star Trek Nemesis...what....a week before LOTR? Right? Who thought that was a good idea?!? Or releasing a movie the same weekend as Spider-man 3, geniously dumb if anyone is or would.
um by Charlie Murphy	Apr 9th, 2007 03:12:46 PM
i really don't think this would help matters AT ALL. if people weren't creaming their jeans at the thought of seeing these together, they won't rush out to see them seperately. separation will only bring up budget and make it even more of a flop.
What hurt it was the delay by Purgatori	Apr 9th, 2007 03:18:11 PM
that was due to one filmmaker in particular. Personal shit that interfeared with the films release. This was supposed to be released over 2 months ago which would have been better. Also, WTF with chopping up Death Proof so badly? I'll accept losing the freaking lap dance, but what with the whole stalking at the conveniance store? Also, why did it suddenly lose the old school crackle and age look half way through? That's stupid. Quentin, you let me down man. Planet Terror ruled your ass.
...good idea, bad idea... by mr ahole ramirez	Apr 9th, 2007 03:18:56 PM
....good idea, a double feature movie by Taratino and Rodriguez...bad idea, splittin the two movies up to negate the whole idea of havin two movies by QT and RR...
WHO CARES by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:19:10 PM
That ten mill. was us. We saw it we loved it. Why do you care. These dudes will make more movies. I've been WordOfMouthing this film and some had not even herd of it. It was definitly lost in the shuffle of the big holiday weekend. THat's not all. Quint, listen man, I never went to a filled up grindhouse. Thats why. And Jesus is getting back at Tarintino for using the N word.
Im just glad the fucker got made by luckylindy	Apr 9th, 2007 03:19:48 PM
And i got to see it with friends and we had a blasty ass time before it may have gotten cut...BO returns mean dick to me...the weinsteins can do whatever the hell they want cuz they are the weinsteins...so whatever, i dont care
if i have to buy 2 separate grindhouse dvd's.... by waggy	Apr 9th, 2007 03:20:38 PM
i will personally boycott every weinstein release that doesn't have tarantino's or rodriguez's name on it. (won't be hard at all considering how quickly movies hit the net these days). guys, you tried something different and it didn't quite work. do not destroy 2 of your most important filmmakers' creative vision just to make a little money back.
Great, so here are our options... by jimmy_009	Apr 9th, 2007 03:21:09 PM
Sit through a 3 1/2 hour movie or splice it in half and make us pay double the ticket price. Either way we win right!?! I didn't see Kill Bill 2 in theaters simply because I knew it was actually one movie that I'd be paying for twice. You blew it Weinsteins, don't butcher the film just because you're too stupid to pick a good opening date. Cut your loses and remember that next time someone delivers a 3 1/2 hour movie.
Grindhouse not as good as Roundhouse by Masked Avenger	Apr 9th, 2007 03:21:12 PM
Remember that sketch comedy show from Nickelodeon, that was hilarious! I thought Grindhouse was pretty good, Planet Terror was a little disappointing while Death Proof was surprising(try sayind Death Proof 3 times fast). It also didn't do well because Are We Done Yet? Was release on Wed., adding to the fact that many kids are on Spring Break, which is why the other films did well, on top of that we probably have a small percentage of teens buying tickets to those other movies and sneaking into Grindhouse,(that's why Wild Hogs did well after 300 came out). Oddly enought, I went to see Grindhouse last night and there were two kids in the audience, one was about 8-9 and was with his dad, they left after Planet Terror, then there was a mother and her 4 year old son, they watched the entire film, no foolin', and it wasn't like she was with a date or her husband, it was just her and her infant. Wierd.
people will by sHapesHiftinLizard	Apr 9th, 2007 03:22:18 PM
feel ripped off thinking"why should i pay twice for something some other bozos paid once for, ill rent it/them" It was an 'experimental' release and now it seems it had a badly timed release, dem is da breaks. Liked Frank the rabbits point about Kill Bill, if they thought one movie should be split in 2 why did they think it would eb a good idea to put 2 into 1 when the complete KillBill and GH have roughly the same running times?
that is weird by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:23:33 PM
Masked Avenger: your assignment, kill the pet-er-ass
I don't think that would save this movie by quadrupletree	Apr 9th, 2007 03:24:00 PM
This movie was made for a very specific audience, namely people who have seen, have fond rememberences of and are fans of 70's exploitation cinema. In other words 1% of the movie going population. You can cut it into as many pieces as you want, the bad word of mouth is going to pull this thing farther down in the weeks to come no matter what they do. I respect Rodriguez and Tarantino for hanging their balls out there and putting this thing out, the worst thing they could do now is back-peddle in shame because people don't connect with it. They should be proud of it for what it is and let it run it's course. It's not a movie for everyone and was never meant to be!
how did the three hours make a difference... by pizzaparty	Apr 9th, 2007 03:24:41 PM
given that the per screen averages were so dismal anyway? also, what do people make of this story, that contemporary grindhouse-type theaters couldn't even show the film?
USE YOU ILLUSION by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:25:24 PM
you bought both of those didn't ya (place Axel Rose scream here)
gride9000 by Masked Avenger	Apr 9th, 2007 03:27:17 PM
I don't get it? What do you mean, 'kill the pet-er-ass?'
oops by pizzaparty	Apr 9th, 2007 03:28:39 PM
i tried to post an html link in my post. this story: http://www.deadlinehollywoodda ily.com/grindhouse-couldnt-get -grindhouse/
the lady treating her 4 year old like a date by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:29:15 PM
and get axel and his dolphin to help
They should give this one another weekend by Jak0lantern01	Apr 9th, 2007 03:30:09 PM
before drubbing it. Universally, the movie seemed to have positive reviews and , if the audience felt the same, it may have lags in the coming weeks. Damn, they just don't give movies a chance anymore. Perhaps they should have released this thing like a real grindhouse movie: in select markets and let it spread across the country at its own pace. They should probably go back to this method with every movie, it seems the crammed, first-weekend box office multiplex model just isn't working so well these days.
Jak0lantern01 by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:31:56 PM
thats the same attitude that kept "Cop Rock" on for two weeks
oh great, let's make death proof even LONGER... by omarthesnake	Apr 9th, 2007 03:32:43 PM
bad frickin' idea. Sure, the lap dance should be put back. the Missing Reel gag only works once, and in Planet Terror it's hysterically funny. In Death Proof it's just annoying. But if you put the scene back in, dear God, trim back some of the incessant yapping. There's twice as much dialogue in that movie as any reasonable human can tolerate. f'rinstance, the two guys scheming to get the girls drunk and agreeable is just a waste of time that goes nowhere, accomplishes nothing and isn't even that cleverly written, yet QT was so smitten with that sequence he put it in as a track on the SOUNDTRACK CD? WTFH?
Hey Whine-steins by skimn	Apr 9th, 2007 03:33:09 PM
Leave it alone. Whether people loved it, or liked it, or liked some parts of it and disliked others (see all the talkbacks), leave it the fuck alone. It was a film geek experiment, made by film geeks for film geeks. The general audience probably didn't get it, wouldn't get it, couldn't get it. Enjoy the next few weeks before the summer rush, and pick up the bucks on the 4 DVD versions you'll eventually squeeze out.
More thoughts on GRINDHOUSE by ProfGriffin	Apr 9th, 2007 03:33:48 PM
It was FUN. A celebration of those wonderful exploitation films we adore...and was made in the exact blueprint of what has come before. There are original concepts and visuals to be sure...but the GRINDHOUSE film experience (missing reels, scratchy prints, fake trailers, etc) is a gag. An extended joke and a sly wink to the audience that only 10% of the GENERAL public are getting. MOST people don't know what a Grindhouse is. It's astonishing, but if they called the film....The Drive-In or B-movie Double Feature...or something similar, people may have reacted differently. Is it a train-wreck? No I loved it, it was a FUN time...but people came to the theatres over the Easter Weekend to see something a little lighter, funnier...and not as offensive. Is it a sign of the times? How can we predict this? Usually, in times of national upheaval (war, political unrest, etc) blood-soaked horror and exploitation does well...(the 70's)...but in the excess of the 80's we had the slasher cycle that people flocked to see. I really don't know what happened here. Only that people didn't get it...and it's NOT their fault. The movie needed to be something that it wasn't. Accessable.
Let's chop Kill Bill in half! by photoboy	Apr 9th, 2007 03:33:49 PM
It worked for Kill Bill so they're probably thinking it will work here too. Plus it makes it easier for them to sell 2 DVDs (or even 3 DVDs if you want both separate films and the combined cut). Personally I think it's a shit idea, but I'm still waiting for that recut of Kill Bill that makes it all one film. What ever happened to that one eh?
omarthesnake by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:33:53 PM
have you ever had a real conversation
I think ARE WE DONE YET also benefited from GRINDHOUSE by Kraken	Apr 9th, 2007 03:34:14 PM
Teenagers under the age of 17 buying tickets to see ARE WE DONE YET and going into GRINDHOUSE instead. I bet you anything if you were to walk into any average theater last weekend, GRINDHOUSE would have had more teenagers in it than ARE WE DONE YET. But Quint is 100% right counter programming doesn't really work most of the time, because all you're doing is most likely making a girlfriend/wife argue with their husband/boyfriend on what to see that weekend. If it's a family weekend holiday, and there are 3 family movies to choose from, guess which demographic is going to lose the argument on what to see that particular weekend. I know from previous girlfriend experience (until I married my awesome horror movie loving wife) that if there was a movie that we'd "both" enjoy (see PG family movie) opening against the genre movie I wanted to see, we'd go see the family movie first, and then maybe the genre movie later. Now, if the genre movie was the only game in town that weekend, I had a better shot at seeing what I wanted to see. Now, I'm not saying this is the case for all couples, I know a lot of female genre fans... but I'm just speaking in averages here when it comes to the stereotypical family unit.
why not just cut the running time? by TheNorthlander	Apr 9th, 2007 03:34:37 PM
If the length is really the issue, they should just make it shorter. But I agree easter is a bad weekend for this as well. I work at a multiplex and it's been pretty quiet all easter (except for 300, which is sold out seemingly due to it being an area full of arabs who are curious about how they're reflected). Today people are returning after the holiday weekend, and guess which movie sells the best? Mr Bean.
skimn by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:35:03 PM
you are a very intellegent person, no joke here.
'Grindhouse not as good as Roundhouse' by Traumnovelle	Apr 9th, 2007 03:35:13 PM
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH......hol y shit. Thats the funniest talkback i've ever seen on this godamn site. That show was the fucking PITS, and i even remember the theme song....'Goin to the Roouuundhouse....we'll have a celebration....Goin to the Rouuundhouse....where i can be myself.....when life gets you so dooown, you know you can go dooowoown, to where something something my friends blah blah....at the ROUNDHOUSE!'...or something similiar.....shudder. Yea, but anyway, Death Proof is one of the worst movies i've ever seen in my life. I dont give two fucks if you think i haven't seen enough exploitation flicks to 'get' it, it just straight up sucks dick. Two lovely ladies with me, a six pack of tallcans and Planet Terror, THAT was a memorable experience. Shout out to Robert Rodriguez.
gride9000 by Masked Avenger	Apr 9th, 2007 03:36:41 PM
You're only confusing me further.
Traumnovelle by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:37:09 PM
that was some ignorant shit. Whats you problem, do you have a tinyURL.com?
Masked Avenger, dude it was a dumb by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:38:52 PM
joke forget it. But you should watch every Use Your Illusion video. There are dolphins.
Wasn't running time the excuse for low King Kong BO? by tonagan	Apr 9th, 2007 03:39:19 PM
Not to stir up that debate again.
WTF is Cop Rock? by Jak0lantern01	Apr 9th, 2007 03:43:40 PM
Anyway, Kraken has a good point that kids may very well have been buying tix for the family friendly flix only to go sneak into GH. There's a very strong possibility. I used to do it as a kid. :)
why the experiment failed... by cdubbs727	Apr 9th, 2007 03:43:47 PM
I saw Grindhouse and loved it. I have friends who want to see it. But I think it has, like people have said before, a VERY limited audience. People thought the blood-soaked Grindhouse would get people lining up because the blood-soaked 300 had made money. But in truth, I think most of the average moviegoers looked at the ads for GH and said "it just looks like two really bad movies". While, for film geeks, that was the entire point, the average moviegoer doesn't want to go see something that looks like something they would normally see on latenight cable. I think it's a horrible idea to split them up as the moviegoing public WILL see it as a sign of failure. Weinsteins should let the film ride out and be discovered. Won't make much more in the theater, but I could see it becoming a cult hit on DVD and a midnight movie at venues that do that sort of thing. By the way, is it just me or would it be awesome to have the Grindhouse movies specially released on VHS separately so they would look like the type of things you'd see in a bargain bin or on a video store shelf?
gride9000 by Masked Avenger	Apr 9th, 2007 03:44:23 PM
It was a joke, I get jokes! That was pretty funny then. Actually thanks to IMDB.com(God's gift to internet)I was able to understand your reference to Guns'N Roses, more obscure than mine to a defunct Nickelodeon show. Both incredibly off topic, both way more interesting.
Oooh.... by epitone	Apr 9th, 2007 03:46:06 PM
...I can see Death Proof without having to sit through Planet Terror? Count me in. Team Weinstein!
By the way, as I stated on the other GH TB.... by Jak0lantern01	Apr 9th, 2007 03:47:04 PM
I could see the movie this weekend. Not only did Easter foul me up, like it may have done with other people, I couldn't find a reasonable screening to go see it. The multiplexes by me were only showing it on one or two screens (if lucky) and on Saturday night I just could not find a good time to go see it, unless I wanted to sit in a theatre until after 2AM. Like I said earlier, the current Hollywood release model/first weekend make or break model purely sucks and doesn't give many good movies a fighting chance.
Grindhouse problems.. by rodvegas78	Apr 9th, 2007 03:47:43 PM
I saw Grindhouse this weekend, the theater here only had 3 showings in 1 theater.. at 12:00, 4:00 and 8:00. That's it!! 3 showings a day. As to where "Are We Done Yet" had like 5. Basically I don't think the movie did as well because the mixture of Easter Weekend, Spring Break for some colleges and the fact that it was being shown less on theaters then the other movies. The Weinsteins should take the $$$ made on average per showing compare it to the other ones and spin it that way. It's called Marketing... if they really get desperate and it does tank at the box office.. then just release it on DVD or have the Sci-Fi channel pay to play it uncensored and uninterrupted at like 1:00 a.m.
Easter had fuckall to do with it, apologist butthead by HypeEndsHere	Apr 9th, 2007 03:50:54 PM
well, shit, you asked "what do you folks think?" there's really no reason to split the movie up. if you want to see the good one, leave early. they put it first.
I agree about Star Trek Nemesis.. by Cotton McKnight	Apr 9th, 2007 03:52:00 PM
Actually it was better than "Insurrection", yet did worse numbers. I attribute that solely to the fact that it was released a week before the two towers. And wasn't in between that and a James Bond movie? Unbelievable. But then again, I have heard their idea for the sequel and i'm kind of glad it did so bad, just so we didn't have to see what they had in mind.
Why is everyone ragging Death Proof? by theseventhshore	Apr 9th, 2007 03:52:56 PM
You're beating the wrong fucking horse, children. Sure...the yapfest ain't gonna bring in the mindless masses, but DP has REAL CHARACTERS. EMOTIONAL DYNAMICS. A TRUE TENSION ARC. AN AMAZING ANTAGONIST. Planet Terror IS its antagonist. Oozing and mindless. If anything, QT should convince the bloated brothers to release an extended/polished version of DP as a separate experience...or at least a special edition DVD (along with additional stunt scenes of Zoe Bell in other movies). THAT will make the bones back, brothers...
WTF is Cop Rock by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 03:54:10 PM
another joke TV show by the people that did something else. hak0lantern01, try what Masked Avenger did. IMDB it and all of my dry wit will be unvailed. Masked Avenger your ok in my book.
Bad idea by BobParr	Apr 9th, 2007 03:54:35 PM
I saw the movie(s) this weekend and enjoyed it. I wanted the double feature grindhouse experience with the previews. I would not pay to see an extended version of either of these movies by themselves.
One man's cool... by ebolamonkey	Apr 9th, 2007 03:55:22 PM
is another man's stupid. I've heard way too many comments from non-film geeks like "that looks like a really stupid movie" or even "what the hell was that?" after viewing the trailer on TV. Geek-love can support a comic book title, or a web site, but it can't support a $60+ million dollar movie. I mean, who was the idiot that thought the public was demanding this type of film?
People are ragging on Death Proof... by Jak0lantern01	Apr 9th, 2007 03:56:05 PM
because they have the attention span of fruit flies. Too much fast edit TV has rotted their brains, so they can't sit still without your standard Michael Bay hack editing job. You know, they do have a name for this: Attention Defecit Disorder, aka ADD. I actually like movies with dialog, the ones without are just way too shallow (I did like Kill Bill 2 a lot).
Re; KosherWookie by WolfmanNards	Apr 9th, 2007 03:59:14 PM
"Saw this movie twice this past weekend and LOVED IT!!! It REALLY evokes the grindhouse memories, crappy prints, scratches, exploitation trailers and all! This from a veteran of the Times Square grindhouse experience at the Rialto and the Liberty back in the bad old 70s." This should have been Harry's review. But he had to take the expected self indulgent ego route.
THE TRAILERS and the DVD by Darth Melkor	Apr 9th, 2007 04:00:12 PM
So if they separate the films are the wonderful trailers gone too? And what about the DVD release? Here's what they MUST do. You release Grindhouse on DVD, exactly what we all saw in the theater. Hell don't even include bonus features. Just give us the straight 3 hour film. Then release an extended Planet Terror without the missing reel and bonus features as it's on dvd. And do the same for Death Proof. Most fans would buy all three. I would.
i for one by rdsxfan8	Apr 9th, 2007 04:01:29 PM
will be very pissed if i have to shell out 2x the $$ to see both films that those of you who have already seen it spent seeing them both. and easter had nothing to do with me not seeing it, i happen to work w/e's so I havent yet gotten around to it. but it looks like i had better get my ass in gear before those ASS CLOWN exec's have their way and cut this thing into 2. i also agree 100% that it was a shitty idea to open this on a holiday w/e. Lots of folks out with the kids doesnt mean a big BO draw for this one. and it wasnt just beaten by "Are we there yet" it was beaten by "blades of glory", "meet the robinsons" and "AWTY" which is more proof that this type of film should never open on this w/e.
Darth Melkor by Jak0lantern01	Apr 9th, 2007 04:02:21 PM
That's right, give Hollywood proof perfect that they can rip you and every other sucker off on this one. I'd piss on all 3 DVD's.
QT makes 2 films out of Kill Bill... by Fabulous Freak	Apr 9th, 2007 04:03:29 PM
...and they seriously consider making it 1 for DVD. Grindhouse is two movies for the price of one, and they want to split it up into 2. If he werent as powerful a force in hollywood, imagine how fucked his movies would end up by the time they reach us.
"It was the three-hour run-time..." by MechaTruffautMk2	Apr 9th, 2007 04:03:39 PM
Blaming Grindhouse's failure on its run-time would make sense if there was some sort of a history of such failures when the movies were just really, really good...but what about the Lord of the Rings films at three hours plus each? Huge successes...basically, you can't really get any bigger, with them each in the top ten highest grossing films of all time. Why were they so huge, despite their run-time? Well...they were extremely well done! (not exactly masterpieces, though, but that's another story) Why did Grindhouse bomb? Same reason the new King Kong did...both films were awful. Tarantino is the worst hack of all time; I saw Grindhouse just to stay afloat with the current conversation in film, and I was not at all surprised when it blew unmitigated ass. I should have learned my lesson after Kill Bill. I swear, I'll never see another Tarantino hacksterpirce (hah hah, see what I did there? At least Kurt Russell laughed...) even if it's a giant robot romantic kung fu space opera starring the reanimated corpses of Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland (yes, I know she's still alive, so I guess she'll actually just be deyoungified).
Spider-Man 3 by rodvegas78	Apr 9th, 2007 04:05:12 PM
I'm not comparing Spider-Man 3 to Grindhouse, 2 different demos, etc. But had Spider-Man 3 opened this weekend, you think it would have made less then what it would make opening in May? I take back my statement for saying Easter had anything to do with it.. Saw IV could have probably opened to big numbers over Easter.. people love that Saw guy..
ASS CLOWN is so playedout by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 04:05:32 PM
How bout' "SHIT TUBE" "DICK CHASER" or the rare but effective "CUM DUMPSTER" show some creativity.
It's CRAP by lennon211	Apr 9th, 2007 04:09:54 PM
I think it's a crap move to separate the movies...in fact,the Wiensteins will go in my book as ChickenShit. Now, Harvey, how about that full release DVD?
re: gride9000 by rdsxfan8	Apr 9th, 2007 04:11:23 PM
how about dum cumster insted of cum dumpster.
MechaTruffautMk2 by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 04:11:49 PM
You got all the answers, don't ya, listen you butcket of stinky doo-doo. Don't fuck with our man. Around here QT is a G.O.D. Who care if you think a super duper movie is ok or even shity. Come back from bizzaro world and I'll teach you how to get laid.
Tarantino missed the boat... by EthanEdwards	Apr 9th, 2007 04:12:19 PM
on this one. For someone who has basically made his career making exploitation movies, he really missed with with Death Proof. This was supposed to be a "grindhouse" (in quotes, because no one really references this correctly here) movie, and just adding a couple of jump cuts to a very talky film (that no one would've sat through or had the capibility to make) doesn't make it a grindhouse movie. Everyone has already pointed out that the graniny, scratchy quality diasappears halfway through the film. Why? Possibily the same reason why Tarantino was already going to recut it before opening weekend (check last week's EW). There's a better movie in there (or maybe not... maybe Tarantino knew his movie sucked in camparision to Rodriguez's, at least on the "grindhouse" level, and I'm sure he doesn't want to play second fiddle to Rodriguez). In other words, it was a terrible "grindhouse" movie but (maybe) a good movie that was being restrained by the "grindhouse" ideal. Either way, people who defend it as is for what it is supposed to be are just trying to come off mentally-superior. Its disappointing that Tarantino given the chance to really release his inner creativity in a film style he loves so much missed so badly.
rodvegas78 by ProfGriffin	Apr 9th, 2007 04:13:26 PM
Excellent point. It may not have been the fault of the Holiday Weekend...but for this TYPE of film it certainly had an influence. Again, it wasn't that people did not go to the movies...they did. But they all went to see something else. Running time affects it in that there are so many hours of the day and only so many showings can be held... But the truth of it...(as Pintel would say) is more terrifying. The movies failed to bring them in. We were gluttoned with advertising, all the players appeared on the talk shows, the BUZZZ was big (magazine covers, Entertainment talk shows) this was an experience. BUT...the public passed.
almost by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 04:13:48 PM
but cum dumpster is pure genius. And listen buddy I didn't invent that one.
I don't know why they're panicking by GregoryHarbin	Apr 9th, 2007 04:14:10 PM
I really want to see Grindhouse, I just didn't have a chance over Easter weekend. I'm sure a lot of other people didn't, and will be seeing it this weekend, or buy the DVD, where runtime won't matter.
Leave it by Russman	Apr 9th, 2007 04:14:22 PM
It was fine the way it was. On DVD they'll add more stuff fill in the "missing" reels and it'll make even more money.
Speaking of shit that tanks by Yogsoggoth	Apr 9th, 2007 04:15:13 PM
did anyone see the teaser trailer for Halloween yet? I know they'll wait three weeks to post about it here and then treat it like it is brand new, but for your viewing pleasure (http://tinyurl.com/3xmdom).
3 DVDs is the answer. by Zarles	Apr 9th, 2007 04:16:09 PM
One of the full movie, one of PT, and one of DP. Load them all up to the gills with as many extras as you can, and bingo - you made your money back.
Um, gride9000... by Childe Roland	Apr 9th, 2007 04:16:28 PM
...you relly ought to check into a little place I like to call "reality." I don't think you'll find many on this site who write QT off as completely talentless, but most of us (at least those of us who actually notice things like comparitive quality in cinema) are painfully aware of his limitations (the ones he was born with and the ones he's placed on himself) as a film maker. The days of blindly bowing at the feet of any old idea that runs through that coke addled brain of his are well over and done with. As for teaching anyone how to get laid...why do I imagine you as the freckle-faced cousin from National Lampoon's Vacation, asking young Anthony Michael Hall if he's ever bopped his baloney?
why are they shocked? by lionbiu	Apr 9th, 2007 04:17:34 PM
Grindhouse movies never did great box offcie back in the 70's so why would they do great box office now? It was released at a stupid time, the best release date would have been early february to mid march or late summer. Dvivding the film would be stupid and completely go against everything the film stood for.
I'm seeing it this weekend and it better still be one by kinghenryVIII	Apr 9th, 2007 04:17:47 PM
film or I'm gonna shit. I'm hearing it's great thenhearing it's not .... I do want to make my own opinion but obviously I need to do it quick. Weinstien you prick! Let it play out!
Just a thought... by Jono from the Block	Apr 9th, 2007 04:18:48 PM
But wasn't the whole thing with Grindhouse movies that they very rarely made tons of cash? So a big homage to a load of movies that didn't make much money ends up... not taking money. A bit like Tim Burton's Ed Wood - it's great to pay homage to something but if the mass audience didn't take to something first time round then why should they now (although I'm sure there will be several exceptions that prove the rule)? Must be off, time to watch my Four Rooms DVD to see if it really is as bad as i remember...
Grindhouse was awesome by gusborwig	Apr 9th, 2007 04:19:12 PM
This was a great set of movies. I would have to say this was a great homage to some of the great b-movies out there. Its definetly one of those movies that has to be seen in a movie theater or even preferably at a drive-in. I cant wait to see if they do something on the DVD to make it that much better. Its not meant to be serious. I came in expecting 3 hours of gore and hilarity and I got that and more. Splitting these movies up would be a terrible idea. Wait it out Weinsteins. Itll be a big seller on rental/DVD.
Which Kind Of Idiot Are You? by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 04:19:38 PM
1. The kind that thinks he/she know more about movie marketing than the people who make films and have a marketing dept. 2. The kind of idiot that can't sit through good stories with real diolouge. 3.The kind that thinks QT and RR suck.
hey TBers...wonder why Bay doesnt care what you say? by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 9th, 2007 04:19:58 PM
because just like SoaP, you all couldnt stop talking about how cool it was gonna be...then guess what? FLOP!!! so either you gusy are all fucking talk or there are a lot of people posting under different names bacause i know I'VE already paid to see Grindhouse 3 times....ive done my fucking part. and you wonder why they dumb down comic movies and other shit we like...WE...DONT....MATTER!!!!
Machette and Werewomen of the SS by gusborwig	Apr 9th, 2007 04:20:19 PM
These movies need to be the sequel.
Why GRINDHOUSE is bombing(for now) by Lord Elric	Apr 9th, 2007 04:20:36 PM
I was auditing another movie all weekend, and i can tell you what was happening there. Tons of young people buying for Firehouse Dog and Are We Done Yet, then sneaking into Grindhouse. The theatre screen was packed, especially at night, and we're talking a 300 plus house. that's what happened. Plus, the word that Death proof was pretty talky. Add to that a very bad release date and a lack of proper explanation as to just what Grindhouse means, which seem to have prompted more then one teen a few weeks ago to say that it looked "stupid", and there you have what went wrong. I'm still confused as to why the whole thing cost 53 million, which is about the price for about 200 real grindhouse films, but I'm assuming the heavy CGI work in Planet Terror, plus the large cast, may have had something to do with it. Bad timing did this one in. This is a mid Summer, early fall film. or at least Spring Break. I do think that it'll do very well on dvd, though. Please, I seriously hope this doesn't endanger any spin of the propsed spinoff films. I want Werewolf Women Of The S.S. to be made.
Jak0lantern01 by Darth Melkor	Apr 9th, 2007 04:20:52 PM
Only if you buy all there. I'm just saying give people the choice. Don't make them watch them separately. If they want Grindhouse, let them buy Grindhouse. If they're a big Death Proof fan and want and extended cut, let them buy just that. I'm not saying let them rip us off, I'm just saying we should get to decide if we want to see these films like they were intended to be seen, not separately.
People are ragging on Death Proof... by KeithCourage	Apr 9th, 2007 04:22:06 PM
ADD huh...or maybe it's because when I bought a ticket to a movie called Grindhouse, I expected to have fun...not listen to girls talk at a diner. If I bitched that "The Queen" or "Little Children" had too much dialogue and were boring...then you could spout that snotty bullshit. People are just pissed because they were promised a "Thrill Ride" and got a scenic bike ride instead.
stupid weinsteins by purplemonkeydw	Apr 9th, 2007 04:22:44 PM
always trying to make money off of movies so they can make more movies...stupid innovators of independent film...d'oh!
gride9000 by skimn	Apr 9th, 2007 04:22:53 PM
I would've responded sooner, but the drool all over my keyboard was making it all slippery like.
agreed by lionbiu	Apr 9th, 2007 04:35:30 PM
With death proof there actually is a good movie within there and making it a grindhouse movie actually stops it from realising it's potential. Planet Terror is everything a grindhosue movie should be..stupid, big, dumb and filled with action. Death Proof gets shitted on because it does not deliver what is promised.
ProGrif by rodvegas78	Apr 9th, 2007 04:36:39 PM
I see your point, I guess it's just the whole Snakes on a Plane thing, even though Grindhouse is far superior to Snakes on a Plane.. I have a bad feeling for Hot Fuzz when it opens in a couple of weeks.. I saw it with the stars there and the theater was packed, but it's not like there was a line wrapped around the building.. I think we geeks want movies with fresh ideas that aren't a remakes that are worthwhile and get angry when it doesn't take in a ton of dough... Had Grindhouse made $100 mil. this weekend.. would we all be bitching about the people that jumped on the bandwagon??
Partially the Hype is to blame by Macktheknife01	Apr 9th, 2007 04:37:19 PM
My wife and I both debated going to see this but decided to wait til next weekend, I mean it was easter. I love most of both of these guys but i kept seeing these two nerds high fiving at the end of each add. "Isn't great that we can write on cocaine". Seemed a little indulgent
The Passion Opened on Easter? by Darth Melkor	Apr 9th, 2007 04:39:43 PM
IT WAS ABOUT EASTER!!!! I don't seem to recall flesh eating zombie viruses and freeway maniacs in the Bible.
Why it failed by crackerfarmboy	Apr 9th, 2007 04:40:51 PM
1) Very little advertising. How many fucking "The Reaping" ads have there been? About 10 times more than "Grindhouse"! 2) Easter weekend was a terrible idea. It's a family film weekend and it's in competition with the Farrell juggernaught "Blades of Glory" even though that film is the same fucking teen comedy film they've been making for the last 6 years now. "Hey here's an idea" (reaches into hat of funny professions): "Let's have Will pretend he's: A BALLERINA!!" $100 million later and everyone's happy, except for people who like intelligent comedies. But back to Grindhouse: 3) It needs time for word of mouth to spread. It's good I'm sure (will see it next week) and Tarantino's films rarely start out with huge opening weekends. This movie will grow as people get sick of "BOG" and the late April/early May movie blues set in. Don't panic Weinsteins. Don't shit the bed! 4) Trust Tarantino, this film will not flop as bad as you think it will.
Loved it by liljuniorbrown	Apr 9th, 2007 04:45:29 PM
I had to fucking make time late sunday night after all the family priorities and then i got to see it. Death Proof does not have enough exploitation style to it. I enjoy looking at hot ass chicks as much as possible but all that talking is way too much for me. It was a great time at the movies and I do want more GrindHouse flicks in the future,as long as Eli Roth is no where near the fucking lense. I want to see El Wray and the bad ass Micheal Bein character,even the babysitter twins who didn't get enough screen time for my taste.
The Weinsteins recut a move? by Larry of Arabia	Apr 9th, 2007 04:45:41 PM
Man, that would NEEEEEEVER happen!
machete by rdsxfan8	Apr 9th, 2007 04:48:42 PM
this is the one they should make a movie outta heres a link to a youtube clip fo the machete trailer!!! ( handheld cam shot but it still looks ok) http://tinyurl.com/2exe6g
I honestly don't think Death Proof would work by itself by Hideo Kojima	Apr 9th, 2007 04:50:29 PM
If it was released by itself it would probably bomb more than Grindhouse
GRINDHOUSE not as good as... by -guyinthebackrow	Apr 9th, 2007 04:52:41 PM
ROAD HOUSE! You know it!
WORD OF MOUTH as Grindhouse's SAVIOR by TheDohDoh	Apr 9th, 2007 04:53:03 PM
Seriously guys, anyone who thinks positive word-of-mouth is going to save this mutant-experiment of a film is kidding themselves. Look at how much dissonance there is in the ranks of TBers. If half the geeks here think Death Proof was a let-down, then 80% of non-geeks/general public viewers are going to trash it. There's a more indepth TB discussion of the film under Moriarty's review, and I recommend everyone add to that talkback per the films. There's no way to save this one. It won't do shit overseas either - did they even have "grindhouses" outside the states?
jfp2006 by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 9th, 2007 04:54:18 PM
uh, are you even remotely familiar with the idea behind Easter or are you just retarded?
It worked when they broke up 4 Rooms. by modlight	Apr 9th, 2007 04:54:31 PM
Oh wait, that was a half baked jerk off pet project as well.
DUMP YOUR MARKETING BRAINS NOW! by Cult Exiter	Apr 9th, 2007 04:55:20 PM
Now, this was like promising every fanboy (worldwide) 2 chicks in a row, the same night! and then... April's fool, sucka! Dream on about Jane Fonda! Hahah... Where's the pimp's logic?!
Death Proof Sucks by monkeyboyjunior	Apr 9th, 2007 04:56:32 PM
"If 300 had been released last weekend, it would have flopped, too." No, it wouldn't have. Planet Terror is mediocre and Death Proof is as boring as watching paint dry. That is why it had a poor weekend. No deep analysis required.
missing reels by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 9th, 2007 04:58:01 PM
if they put the missing reel back into Planet Terror, im going to kill someone...that jump cut had me laughing harder at anything else in either film. i mean fuck if they put that footage back, it will just take away a great gag and will actually make the film worse. also, im not buying 2 motherfucking DVDs when this thing hits, and youre looking at they guy who has a 1000+ DVD collection so im bot exactly stingy when it comes to throwing down for movies. its the principle of the projesct goddammit. and for the record, i blame the easter weekend/lack of ads for the disappointing numbers
The more I see of Rose McGowan by Mr. Lahey	Apr 9th, 2007 05:07:17 PM
flying around with her gun-leg, the happier I am these movies will be split up. Thank you.
They would make some money by aron	Apr 9th, 2007 05:08:24 PM
They would make some money back if they hurried up releasing it in other countries. I have to wait till June until it gets released here in Ireland. Most people will already have seen pirate copies of it by the time the movie opens here. Same thing with Rocky Balboa and 300 there were perfect copies of them going around before they even opened here.
Seems chickeny by CherryValance	Apr 9th, 2007 05:11:11 PM
I mean, leave it the way it is and take it like a man. Although had they been originally released individually, I would have only gone to Death Proof. That would have been good. I would have avoided the silly zombies and they wouldn't have gotten any more of my money.
"but sir, he's getting his dick wet sir" by future help	Apr 9th, 2007 05:14:10 PM
there were great moments all thru Planet Terror. QT really let me down. Rather boring "grindhouse" story. But i laughed and laughed when Kurt Russel turned into a pussy. That was great! AND YES. i like the idea of busting this movie up as a 6 movie at 20 min ea (or some 30 and others 12min)Grindhouse experience. That whould of been much more fun and higher energy.
no matter what...im happy it ever even got made. by future help	Apr 9th, 2007 05:15:31 PM
period.
I do want to... by Massage...Bored	Apr 9th, 2007 05:17:48 PM
...see the entire Death Proof long cut in the theatre, I'll go back!
more than the sum of its parts by johnnysunshine	Apr 9th, 2007 05:19:24 PM
this is a film that's more than the sum of its parts. I got two great movies for the price of one this weekend and had an excellent time with them. why spend a bunch more money splitting them into two movies? I fyou just want to see one flick, then leave early or come late. I'm sorry they didn't make as much money as they should hav. releasing it on easter weekend was pretty stupid I guess and it's not something that'll appeal to everyone, but surely they'll make their money back on dvd. Also, a lot of people seem to be ragging on death proof. The first half lags, i admit, but the second half was awesome!
What the hell is Firehouse Dog? by MechaTruffautMk2	Apr 9th, 2007 05:20:21 PM
I refuse to look it up on IMDB, because the last time I used that site to check out that new movie, ya know, 300, it sent me to a softcore gay S&M porn flick. Not quite sure what that's all about...anybody know what's wrong with IMDB? Also, Grindhouse is still terrible.
Re: Firehouse Dog by TheDohDoh	Apr 9th, 2007 05:26:24 PM
Mecha, you should look for the trailer for Firehouse Dog. It's pretty fucking incredible. You won't believe your eyes. Imagine WonderDog at the grindhouse, and you're 1/2 way there.
running time means less showings, yes. BUT... by HypeEndsHere	Apr 9th, 2007 05:26:53 PM
a novelty shouldn't be 3hrs in general. imagine a "Stairway to Heaven"-length version of "Purple People Eater".
RE:MechaTruffautMk2 by rdsxfan8	Apr 9th, 2007 05:28:51 PM
here is the link to the yahoo site for firehouse dog. http://tinyurl.com/ysmz87 your guess is as good as mine what this is about but Im guessing it has something to do with a a firehouse and a dog.....
in the voice of Samuel L. Jackson: by Cult Exiter	Apr 9th, 2007 05:29:24 PM
When you got a bucketful of shit... Who you think you fooling, by putting a half of that shit in another bucket, then tell us, now you got 2 buckets of shit! We all can both smell and see, that there is still just 1 bucket of shit in total! And we want all that shit in only 1 bucket, cuz it all fits in 1 bucket! Got it?!
STUPID: Grindhouse POOR showing...Harvey Reacts by 9000rpm	Apr 9th, 2007 05:30:32 PM
Yeah, right, I'm going to waste even more of my money on Grindhouse. There's no way releasing Gtindhouse in two parts is going to do anything but sink Weinstein even deeper in the red. The word is out and Grindhouse is box office poison. Sure, a few morons will show up so they can smuggly proclaim they saw all the missing bits (you know, the ones that turn Death Proof into a cultural phenom). But, hey, clueless, I don't want to see the ugly chick do a lapdance, and the VAST majority of the miniscule number of boyfans that got swept up by the hype (and got ripped off) will avoid this bisected turd like the POS it is.
My two cents by Darth Thoth	Apr 9th, 2007 05:32:53 PM
No need to elaborate the many reasons why this movie failed at the box office. Previous talkbackers handled that. Let's just say I'm in the camp that feels the burden lies with the suits b/c I thought the movie rocked. Sure the movie was long but that didn't stop Rings. Even Kong did ok #s. Nothing bad like this. So length can be worked around. No, I think releasing a movie like this on Easter weekend along w/ kids buying tix for other flicks and then sneaking into GH are the 2 chief reasons for the bad #s. Oh look, I still gave my reasons this tanked. Oh well. Well, my point is this if any of the suits are listening, I think it's a bad idea to cut and rerelease this movie. It's out. Let it be. There's always word of mouth (it was reviewed well too), outside of US theatrical sales, and DVD sales. Plus, the summer movie season is basically here. Hot Fuzz comes out in a couple of weeks. Then Spidey 3 after that. There's no room really. Just let the flick ride out. It's a good movie experience.
Enough with the Death Proof apologists! by CreasyBear	Apr 9th, 2007 05:33:22 PM
The argument some of you make sets up the fallacy that there are only two ways to think: either someone "realizes" Death Proof's (aimless and truly boring) dialogue was brilliant, or you must be a moron who claps and drools at Ghost Rider. You think those are the only two choices? Give us all a break. Death Proof's endless blathering did not do much to establish any of the characters, was not funny, did not produce any clever turns of phrase, and was usually superfluous to the plot. It's not dialogue that I have a problem with, it's pointless dialogue. Some of you act like there's no difference.
If they are going seperate this movie by emeraldboy	Apr 9th, 2007 05:35:36 PM
then they might as well Scrap the June 1st opening in the UK/ireland and release and two seperate movies. That is what they are doing in the rest of Europe.
And Planet Terror was a lot of fun. by CreasyBear	Apr 9th, 2007 05:35:46 PM
Rodriguez respected goofy exploitation movies while at the same time poking fun at them, and it made for a wild, fun movie.
It will make 10-15M next weekend by Jack Burton	Apr 9th, 2007 05:36:04 PM
I think the main problem was opening on Easter. I don't know anyone that saw it (including myself) but everyone I've talked to is planning on going this weekend. Cutting it in half is ridiculous. Let it be what it is. I also don't get why Harv feels the need to chop it up for the DVD release either. Except his rampant greed at getting $40 for both movies as opposed to $20 for the full flick. At least release it in one full volume if you are going to do that. I'm sure it has chapters, how hard is it to skip to the one you want to watch?
Bottom Line..public does not want legless chics... by jojo-pimp	Apr 9th, 2007 05:36:17 PM
with guns on their legs!! i mean seriously, we all know, deep down, that even though us fanboys love this shit, it is kinda retarded..and i hate to say it, but thats what 90% of ticket buyers are going to think! Personally, i loved the damn movie...but everyone at my work thinks it looks retarded and wont even give it a shot
I agree - Word of Mouth by Gangar	Apr 9th, 2007 05:43:38 PM
It WAS a bad idea to release this on easter eknd. the whole damn multiplex was empty. Also - this is a word of mouth movie for sure. This will definitely pick up steam if they let it. DeathProof is an odd flick but it really does nail the exploitation experience, probably more accurately than Planet Terror, just because most exploitation movies aren't that crazy good from start to finish. Death Proof is like a really clever Roger Coreman parody and is pure genius, but the whole thing is DIFFERENT and DIFFERENT takes time. I hope the Weinsteins find their cajones and stick with it. Chopping Kill Bill into two was a mistake. Don't be greedy bastards. have a little patience for once. Jeez.
On Dancing with the Stars they do by CherryValance	Apr 9th, 2007 05:45:26 PM
Heather Mills has survived two eliminations already. But in Planet Terror that gag, or whatever it was, didn't really work.
What happened to the Weinsteins? by Jinxo	Apr 9th, 2007 05:45:39 PM
Back in the day these guys were the masters of marketing and now that seems to be their downfall. Before Grindhouse they went and threw all their ad dollars at a stinker horror flick and gave almost no release and no promotion to Feast, the first decent Project Greenlight movie. And now they have Grindhouse. Great fun flick. What do they do? Rather than bringing real grindhouses into the push for the film they ignore them entirely and they release it on Easter weekend?!?! Okay, I'm a lapsed Catholic. Haven't been to church regularly in over a decade. And I loved the idea of Grindhouse, was dying to see it. Yet even I actually had a problem with it coming out at Easter. I didn't even think about it until the news came out about how the film did but I did actually have to convince myself to go see it this weekend. There was a part of me going, "Okay, you don't go to church, not super religious but still the minimum respectful thing you could do would be to wait and see the flick next week. I mean you have 51 other weekends to see flicks like this. Is it so much to ask that you skip a film like this for this ONE weekend of the year?" Again, I did go but I'm betting I wasn't alone. So you lose the $$$ of anyone celebrating Easter with family, then you have people avoiding it out of respect for the weekend, others who are going, "3 hours of movie?!?!" Not saying it should be cut up though. The length would be less of an issue without the other problems. I think they should wait and see what happens next weekend. Word of mouth and Easter bein gout of the way may actually help weekend #2.
Most of the time I usually by RomeroZombie	Apr 9th, 2007 05:48:17 PM
Most of the time I usually wait for dvd to see a movie.With this one a buddy of mine and myself snuck out to a matinee(the first show of the day at 11:00a.m)After getting assraped at the concession stand(cash?credit?home equity loan?)me and my buddy took our seats.During the previews for the other movies the projectionist tried to add to the overall grind house experience by misaligning the camera so that it was a crooked image and even turning the camera off at one point.To further enhance the experience for my fellow movie going audience members,I accidentally kicked over my coke and it ran down underneath the seats for them to rest their feet in.For the next three hours in change we had an excellent time watching two masters of cinema totally geek out for us.Whether or not it made 50 million dollars the opening weekend it was worth doing.They will get their money back in the long term especially with dvd sales and such.Part of me was happy that it didnt do so well(payback for Shakespeare In Love beating Saving Private Ryan for best picture),but it is also sad that people didnt come out to support the movie more.One of the things I was thinking that could help the movie a bit more...Drive-Ins......The season is almost here for em and what more appropriate venue to see a film like this.Overall for three hours I was heavily entertained..my buddy felt the same way too.All isnt lost..hopefully they have patience and let the movie sit in theatres for awhile.
I doubt anyone will read this far down the list by StovetopStuffin'	Apr 9th, 2007 05:48:24 PM
But I could have stood to watch at least a half hour MORE of EACH movie.
Well... by hatramroany	Apr 9th, 2007 05:50:06 PM
...they are being released separately overseas. And it did get mixed reviews within reviews, meaning people liked one more than the other (mostly liking planet terror more). And it was easter weekend.
thats true by Gangar	Apr 9th, 2007 05:50:15 PM
I was actually GLAD it was Easter because I could see it in a nearly empty theater and the 3 hours flew by, but that scene of the guy BFing the turkey with the human head attached might have been considered sacriligious to some folks. Good thing it wasnt a bunny.
not everyone celebrates easter, by the by by HypeEndsHere	Apr 9th, 2007 05:52:08 PM
and getting candy in a basket does not prevent one from going to a movie theatre over the course of 3 days. i think the easter thing is barking up the wrong tree. not to mention this film isn't exactly targeted at the churchgoing public or children. and some dude up there said they didn't advertise this movie.... to you i say, "do they have to tattoo the poster on the inside of your fucking eyelids?" because that's the way i felt a week before it came out.
DEAR HARVEY WEINSTEIN, FUCK YOU - xoxo, THE SOUTH by TheDohDoh	Apr 9th, 2007 05:53:06 PM
Seriously, the fact that this prick is defending his movie and his company's huge financial bust this wke by blaming it on "the need to educate the South" is the MOST FUCKING OFFENSIVE, BLOWHARD EXCUSE OF ALL FUCKING TIME!!! What the fuck. This movie is fucking bullshit and even half the geeks think so. And he blames it on "the red states." Moreover, LOOKOUT EVERYONE HARVERY WEINSTEIN IS COMING TO THE SOUTH AND THE MIDWEST TO EDUCATE EVERYONE! What a prick. It's funny b/c Wilmington, NC is the third largest for film production. It's funnier b/c this fat, greedy fuck will be out of business or at least lose his best talent after this is all said and done.
jfp2006... by FrenchBastard03	Apr 9th, 2007 05:55:20 PM
...The Passion did NOT open on Easter, dipshit. Look it up before you start spewing falsities. It came out on February 25, over a month before Easter..
Wow my mistake. by BillyPilgrim	Apr 9th, 2007 05:56:47 PM
I thought Firehouse Dog was Firehose Dog. I was shocked to think that a Peter North with Jenna J flick made it to the big screen. But alas....it was not to be. I will state the obvious and say splitting the movies is dumb as shit. Maybe make it a DVD option.
HARVEY WEINSTEIN GOTTA EAT!!! by TheUglyBaby	Apr 9th, 2007 05:58:26 PM
(__)__)
A warning to anyone with talent by hallmitchell	Apr 9th, 2007 05:59:01 PM
If you sign a deal with the Weinsteins. It is like signing a deal with the devil. Harvey is all there with his chest puffed out at Democrat fundraisers. Making out he's a Hollywood liberal. Yet will not loose one once of sleep at ripping off and screwing over film makers.
..."Loose"? ....."Once"? by TheUglyBaby	Apr 9th, 2007 06:01:01 PM
3 words, babe Hooked On Phonics
The moment a movie company's by Onset	Apr 9th, 2007 06:03:22 PM
The moment a movie company's actions can be likened to those of a television network is the moment they lose.
Auds'll need to feel new footage makes em better by lettersoftransit	Apr 9th, 2007 06:05:58 PM
This will work if the audience is sold on the idea that the added footage is more outrageous than what was in the double feature bill. If they get the impression both films have simply been fleshed out to feature length by reinstalling weaker stuff that didn't make the cut first time around, they may not feel like paying to see one expanded film when they could've seen two lean and mean. Might even want to consider new footage that puts one or both over the top to NC-17 That would sound like the minutes left out were something special.
They fucked up kill bill as wel so why not this one? by Windowlicker74	Apr 9th, 2007 06:06:12 PM
the only one who thought that whas a great idea was Harry. nuff said.. , they're going to split grindhouse here in Europe anyway.
split it by darwinwins	Apr 9th, 2007 06:07:40 PM
the concept was a gimmick anyway. this movie combined will not make any money. double features sounds fun for a small percentage of the people -- the rest who go out in packs to see movies also like to go out and do other things. these two movie's combined lengths kinda rub into friend time. and that is your main audience (for this R rated movie)-- the flocks of people in groups. artistic vision is a nice concept but since the business of cinema is business first, the weinsteins will split the movie. no one is bitching that the movies are being separated overseas. why? cos the two were made to sell tickets and the most tickets will be sold by cutting the movies into two. the intent of that move was because the concept of the double feature is foreign to many foreign markets. this past weekend's performance validates that belief because the concept of the double feature is a couple of decades removed from our own.
I'd say Quint pegged it... by jimmy rabbitte	Apr 9th, 2007 06:11:08 PM
...when he pointed out that this was a holiday weekend. I've been waiting for this to come out; and can't wait to go see it. I just couldn't get in and see it this past weekend due to family plans and obligations. WANK-stein should wait and see what this weekend brings... if he chops them up I'm not even going to bother with seeing it in the theater.
What I want to know: where the hell was $53 million? by DarthCorleone	Apr 9th, 2007 06:11:09 PM
Because it sure wasn't up on the screen. Does that include the advertising budget? Isn't a budget like that contrary to the whole Grindhouse spirit? Don't get me wrong - I had a great time with the movie and have recommended it to others, and I thought the effects were fun and the cast was great. I just don't think this movie should have cost more than $20 million.
gride9000... by omarthesnake	Apr 9th, 2007 06:12:31 PM
yes, but i've never asked millions of people to pay $8 a head to watch it. We've only got 90 minutes with these characters, I don't give a flaming shit to hear them ramble on. That's just sloppy, lazy, self-indulgent filmmaking. And QT is certainly self-indulgent, but that's OK if he backs it up with the solid dialogue, good characters, etc, etc. But in this case, it was sloppy and lazy and worst of all, BORING. You want to establish the chatty nature of the characters, you could've done that in half the time it took. The conversations around restaurant tables thing can only go so far without looking like Reservoir Dogs Lite.
I celebrated Easter by drinking and gambling. by DarthCorleone	Apr 9th, 2007 06:14:14 PM
I was able to catch the Thursday night showing of Grindhouse. I do think Easter weekend was a factor, as it would have been for me if not seeing it before leaving town. Even if it's distasteful for some to see severed and oozing limbs in conjunction with a religious holiday, a lot of people had a three-day weekend and might not have wanted to commit three hours of vacation to a movie.
It won't happen by Rupee88	Apr 9th, 2007 06:14:22 PM
They are probably just floating these rumors to save face somehow.
Too Late by Ratphink	Apr 9th, 2007 06:14:34 PM
In true Grindhouse style, both films should have had budgets of 10 mil or less each. Forcing both filmmakers to really deliver that vision on limited budgets. I enjoyed the experience alot, but wished they felt more like low budget quickies. If that were the case everyone would be looking at a fairly successful opening instead of thinking of really runining things this way.
Bad Release Date by darquelyte	Apr 9th, 2007 06:16:01 PM
They should have released it in May just before all the big sequels come out. Let it play through the summer in the drive-ins, then rerelease it in September as 2 movies with the "missing reels" put back in, then release it on DVD for the Holidays. It would have made a much bigger impact that way. Now, what they should do is just let it stay out there and see if word of mouth works or not. If it does, run it until the weekend of the first big sequel, then pull it, and do the Fall/Holiday thing I mentioned before. If word of mouth doesn't work, pull it after next week, then do the Fall/Holiday plan. Not really all that complicated. ~ÐL
I think you are all missing the point by The Skeptical	Apr 9th, 2007 06:17:16 PM
I think you are all missing the point of this "rumor". (Which is front page on yahoo news). The idea is to make the people who have not seen ir think "Damn, I better go see it before they split it up!". it's a reactive MARKETING campaign. Do any of you realy doubt that?
nuts to you by Gangar	Apr 9th, 2007 06:18:22 PM
You guys who didn't get Deathproof don't know stink about exploitation movies. Most of them are JUST LIKE THAT, lots and lots of exposition and a little bit of action. That's the JOKE, except the dialog isn't nearly as interesting. I'm not even a huge Tarrantino fan but I think he did a really good job here and hit all the right notes. Kurt Russell is both hilarious and menacing and the ending is supoib, like the ultimate cheerleader flick. You dissenters need to get yourselves a schoolin' in some serious exploitation theater before you start pissin' on the Deathproof. You don't know shit.
real dialogue? by rainbowtrout1265	Apr 9th, 2007 06:19:46 PM
"The kind of idiot that can't sit through good stories with real diolouge" Tracie Thoms dropping 500 F bombs is not real dialogue. That has to be the worst performance of the year.
DarthCorleone: $53M by 9000rpm	Apr 9th, 2007 06:20:29 PM
The real budget is supposedly more like $67M, plus marketing. What a mess.
with respect to darwinwins by jimmy rabbitte	Apr 9th, 2007 06:21:09 PM
I've read many a post from TBer's in overseas countries who aren't happy that the films are being released separately. As for the running time, ( my local cinema's website lists it at 3 hours 11 minutes ) it is a bit long, but there've been long running films that have done well. I would attribute the low receipts more to the holiday weekend than the running time. Atleast at this point; but if the numbers don't improve this weekend, it's quite likely they aren't going to... and then splitting them up is probably unavoidable.
and please, no extra footage on Planet Terror either by omarthesnake	Apr 9th, 2007 06:21:19 PM
i enjoyed that film a lot more than Death Proof, but it was the right length, with the missing reel. Any more and you just get numbed to the action and gore.
Audiences just dont care for mysogynist camp sleaze by watashiwadare	Apr 9th, 2007 06:23:36 PM
The low turnout is just reality that the geek elite (incl critics) has to face: tarantino is for a limited cult fanbase, not all of culture.
The net is NOT as mighty as some think by LLcruize2	Apr 9th, 2007 06:24:51 PM
Quint, I have to disagree with you that 300 would have bombed this weekend. In it's 5th weekend, 300 brought in over 8 million bucks, up against the exact same movies as Grindhouse. Had 300 been released this weekend, sure, it may have lost a little off its record pull, but it would by no means tanked like Grindhouse and I have no doubt it would have taken the weekend easily. Harry basked in the supposed glory of the net being a factor in making 300 a hit. He gleefully claimed some of the credit for 300's monster weekend was due to the net promotion/word of mouth. WRONG! The film did well because the film was marketed correctly, it had mass appeal and the word of mouth on the STREET was great. The assumption that the net is any true force in if a movie is a hit or not is to suppose every single person that logs onto the net gives a damn about movies. They don't. Weinstein made mention they may have not marketed Grindhouse correctly as a "in theater" experience. In fact, they did do that, but it was done mostly on the internet. They believed too much in the incorrect assumption by many an internet movie "expert" that the net can make or break a film. Back when Harry was taking the bow for the net making 300 a hit I wanted to caution him in being too proud of a false assumption. I didn't, but Grindhouse failing this weekend is all the evidence needed to show that assumption to be false. Even though Grindhouse was universally lauded by net critics and print critics, it failed to put asses in the seats. Word of mouth on the street, in the office, between friends, and pure entertain still are THE ways people are put in the seats. Look at Wild Hogs. It was blasted on this site by every critic. It was blasted by most print critic, yet the film has succeeded in spite of the two groups who think THEY put people in the theater. I want to see Grindhouse and will do so before it is out of theaters. But it isn't because AICN said it was good. It isn't because any other internet site said it was good or it got a "two thumbs up". It is because I am a fan of both directors and enjoy these kinds of movies. I didn't need the net to help me make that decision and it never will.
Grindhouse ticket price by 9000rpm	Apr 9th, 2007 06:25:00 PM
I don't recall exactly but weren't ticket prices at 'grindhouses' significantly LESS than regular theaters? Damn I want at least $8 back.
Cut em by phaedrus007	Apr 9th, 2007 06:25:03 PM
I am one those who is very interested in the QT movie, but not too enthusiastic about the RR movie. 3 1/2 hours a lot of time for me to set aside for a movie (more when you take into account going to the theater, waiting in line, etc) and I just thought this puppy looked too long to sit through. So I'm waiting for DVD.... unless Harv cuts em, in which case he'll get my $ for QT's flick in the theater and RR's at the video store.
Don't blame Easter by hallmitchell	Apr 9th, 2007 06:26:53 PM
Alot of people just didn't want to see it. Geeks are on holiday to.
no, nuts to you, gangar! by omarthesnake	Apr 9th, 2007 06:27:04 PM
(how fun, i feel like i'm a gangster movie arguing with Jar-Jar's cousin) It doesn't matter if the "joke" is that exploitation movies are "just like that". The point of this, according to RR&QT, was to make a grindhouse double-feature that lives up to the movie poster, not one that shows all the flaws of cheapo low-budget movies. And the exposition, ham-fisted as it was (Gee, think her showing off her gun or her talking about never getting hurt will come back?), wasn't the problem. the problem was the little side conversations that went nowhere and took their own sweet time doing it. We love QT for his stream-of-consciousness dialogue and pop culture shit, but not when it's this drawn out and limp.
They shouldnt release them seperately by LeviDTinker	Apr 9th, 2007 06:27:48 PM
they shouldnt take them apart now. while i think each movie would have preformed better seperately to begin with. to take reedit them seperately now after they have allready been released, would do more harm than good. while it wasnt number one and only grossed 11 million this weekend, there is no reason why the way it is now this movie cant build its grosses slowly over the next few weeks. the movie was made relatively cheap compared to most films today, i really think that eventually it will make its money back at the box office as it is.
Where's your balls Q.T. by hallmitchell	Apr 9th, 2007 06:28:27 PM
It was your movie that made the Weinsteins rich. Remind them. They are screwing you in a power play. OR are you really a pussy and going to let them dictate to you what's going on. Shattered dude.
My theatre by landocolt45	Apr 9th, 2007 06:28:40 PM
In Jacksonville, NC they had it in one of the smallest theatre rooms at the 16. The big theatre rooms had blades of glory in 2 of them and meet the robinsons and are we done yet in 2 as well. I think this was becasue of it being Easter, it was kinda dumb to release it now, but for a 3 hour movie it should have been put in a theatre with more seats. It was hella packed in the small theatre.
What about this movie made appear to be so great? by ryan1976	Apr 9th, 2007 06:39:47 PM
Just look at the trailer for this film; "Come see this CRAZY movie where a girl gets her leg amputated and replaces it with a BIG GUN....then Kurt Russel has a car that he uses to kill women with...BUT he can't die!!!". I'm a huge nerd and geek and film buff and my interest in this movie was very low at best. At the end of the day this movie was made for a very small part of a somewhat small audience (nerds, geeks, filmbuffs) and then mareketed to a public that just didn't care and thought it looked to weird or didn't understand the concept. And not understanding the concept IS OK!!! That doesn't make them dumb or mindless...it just makes them NOT-INTERESTED! Things like this are not for everyone. Do I think that opening Easter weekend had an affect on ticket sales, probably. But I think the movie itself is what alienated people.
Maybe I'm spoiled... by SebastianHaff	Apr 9th, 2007 06:40:13 PM
My dream Grindhouse DVD: DISC 1: The original 191 minute theatrical cut, with commentary from Rodriguez and Quentin for the whole thing. Bring in Zombie, Roth, and Wright for at least the intermission. Maybe a commentary cameo by Bruce Willis and Zoe Bell. Also include an option to watch all the fake trailers by themselves. Throw in all the deleted scenes (viewed speartely from the movie), and we've got a fantastic first disc. DISC 2: Planet Terror extended cut. DISC 3: Death Proof extended cut. DISC 4: Shitload of features. A Rodriguez flick school, cooking school, a feature length documentary about the whole movie - from the original great idea to the bad opening weekend and everything in between, another feature length documentary not about Grindhouse the movie, but about grindhouse films in general. Includes interviews with Quentin and Robert and as many of their exploitation director friends as possible. Genuine vintage exploitation trailers. Trailers, TV spots, etc for Grindhouse. And all the other random zaniness that appears on Rodruiguez dvd's. The little booklet inside the dvd box would also have a menu for the nasty Mexican resteraunt advertised in the movie! Now THAT'S a motherfuckin' dvd I'd buy. Fuck all that releasing three versions noise. Let me have it all in one package. But then, like the title says, I'm spoiled.
Is it possible people didn't want to see this movie? by Chingachgook	Apr 9th, 2007 06:40:16 PM
Perhaps "QT" and "RR" will now realise that most do not share their "vision". Face it, this was a vanity project by two guys who think that everyone likes what they like. I guess they were wrong. And the pompous Weinsteins get whatever they have coming.
Huh?!? by Gangar	Apr 9th, 2007 06:40:51 PM
You love QT for his stream of pop culture what? You only love him when he does what YOU EXPECT him to do? You don't like him when he does something different, something you declare as LAME because you simply...don't...fuckin...get it? You want lame, look in a mirror, PAL! Maybe you should change your monicker to 'Status Quo'. It would be more fitting. God bless kurt Russell and Vanessa Ferlito's ass...and I'm out!
Death Proof's 'realistic' dialog... by brando render	Apr 9th, 2007 06:41:35 PM
..made me feel like I was watching the Gilmore Girls. Ugh.
Screw You, Bigot by monkeyboyjunior	Apr 9th, 2007 06:44:43 PM
"but its no secret that the flyover states aren't exactly what you'd call culturally aware of anything outside of Jeebus, meth, and how much they hate all nonwhite nonchristians (especially if their gay, but its okay to be a raging pedophile if you wear a funny hat and pretend you speak to a magical space god who lives in teh sky). No offense." You are a bigoted ass who has been programmed like a fucking monkey with eletrodes on its nipples. South bad! North good! Me vote Obama. Go back to your power node, clone. Beyond that, maybe you are right if you say people "don't get it." Well, fine. We don't. But don't bitch about a movie tanking if it is intentionally unappealing! Why did it have a shitty opening weekend? Either it sucks accidentally, or it sucks "on purpose." What difference does it make?
Good for Planet Terror, Bad for Death Proof by Knightsong	Apr 9th, 2007 06:53:20 PM
I could totally handle seeing a full cut of Planet Terror, But Death Proof would flop hard. You can go on and on about it being Tarentino's style of film making...it doesn't change that fact that it lacked the fun.
This Easter thing is ridiculous... by modlight	Apr 9th, 2007 07:03:02 PM
Is Grindhouse really targeted at the same audience that goes to church? I doubt it. The only reason this tanked is that (and listen up here Tarantino and Rodriguez) we've all seen every Zombie Movie and we all love Vanishing Point and all it's bretheren. We don't want to see some tounge in cheek homage to movies we love. The thing looked disingenuine... and guess what people who like film don't like fake ones. I strongly urge Tarantino go back to making movies that referenced the movies he loved like Pulp Fiction and stop making clever copies of them like KB1 and this. And Rodriguez... Love you too, but next movie you make, take some time. There is no rush. You are talented, but you try and put out so much to prove how prolific you can be and we all end up with movies that feel like 2nd drafts.
brando render...Death Proof's 'realistic' dialog by 9000rpm	Apr 9th, 2007 07:05:57 PM
...like watching the Gilmore Girls I'd say it was closer to watching QT's version of Charlie's Angels. Zoe Bell is Cameron Diaz, and Rosario and Wanda Sykes are...Boring 1 and Boring 2.
TOO SOON! by Darth Melkor	Apr 9th, 2007 07:06:20 PM
To split these films up. Sorry I just wanted to be the "too soon" guy for once. Ah.. satisfaction.
They should make a movie called..... by RonJeremyIrons	Apr 9th, 2007 07:08:11 PM
The Ronald McDonald Grindhouse,where Stuntman Mike runs over all of the McDonaldLand character's, starting with the fucking clown. I'm lovin THAT!
Excuses by juxtaposedkiosk	Apr 9th, 2007 07:10:09 PM
The movie was bad. No other reason for it failing at the box office.
I can see how that would work... by trysop	Apr 9th, 2007 07:11:10 PM
I think it would work if they broke it into two films. Something like "Death Proof: The New Tarantino Flick!" and "Planet Terror: From The Director of Sin City". Play the fake trailers with Planet Terror, which would fit the mood (and audience better), then Death Proof on it's own. I think (unfortunately) it would be great for the box office, but bad for the excellent 'double-bill' concept. I wonder if people were scared by the 'grindhouse' aspect of it? When my wife and I saw it over the weekend in the local 20-plex, there were cops all over the place. There are usually none, so it was kinda weird. I bet some old cop dude was like 'we useta bust all sorts of no-good criminals at the grindhous' lol.
SebastianHaff by Zarles	Apr 9th, 2007 07:17:08 PM
You and me both. I'd plunk down $40 for that sumbitch right now.
QT should've taken a tip from Beyond the Valley of the by LaneMyersClassic	Apr 9th, 2007 07:21:39 PM
Dolls. There is more high quality T&A in 5 minutes of that movie than all of GrindHouse features combined. BTVD also had stupid dialogue, bad-ass rock, gore, murder and drugs. But the boobies and ass were plentiful and gorgeous.
It has no audience outside of its audience... by Alonzo Mosely	Apr 9th, 2007 07:31:53 PM
That is the problem pure and simple... Those original grindhouse movies weren't money making machines, why did they believe making this would equal huge boxoffice? Let it run its course, let it go abroad, sell the dvds as separate and as a completed box set with some silly kitsch gift. Then make a super special dvd with bonus new fake trailers... The end result will be it made money, but they real expected this to do big opening numbers?
IF I WERE HARVEY OR BOB by The Real MiraJeff	Apr 9th, 2007 07:32:10 PM
I think I would cut my losses, yank the film and re-release it as soon as possible, separately, with the missing reels re-inserted, AND I'd offer like a $2 or $3 rebate with each ticket stub. Because if people really wanna see both films, right now they can for let's say, on average, 11 bucks. Let's just say that's the price of a movie ticket even though it gets way higher in major cities like NY and LA. Now obviously theaters won't slash their prices, but if Weinstein Co. offered a little cash back, and charged like 8 bucks to see it, then they'd be making 16 bucks off someone who wanted to see both films. Plus there's the repeat business from people who may only wanna revisit one of the films. I know that in concept, these two films were the perfect double-bill, but from a marketing standpoint, they sort of appeal to two very different groups of people. Rodriguez's film could've opened to Hostel like numbers because auds love zombie films and they love hardcore horror. People would've understood Rodriguez's film more if it had its own standalone advertising material. Tarantino on the other hand, has a more high-brow cult following who absolutely would've embraced this flick more if it wasn't buried behind Planet Terror, which by the end of that film, you're exhausted. You've been taken on a wild, crazy thrill ride through a zombie apocalypse. Now you have to watch another 90 min film? That's a lot to ask of the audience. I think it might've helped a little if Tarantino's film went first to set the mood, and then let Rodriguez run wild. Cuz Planet Terror would keep your ass awake once that 2nd hour rolls around. Keep in mind I loved both films, but I can imagine how, after being in the theater for 100 mins, people might've felt a little worn out, and then they have to wait for like 45 mins for anything crazy to happen in Death Proof. I mean, if these films were released independently of one another, they each would've opened to better numbers than they did together, but then again, it wouldn't have been as much of a big movie-going event. I think the domestic box office is still salvageable and I think the film will have decent legs through April even if the Weinsteins don't do anything and decide to stick to the plan, because there isn't that much else coming out this month except for Hot Fuzz, and that won't open to boffo biz either. April is the Weinsteins for the taking, as long as the mediocre films Disturbia and Fracture don't come out of left field to win a weekend. Point is, if they do change the release up, they have to do it soon because Spiderman 3 opens in less than a month!
Length is NOT the Issue! by localone	Apr 9th, 2007 07:32:18 PM
Regardless of the length I saw this movie twice over the weekend and was in no way sad about it. This movie going experience is amazing and cutting it up for the purpose of patronization is a slap in the face to what rodriguez/tarantino were trying to do. People will here how amazing this film is and go. Just give it time. Oh, and there no easter bunny so next weekend should be much better.
Too smart for most, too crude for some by Lemo	Apr 9th, 2007 07:34:39 PM
Saw the late showing Saturday and laughed my ass off the whole time. I honestly thing the mouth breathers would never understand 3/4 of Deathproof and anyone who can't laugh at over the top gore for what it is would hate it.
That would fucking suck!!!! by MikeHoncho	Apr 9th, 2007 07:36:38 PM
The reason this is one of my favoirtie movies is becuase the experience in the theatre was unlike anything else. I had such a great time with seeing one thing and immidiately moving into something new. If they did that, the movies would not be the same. The reason it is so much fun and they work so well is that they just go together, and to separate them would be terrible.
Mouth breather? by RonJeremyIrons	Apr 9th, 2007 07:38:11 PM
Good one, Dr. Lemo
omarthesnake and the "anti-DP crowd" by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 07:44:23 PM
Fuck ya'll, whach some french films. Those girl were super cool. The whole thing was cool. Childe Roland, missed your comment you sack of shit. I did look like anthony michael hall. Now I don't and I have a perfect dick. Also I think you missed my sarcasm about ol' QT being "G.O.D.". I guess Dry wit is wasted some of you rotten little twats just like my love advice. My dick gotta eat!
I cant spell by gride9000	Apr 9th, 2007 07:46:02 PM
so dis on me for somting elssse
FlopHouse by revcrowbar	Apr 9th, 2007 07:46:54 PM
Why is everyone trying justify the reason why the movie didn't do well? Did anyone really think this movie was at all marketable? Of course this movie was going to fail. "This movie is like the old grindhouse movies from the 70's" Okay, so that it means it supposed to be good. If they wanted to be authentic, they would hired no-names (Bruce Willis, Rosario Dawson,and Kurt Russell aren't exactly struggling actors), filmed it in 8MM, and wouldn't purposefully "scratched" and "burned" the film. Nice try QT, but napes to you
Money Trouble by hallmitchell	Apr 9th, 2007 07:50:32 PM
Q.T. and R.R are the big money earners for Weinstein. He has just tied up his two money earners in one big flop. He must be sweating rivers.
Bad Idea...... by Legend67	Apr 9th, 2007 07:51:26 PM
Why on earth would anyone go and see one movie when they could've viewed both a couple of weeks before? Let's see: Nine dollars for one film, or nine dollars for two? Hmmmm. I'll have to think about that one.
Why Easter is a garbage excuse. by hallmitchell	Apr 9th, 2007 07:52:03 PM
Remember when the Weinsteins put out Scream over Xmas and everyone said they were smart because all that was out was family movies and Scream made alot of money. So don't blame Easter.
I couldn't see it this weekend by INWOsuxRED	Apr 9th, 2007 07:52:50 PM
my wife gave me permission to go see it(she won't go see it), but then we realized it was over 3 hours long and we couldn't fit it in this holiday weekend. Length actually was the issue to me, but I will still go see this first-run, unless they do something stupid like yank it out of theaters quickly.
Quentin Tarantino's Box by tile_mcgillus	Apr 9th, 2007 07:56:39 PM
Quentin Tarantino's Box Office: Lifetime Gross Total (6): $298,337,794 Average: $49,722,966 Opening Gross Average (5): $15,479,003 (Wide Releases Only) Kill Bill 2 - 70M Kill Bill 1 - 70M Jackie Brown - 40M 4 Rooms - 4M Pulp Fiction - 107M Kill Bill 2 - 70M Reservior Dogs - 3M
4 rooms by revcrowbar	Apr 9th, 2007 07:59:52 PM
wow...i forgot about that piece of garbage...
Firehouse Dog is the movie of the year by MechaTruffautMk2	Apr 9th, 2007 08:00:25 PM
Topic, plain and simple.
Robert Rodriguez's Box Office by tile_mcgillus	Apr 9th, 2007 08:00:45 PM
Robert Rodriguez's Box Office Lifetime Gross Total (11): $585,131,611 Average: $53,193,783 Opening Gross Average (10): $18,318,417 (Wide Releases Only) Sharkboy-lavagirl - 40M Sin City - 70M Once Upon a TIme in Mexico - 55M Spy Kids - 110M Spy Kids 2 - 85M Spy Kids 3 - 110M Faculty - 40M Dusk til Dawn - 25M Four Rooms - 4M Desperado - 25M El Mariachi - 2M
It was kind of strange........... by Legend67	Apr 9th, 2007 08:02:26 PM
I went to see this movie in Myrtle Beach S.C. over the weekend as I was on vacation. I was with my girl and we bought our tickets early because I thought that it might sell out since the 7:45 show was actually the last show (which was a red flag in itself). We went to eat and got back to the theater and there were only about 14 people waiting to see it. I was a bit pissed. I knew that I should've gone on Friday but I couldn't. I wanted to see this with a theater full of yelling fanboys. Instead in many of the laugh-out-loud moments, my laughter was all that could be heard. Kind of awkward........actually.
It's a bomb by corvette63	Apr 9th, 2007 08:04:32 PM
They can split the movie up but I don't think either film will find a wider audience in the states. Each movie is a Hard R and so over-the-top that only diehard fans like us will see them. If they want to go ahead and release them seperately I'm game. I'd love to see additionl footage of Death Proof.
I go to church. And I loved it! by Darth Thoth	Apr 9th, 2007 08:13:08 PM
I'm just saying. Friday night I went to a Good Friday service. Afterwards I drove into the city for a midnight showing of Grindhouse. Friday was a great day in my book and I thank the Lord for it!
It's happening in Europe by Vadakin	Apr 9th, 2007 08:22:47 PM
But was there a news story here about it? No...fuck AICN and their anti-European newsworthyness bias :P Seriously though, this is old news. I'm not going to see Grindhouse because it's being split up. I want the full experience. The trailer promised 2 films for the price of 1, and if I don't get that, I'll sue for false advertising... But here's the thing...one of the traditions of Grindhouse is sneaking in to watch the films in shitty quality...if the film is split up, then the only way to get the full experience will be to download the full double feature through a torrent, illegaly...sad but true.
One more thought... by revcrowbar	Apr 9th, 2007 08:23:50 PM
Troma has been doing this type of film a lot longer, and hell of a lot better. Toxic Avenger, Surf Nazis Must Die, Redneck Zombies, Sgt. Kabukiman...nuff said
Sorry about the delay by tile_mcgillus	Apr 9th, 2007 08:33:41 PM
Had to take care of some stuff. But honestly not really a big disappointment. It is about on par with the rest of their films. Both directors aren't really big box office performers. They do however, kill on DVD and essentailly set popular cinema culture. I can fucking guarantee people will remember Grindhouse over Blades of Glory 10 years from now. Funny, how people are so short-sighted.
$53 million??????? by pdennett316	Apr 9th, 2007 08:44:02 PM
Why does this cost so much? I thought the point of Grindhouse was low budget thrills, not CGI out the arse. Rodriguez made Desperado for $7 million and made it look like it cost more, surely he could have taken $7 million and made it look like it cost less. That's why it's not been as successful; it cost too fucking much in the first place. A $53 million vanity project which abandoned the values it sought to honour. You could have released this on a day when no other movies were playing and it still would have struggled due to the limited audience for the style of movie being 'recreated', and the fact it cost at least 10 times as much as it should have.
TROMA by The Real MiraJeff	Apr 9th, 2007 08:45:41 PM
Puh-lease. Troma's been doing it better? Better than Grindhouse? Are you kidding me? One thing about Troma, the best decision they ever made was casting Kate Graham as the lead in Poultrygeist. Did you see her on Wheel of Fortune friday night? That girl's got the goods. I should know. She was the first girl I took to dinner in college...
KURT RUSSELL DESERVED BETTER by TheDohDoh	Apr 9th, 2007 08:46:11 PM
All I'm saying is that I see why Mickey Rourke left Death Proof in a mad flash. I love Stuntman Mike but damn if Kurt Russell didn't get shortchanged with lack of screentime (losing it to a stuntwoman, shock horror!) and a character who goes 200mph-0mph like one of those dumb bastards who croaks during sex with a supermodel. You people can blame the Easter Bunny, your dad, your grandma, Mira & Max RIP, the South, your theatre, inflation, whatever the fuck. Fact is, QT & RR have never had a bomb like this before, and hopefully it doesn't drag Kurt Russell down with it. QT needs to be KR in Inglorious Bastards and let him kill a few fuckers to make up for this travesty. Death Proof is the reason why this movie will drop 70% next weekend. I love QT, but I'm on a nearly batshit crusade to get this pile out of theatres. I feel like Randy Quaid-laid-over-a-toilet-in-Ki ngpin when I say that Eli "Dane Cook of Horror" Roth's trailer was by far the best part of this. And Don't being nearly as good. Now, Thanksgiving was some grindhouse moneyshots that delivered the goods. I can handle good stretches of dialogue, but this is not what QT&RR promised the audience. Thanksgiving is what I expected to see. A hilarious throw-up of Prom Night and Slumber Party Massacre - complete with scratches, bad dubs, the works. "A slasher movie instead of a car" my ass. False advertising. Good move, there Mickey Rourke.
MORE LIKE $67 MILLION!!!! + $30MILLION FOR ADVERTS by TheDohDoh	Apr 9th, 2007 08:49:17 PM
Folks, we're talking about a $100M plus disaster here. Earth to geeks, Weinsteins thought this would play big. This is not just a movie made for us. Boxoffice Mojo has it at 67mil for the budget and Nikki Finke at Deadlinehollywooddaily.com has Weinstein saying he dropped, get this, 30-fucking-million in advertising for this thing. They dropped a bomb on me, baby.
TheDohDoh by BGDAWES	Apr 9th, 2007 08:54:24 PM
Holy shit man, you said EXACTLY how I feel about Grindhouse. I had a spot reserved for this film in my top ten favorite films of all time without even seeing it, but when I did I was decidedly 'underFUCKINGwhelmed' and it was almost entirely due to Death Proof. Another thing I completely agree with you is when you say that, 'Eli "Dane Cook of Horror" Roth's trailer was by far the best part of this.' Is that ever a sign that a film is in trouble. He honestly did NAIL it with that trailer but for fuck's sake when Eli Roth delivers the best part of your film, that's when you know that you've either A.) Go back to the green room or B.) Re-write some shit! (Quentin I'm talking to you here!) ...fuck!
For what it's worth - My thoughts about Grindhouse by BGDAWES	Apr 9th, 2007 09:08:25 PM
it pains me to write this. I had a spot reserved in my top 10 favorite films of all time for Grindhouse; sight unseen. I was convinced that QT and RR somehow knew my specific tastes for shitty 70's exploitation flicks and decided to make a movie just for me; and that movie would be Grindhouse. So I gladly left my parent's house on Easter Sunday as early as possible to catch a show on the opening weekend. And my heart sank as I sat for 3 hours and 11 minutes then left the theatre underFUCKINGwhelmed. What's worse is that the guy that ruined this movie for me is the man I had thought was the savior of contemporary film, Quentin Tarantino. He definitely lost me on this one. QT needs to realize that some of the ideas he thinks are 'totally fucking awesome' while he's on a coke binge are not in fact 'awesome' or even good at all. I honestly think that QT stopped making movies for average everyday film geeks that work regular 9 to 5's and went to making movies for film geeks that work in the film industry 'only' with Death Proof. I will say that Planet Terror was decent. Machete, Don't, and even Werewolf Women of the SS were good. However, the part of Grindhouse that was the best part of the entire film (and holy shit I can't believe I'm saying THIS) was Eli Roth's 'Thanksgiving'. He nailed it with that one. But holy shit Quentin, what the fuck? I wish I could tell him that I'm happy life is so damn great for him and that I'm sure it's fun to get drunk with your fellow film buddies in Austin, Texas but don't write and film an entire movie that is basically a blow job for that inner circle of your friends. I feel like he betrayed the entire geek community! To be fair, the title sequence was cool; and Kurt's first kill was cool but that was IT. Fuck.
I was wondering how long it would be before... by Johnno	Apr 9th, 2007 09:12:13 PM
ZombieSolutions crusty maggot brain would implode over not understanding how his beloved Grindhouse failed, to break down and go on a drunken tirade and rage against Christianity and God and toss in the ol' standby nazi and pedophile scandal references. Somebody has issues... I'm almost sure someone in a funny hat molested him. I will pray for you, don't cry... it's alright... Shhhhhhh.....
Grindhouse was never going to make $100 million by Larry of Arabia	Apr 9th, 2007 09:15:06 PM
QT and RR are not popular filmmakers. Shocker of shocks to the film geeks out there, I know but let's face facts, they are cult and prestige filmmakers admired by many with a strong following, like Kubric or Scorese. QT has exactly one $100 million dollar film. Both Kill Bill's together didn't even make $90 million. QT is a prestige and cult filmmaker. RR is the same thing. He has two $100 million movies, and they are both family films. Sin City limped to, in Hollywood terms, a frontloaded $75 based on repeat viewings, but was acclaimed and a trendsetter. These guys were never going to bring home $100 million together, and any producer who thinks so is fooling themselves. The money was always in DVD sales and the cult audience. So up Harvey's ass. He can cut and paste these however he wants. They won't be 100 and he will be seen, yet again, as a man who butchers the works of his directors. (Damnit I want to see the bloated, fleshed, gonzo ass out Gangs of New York you bastard!)
Cutting it in 1/2 will cheese off your fanbase, Harv by Chief Redcock	Apr 9th, 2007 09:15:48 PM
You know, when I first heard the idea for Grindhouse (wasn't this posted about on AICN back in '05?), I had a feeling in my gut that audiences would NEVER go for it, and I believe I said so in talkback. I might've even recommended marketing them as separate films in the talkback, but then running them back to back and giving people the option of seeing one or both (for half off the ticket). Harvey must've been a little nuts to think that this idea would be a big sell... at its very core, this is a cult item, made for film geeks and a certain fringe audience only. To make matters worse, Harvey's kind of backed himself into a corner, because that tiny group of hard core QT/RR/grindhouse/indy/etc fans out there have pretty much already experienced these films in their best possible form. Like it or not, marketable or not, these films were meant to be seen this way... if you mess with that now, the film geeks will never forgive you, Harvey. Film geeks have long memories when it comes to stuff like this, and many were already frustrated when Kill Bill was split in half. This idea kind of played like a recompense for Kill Bill, and it'd be a shame to mess with that. What this all boils down to is: this is a fringe item with the potential to blossom and snowball by word of mouth, but it was NEVER blockbuster material. NEVER. If I was Harvey Weinstein, I'd be more worried about the core fans who will eventually make this movie it's money back, and keeping them happy.
Grindhouse split? Holy shit! by Barry_Woodward	Apr 9th, 2007 09:17:24 PM
I've had the opportunity to enjoy Grindhouse thrice in it's current configuration, so, the possibility of seeing extended cuts of both movies weeks from now (instead of months from now on DVD) excites me.
300 would have bombed too? by mjbok1	Apr 9th, 2007 09:17:48 PM
Grossed nearly as much as Grindhouse this weekend. The fact is this: Grindhouse was a pet project for both of these directors. It should have been done for nothing (budget-wise) and it would have done fine financially. Instead it was done as a regular budget film. Big mistake. I have seen 4.25 of QT's films. I thought two were great, one was self-indulgant crap, one was okay, and .25 was garbage. I don't understand why this was done how it was. QT doesn't have a great BO track record. RR does moreso, but still not movies making money hand over fist. How could you expect a big return on investment when you have niche market directors doing an even smaller niche market type of picture? I plan to see it on video or HBO eventually, but after Kill Bill I won't see another Tarantino film in the theater.
Also, though I don't think I've mentioned it yet... by Chief Redcock	Apr 9th, 2007 09:29:22 PM
...I liked Grindhouse. Planet Terror was cheesy fun, though nothing great (RR should've made They Called Him Machete instead), the trailers and other stuff in the middle were sublime, and Death Proof--in my honest opinion--was great. Not top drawer Quentin (I doubt we'll ever see that again), but a very inventive, tightly written little film. It was refreshing to watch a movie that excelled on the basis of a very well-thought out story... I like how every scene, plot turn, and twist locked together in a very specific, strategic, yet unpredictable way. All in all, it was a great experience.
Split it! by xenazhaan	Apr 9th, 2007 09:40:11 PM
Personally, I wont go see grindhouse if the two moives are stuck together because I only want to see Planet Terror. I have ZERO interest in Death Proof. So, they would get some money from me if they split it into two movies and no money from me if it stays the way it is.
If it ain't broke... by dirkadirkadirka	Apr 9th, 2007 09:49:44 PM
The whole point of this experiment was to show these films back to back in the classic grindhouse fashion. To already come out and say that your pulling the film...after one f'ing weekend!! Easter weekend no less, is such a bitch move. I can't imagine that QT and RR are too pleased about this whole situation. Lets hope they man up and continue with the franchise. They could make tgese on no budget if they wanted.
What's the difference? Half a turd is still a turd. by wackmeupb4ugogo	Apr 9th, 2007 09:51:21 PM
Ain't gonna smell sweeter, sweeheart.
It's a cult film by Gozu	Apr 9th, 2007 09:52:26 PM
I mean, basically, the Weinsteins spent millions of dollars emulating films that cost thousands to make in their day and probably wouldn't cost that much to make now. Also, wouldn't you know it, Easter Weekend is the wrong time to release an exploitative nostalgia peice. That said, I still think "Grindhouse" is awesome, basically the horror equivalent of "Kentucky Fried Movie," and I don't care if it makes three pennies, a marble, and a ball of lint at the box office. On a semi-related note: I saw "Silence of the Lambs" at a local theater and it was a beat up print with missing frames and sound that dropped at random points throughout. Didn't really add much to the experience, just kind of just pissed me off.
No On-Line PR? WTF WAS THAT GRINDHOUSE TRAILER CONTEST? by genro	Apr 9th, 2007 10:06:28 PM
This site sponsored the goddman thing - and Harry's claiming there was no 'net PR?!?!
I'll be watching to see if "Pathfinder"... by SPECTRE Agent	Apr 9th, 2007 10:08:31 PM
"Legend of the Ghost Warrior" makes more this weekend. It would have to, wouldn't it?
Waa! The movie wasn't too my particular liking...Waaa! by leeVSbenway	Apr 9th, 2007 10:10:39 PM
What a bunch of fucking babies. I went on Sunday afternoon and had a really good time. The strange thing that I noticed...more and more people showed up as the damned thing played...and only 2 people left. Imagine that! I had an ok time with PT. The score was the best Rodriguez has ever done and the ending was beyond fantastic. The trailers were fun, DON'T and MACHETE were really, really good. "They fucked with the wrong Mexican," gets my vote for best catchphrase since BOSS N*GGERS "White man's town...black man's law!" DP was awe-inducingly great (DP...hehe). If you don't like it, that's fine...I just don't see how you can get off on trashing it. Watch Bava's RABID DOGS, Campanile's AUTOSTOP ROSSO SANGUE or take a hint from the fucking movie and watch DIRTY MARY CRAZY LARRY and then try to argue DP's merits. I'm sorry, but in certain cinematic situations complaints about "bad" dialogue and muddled motivations are going to fall on deaf fucking ears...and "grindhouse" movies are one of those fucking situations. I'm going to go again and, get this, I'm going to skip PLANET TERROR and watch the great DEATH PROOF instead!
$51 Million Average by topaz4206	Apr 9th, 2007 10:11:24 PM
Between the two of the directors, their average box office for their films is $51-$52 million. So while not outstanding, seems like this flick will reach their average take. BTW, great movie(s)!
Overrated hacks by zacdilone	Apr 9th, 2007 10:23:21 PM
I hope I'm still teaching film history 25 years from now so I can hear my students say "Quentin WHO?"
Why is everyone surprised? by TheDonJohnSon	Apr 9th, 2007 10:28:51 PM
Ok, so do you think QT and RR are sitting back scratching their heads? Of course not, lets look at the criteria: 1) A shitty release date. A blood spattered update of a type of film that died out 30 years ago against Will Ferrell's latest comedy on fucking sports, top that off with Easter (family) weekend and presto, instant failure 2) With the publicity that it got, fewer release locations and I dont know about anyone else but there were no Thursday midnight showings in my city (WTF? They've had Thursday night prev's with every other movie this year, why not with the one movie that was meant for midnight showings) its no wonder it made what it actually made this weekend. Keep in mind 300 racked in close to 30 mil just on Thurs sneak peaks alone 3) The running time was I think what killed it more than anything. The attention span of most people is severly limited to that of shorter films. As good as it may be, 3 1/2 hours of movie watching would be better off at home on DVD not sitting next to a smelly, fat fuck talking through the whole thing Bottom line: Splitting this in two will be contradicting everything thats been publicized about this film so far. Its not gonna want to make people go see it any more than before. If Weinstein had the balls to release it knowing he had all these obstacles, he should stick to his guns and at least look like he'll stand next to his boy Tarrantino (who, by the way, is the only one who could've gotten away with making a movie like this). Hey but with all the recent publicity about its "failure"........theres no such thing as bad publicity, right?
Someone assassinate the Weinsteins, please by Doctor_Sin	Apr 9th, 2007 10:39:56 PM
Aren't they just dinosaurs lumbering along through the Hollywood hills? When will their extinction produce the valuable fuels to power a new filmic world?
I'm with Larry and Redcock by SAVOIR_faire	Apr 9th, 2007 10:52:56 PM
Brothers W, QT and RR are specific guys, they're not LCD (lowest Common) guys, and not tentpole guys. They create 'Rocky Horror'=type fanbases, and loyal followings... You get this money in the long haul, not the sprint! The kids who have to sneak in now will buy DVD's later. Let the movie ride. Let the fans evangelize. It took 'Greek Wedding' 52 weeks to find its audience.
Surprise!! Rose McGowan on Leno Tonight by Cheif Brody	Apr 9th, 2007 10:53:50 PM
They sure went the talk show route to promote this thing!! Leno, Kimmel, Conan, Ferguson, Daly...(Letterman was in repeats all last week). Not so sure hearing the same canned 5 stories from Russell, QT & RR, and Miss McGowan are gonna pack the theaters. A male co-worker friend of mine hadn't heard a thing about it last week...I was shocked after all those TV ads all last week. I really want to see it in a theater...to get the "Grindhouse" experience they went out of their way to create with the faux film flaws and fake trailers...which I think will be completely lost on the DVD in my living room. I think this is a complete kneejerk reaction on Harv's part. If you are not gonna use the internet (although the MSN homepage was full of GH clips and photos in their Entertainment News banners)...you better wait and see if good ol fashioned WORD OF MOUTH helps yer box office. Give it another weekend and see how it does. If it tanks again next weekend....chop away. No matter what anyone says...Easter hurt the box office. Just not a good fit. I just had too much goin on this weekend to take it in. BBBTW...Passion/Christ did so well because entire church congregations were going to see that thing...mostly on word of mouth. I don't think you really can compare the two. A "safe" Will Ferrell skating comedy...or a 3 1/2 hour gore fest? C'mon folks...on Easter weekend? Pffft.
Can someone please make "Five Romms" one movie? by Doctor_Sin	Apr 9th, 2007 10:54:20 PM

Can someone please make "Five Rooms" one movie? by Doctor_Sin	Apr 9th, 2007 10:54:25 PM

I still think... by WesReviews	Apr 9th, 2007 10:57:17 PM
...the fact that Death Proof was terrible had a lot to do with the film underperforming. See also: Jackie Brown.
Its simple guys... by torpor_haze	Apr 9th, 2007 10:58:37 PM
PLANET TERROR was for men(Hot chicks, big guns, chicks with big guns..pun intended), DEATH PROOF was for women (Stuntman Mike turning into whiny bitch and girls beating the shit out of him was gift for the ladies). So chill out.
But did he say? by lennon211	Apr 9th, 2007 11:00:13 PM
But did he say anything about screwing over the fans of the film as is with a divided DVD release?
Was never going to see this anyway. by fluffybunnywhiskers	Apr 9th, 2007 11:01:49 PM
I actually like to spend 10 bucks on good movies, not movies that try hard to suck. That's just me, though. To each his own.
AND THE ROCK CRIED OUT, NO HIDING PLACE by tailhook	Apr 9th, 2007 11:11:57 PM
Harvey and Bob are running for the hills. $53 mil down the tubes. Get ready for the greatest double-triple-quadruple dippin of DVD sales you ever did see. There are going to be so many versions of this on DVD its gonna need an entire shelf on the video store to house it all as they continually try to ride this dead horse to profitability. You'll get bare bones seperates... recovered reel seperates.. bare bones combined... recovered real combined. Restored Special Editions.. Hell... you'll even get a DVD with its own documentary documenting all the different versions currently on DVD. Seriously.. this was a major misstep for the Weinsteins and maybe they finally learned to not put all their eggs in the Rodriguez and Tarantino Vanity Easter Basket. It was so nice when they can offload the losses on Disney... now they take the hit on this one with nowhere to run. This entire debacle really just goes to show you how far outside the mainstream this site has put itself.
MICHAEL BAY LOST by BRUTICUS	Apr 9th, 2007 11:19:33 PM
uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhh, you ruined transformers you tool.
Lack of internet ads? Maybe. Easter weekend? No. by Freakemovie	Apr 9th, 2007 11:25:36 PM
I only say ads might have been a factor because I went to visit my family this weekend, and none of them had even heard of Grindhouse. For my dad that's not uncommon. But my sister and her boyfriend were chatting me up about movies from 300 to The Hoax, and when I mentioned Grindhouse, I got a blank stare. Other than that, the problem boils down to one thing: length, length, length, length, length. When I originally heard about this project, the idea was to have two one-hour movies. That's an idea an audience can wrap its head around. NOT sitting through two full-length movies in a row. Remember Munich and King Kong? Both celebrity directors, both self-indulgently long, both box office tallies much less than expected. You're dreaming if you think 300 would've flopped just because of Easter weekend. Honestly; that might be the least intelligent thing (that wasn't in a talkback) that I've read on this site.
How come no one saw this coming? by vieri32	Apr 9th, 2007 11:26:50 PM
Everyone keeps posting that it was obvious that releasing this on Easter weekend was a mistake but how come no one mentioned this before hand???? The fact of the matter is that the whole concept was bad and thats why this movie failed. Who would want to see a movie about a chick with a machine gun leg besdies some film geek. If it was another director besdies RR, not even the film geeks would go. Also it seems pretty clear that everyone that disliked Death Proof( and there was alot of people) mention the dialogue as being the reason. So i dont see how some of you geeks coould defend it as being Genius.
IT WAS TOO LONGGGGGG! by AvengingFist	Apr 9th, 2007 11:29:02 PM
3 hours of crap/
Quentin Tarantino showed his little manhood = BOMB by AvengingFist	Apr 9th, 2007 11:30:51 PM
Failure.
obvious reason for failure: male frontal nudity by AvengingFist	Apr 9th, 2007 11:32:26 PM
of the ugly Quentin Tarantino
QUINT....c'mon man.... by moto	Apr 9th, 2007 11:34:52 PM
I'm tired of hearing about Easter Weekend. It's an excuse. The fact is, the demographics that were going to see this movie at all would go see it no matter if it was Easter or Christmas or whenever. Just watch this coming weekend. If what YOU are saying is true, then there's going to be a big jump in ticket sales because it's not a family movie weekend. Probably not going to happen. "But that's because people rely on opening weekend numbers to decide if they'll go see it or not." Convenient argument. But according to the above, the people that were going to see it didn't see it because it was "family weekend" or some shit, so this is really the first "available" weekend. Give me a break.
Quentins War Movie is Doomed ! by vieri32	Apr 9th, 2007 11:34:57 PM
Who's going to want to see that after this debacle. Are the allies gonna talk for 80 min before they decide to storm the enemy bunker in the last 10 min of the movie. Is there gonna be a black soldier who keeps dropping the n-bomb every 5th word. Im also sure his confidence in his ability to make this movie, has been rocked. I hope he pulls it together, cause this is the one i was really excited to see.
about the lenght by Iamtherock4	Apr 9th, 2007 11:37:43 PM
people say the lenghth is a promblem cause people dont want to sit people sat through lord of the rings. BUT the differnce is Lord of the rings had multiple screens and the competition ran from them. my theater is a big theather and only had 2 So 3 and half hours how many times can they show it and a NITCH market. How much did they expect this movie to make it cost 53 mill, it will make it money back and then some at the end. Namely with DVD's but it a nitch movie. Love it but I am a movie geek
And about "Power of the Internet" by moto	Apr 9th, 2007 11:41:09 PM
Let's be honest and clear. It's the power of myspace.com with well over 100 million users. Most of which don't come to sites like AICN. Harry implied on his 300 post that AICN had some big factor in its success. Well, how many Grindhouse posts, articles, talkbacks, exclusives, etc. were AICN readers bombarded with the last year or so? Too many. But it still opened well well well below expectations. Thus again, AICN does not = box office success thus studios do not worry about talkback negative comments on a project.
Shoulda seen it coming by acksylrose	Apr 9th, 2007 11:42:51 PM
I thought this movie was gonna be a hit just like everyone else. But I overestemated the ability for a mass audience to "get it" just like the filmakers did. Im guessing that it failed because people just dont want to sit through 2 movies at once. Regardless of the holiday or not. No one has an attention span anymore, which is appearant in the comments of people who didnt like Death Proof, the superior of the two flicks. Its funny when something fails, how many people juump up and say,"I knew it, it sucks,they suck blah blah"
Big Trouble in Little China by gusradio	Apr 9th, 2007 11:48:16 PM
Did anyone else notice Jack Burtons shirt from Big Trouble in Little China on the wall next to the jukebox in Deathproof? I loved the hell out of catching that. My girl had never seen BTILC before so I fired that one up when we got home. Loved both movies. and as far as this movie "bombing" i'm not sure I would take #4 at the box office as a failure, plus both Children of Men and Pan's Labrynth did simular box office first weekend didn't they.. those and Grindhouse are great films. What a great time I had at the movies tonight!
The real problem here is the American public by IndustryKiller!	Apr 9th, 2007 11:50:17 PM
Who wouldn't know something original or good if it stood up and shot them in the nuts. They are by and large pop culture black holes swirling with nothing in their brains but reality television and bad comedy. If it doesn't give them a cheap laugh they simply aren't into it. Now if you didn't like Grindhouse thats understandable, but at least you gave it a chance and went to fucking see it. Not the rest of the sheep, they would rather stick to things that are completely UNINTENTIONALLY awful, like comic book films. As long as it's not offesive in any way whatsoever (except to those with an ounce of taste) and it makes you laugh, they eat it up like so much fast food. The people deserve the garbage that is fed to them, lacking completely in BOTH style and substance, it's just unfortunate for the rest of us who have to live among the festering masses and have what we watch inadvertantly dictated by them. Thank you Quentin and Rodriguez for doing something new (or something old that is new again as it were), I for one loved it.
Nothing to do with Easter... by 9000rpm	Apr 9th, 2007 11:51:44 PM
The simple fact is this: if Grindhouse was entertaining the majority of people WHO HAVE seen it then Grindhouse would have legs and there would be no need for the emergency salvage operation. The Weinsteins are now convinced they've got a dog on their hands (they probably knew it all along but were deferring to their ‘boys’) and they now have to do anything and everything to eek the best out of this mess. It has virtually NOTHING to do with it being Easter or being 3 hrs plus in length or the subject matter or QT&RR's past grosses or any of a dozen other bogus excuses. The majority of people WHO HAVE seen Grindhouse have little or nothing good to say about it.
It's not about an attention span... by moto	Apr 9th, 2007 11:53:51 PM
It's about the quality of what is in those moments on film. If it is about attention span and about them getting it, then the opening weekend would have been huge because people would have shown up for it at least. And then the coming weeks would have dropped drastically because of bad word of mouth. It failed because an audience doesn't want to see a filmmaker spend $53 million to make a bad movie.
Gee, here's a thought: It bombed 'cause it SUCKED by Triumph poops!	Apr 9th, 2007 11:56:10 PM
You know, everyone -- right off the bat starting with Quint here and then people like Harry or Moriarity (and I’m sure behind the scenes most certainly Weinstein, Tarantino and Rodriquez) -- is already making the classic mistake from Square One. That is, they're all sitting around and saying "But it was GOLD, BABY, GOLD! What went wrong?!?" as if the movie ITSELF had nothing to do with its failure. >Gasp!< Yes, I know, God forbid the reason the movie failed was the actual MOVIE! I mean not when you can start the usual Hollywood spin doctoring bullshit of blaming its failure on SOMETHING OR ANYTHING ELSE -- be it the Marketing Department or the studio for not buying enough ads. Hell, any minute now the CATERER will be to blame, all to divert attention from what many of us have already been ranting about all weekend long: Namely the simple fact that the movie actually SUCKED. (Okay, I'll be nicer -- it was disappointing. There, better?) Look, let's run through a few core things they probably should have taken into better account before they started counting their money... 1) You had not one, but two NICHE directors making a NICHE film that was a tribute to REALLY NICHE films. Even worse, niche films from decades ago that today's modern teens (the backbone of current box office receipts) have NEVER heard of, NEVER seen, and thus DON’T GIVE TWO SHITS ABOUT SEEING THEM RECREATED. In short, instead of a film that had broad appeal, you came out of the starting gate ALREADY limping. Because you had a specialized product that only a very, very small percentage of the actual movie-going audience was going to give a shit about to begin with. Hey, I'd love for them to bring back classic 70's porn where there were actually PLOTS involved so you'd also get mentally aroused to really ramp up the heat level, where the women actually looked like real women (that is, not every actress was a cloned, plastic surgery enhanced blonde Barbie), but I don't think THAT'S going to happen and if they did try to make them that way again, it would probably bomb because times have changed and people have a completely different expectation for what a porn film should be. WHICH IS WHY THEY DON'T MAKE THEM THAT WAY ANYMORE LEST THEY LOSE THEIR SHIRT (uh, no pun intended!). A little lesson that the Grindhouse crew should have thought of...
A SECOND thing: Why so much money? by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 12:05:53 AM
I'll just post these other thoughts one by one, then everyone can feel free to debate away... 2) Okay, this is somewhat a creative bitch about GRINDHOUSE, but it still applies to the overall issue of the film ever breaking even or posting a profit. Why the hell are you spending $53 million -- that's right, 53 MILLION BUCKS -- to recreate a style of filmmaking that was done on the fast and cheap and with the world’s worst actors for something paltry like 10,000 bucks -- not to mention that was the whole POINT to making them? That is, as the name implies, to literally just grind them out? The truth is, GRINDHOUSE was rather overly self-indulgent to begin with. It's like saying "I love old Gerry Anderson Super-Marionation shows like THUNDERBIRDS -- you know, cheap little puppets on wires walking around cheap little sets that you can clearly TELL are cheap little puppets walking around cheap little sets -- so I'm going to remake that... ...Only I'm going to hire ILM to do it digitally and with a first class budget, using every modern technology trick I can muster. I mean, it sort of DEFEATS the whole point of recreating something when you DON'T actually recreate it. I mean seriously, as much as you may or may not have liked GRINDHOUSE, that's the truly fucked up thing: they spent $53 million (or rather $100 million once you tack on marketing costs and whatnot) to recreate films that were made for 10 bucks. Gee, good thinking there! Personally, I think what would have been cooler with GRINDHOUSE would have been to make them that way again -- use only 16mm cameras, calculate a budget based on inflation and ONLY spend what THEY could have spent back then, to push your creativity. It's like when John Carpenter made HALLOWEEN and he couldn't afford a dolley, so he had someone push him along in a shopping cart while he held the camera. I just think THAT'S the spirit that should have gone into making these films. I mean, it's hardly a true "Grindhouse" car chase when its done with a top flight stuntperson using top flight modern safety rigging and top flight production equipment...
Quint actually care what we think by Phategod2	Apr 10th, 2007 12:11:51 AM
thats the real headline.
I thought I really liked Grindhouse after I saw it... by rbatty024	Apr 10th, 2007 12:12:43 AM
but then I saw the weekend numbers and realized I hated it. Thank you Rottentomatoes for quantifying my love of films.
A THIRD thing: You had NO stars by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 12:13:44 AM
Another reason I think this was hurt at the Box Office and the average moviegoer is yawning at it and saying "No thanks" -- It had NO STARS. No real draw. So good job slitting your own throat there. Hey, I really did love Kurt Russell as Stuntman Mike, but I'm also an old fan of his going all the way back to THE COMPUTER WORE TENNIS SHOES. Kurt and I grew up together, okay? But the truth is Kurt DIDN'T exactly open POSEIDEN big -- and that was a $100 million plus remake of a movie that people HAD heard of. Along the same lines, what, did the Weinsteins actually think there were THAT many CHARMED fans out there who were dying to see Rose McGowan on the big screen? But that’s okay because Rosario Dawson really opened RENT and CLERKS II huge! Whew! They're STILL counting the money on those! And that Zoe Bell? Wow! The last thing she starred in was so big that I just had to see her top lining another flick and...Oh, wait, that's right. She's just a stuntwoman that NO AVERAGE MOVIEGOER HAS A FUCKING CLUE WHO SHE IS. Of course, what they DO know after seeing this is (1) she can hang onto the hood of a car really good, but (2) she's one incredibly stiff and shitty actress. But hey, at least it starred the girl who was the Drug Kingpin's girl in the Third Season of 24 and who quit CSI:NY (boy, I bet she'd like that job back right about now...) But that's okay, at least the guy who was in THE TERMINATOR and ALIENS 20 odd years ago is in it! Uh...well, that might mean something to you if you're a modern teenager and IF you've ever watched one of those on home video or caught them on USA Network one Saturday afternoon while you were off to the side tinkering on your MySpace page.
LOL Quint you dumbass! 300 would not have flopped! by McGsStepson	Apr 10th, 2007 12:14:45 AM
Seriously, say what you want about 300, but it was a brilliantly marketed movie that was a much easier concept to sell - on the internet, on TV, in trailers, etc.... AND IT STILL MADE $8 MILLION PLUS THIS WEEKEND. Get your head out of your ass. It may have done $40 - $50 million but it would not have EVER done $11 million.
FOURTH thing: Bad news - even GEEKS didn't like it! by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 12:22:18 AM
A fourth problem this movie had? It goes back to the whole niche thing, but it now gets even WORSE. That’s because it’s bad enough you made a movie for a specialized audience -- the "Geek crowd" -- but even THEY were split over how much the movie sucked. For crying out loud, just look at these talkbacks. Almost HALF of the core geek audience -- the people you thought you were going to have in the palm of your hand -- even THEY didn't like it, particularly Tarantino's section which was HALF the fucking film. Which brings up an interesting question I haven't seen many people talking about: What the hell kind of "testing" did they do on this thing? What, NO ONE saw a test screening and pointed out how truly boring DEATH PROOF was? How much the dialogue scenes brought it to a grinding halt? And even if you did test it, I find it hard to believe that the testing DIDN'T show the same thing that's popped up there: that a really GOOD SIZED PORTION of the people would find DP to be dragging. So now you're really up shit creek. Half the geeks don't like it, so now you’ve got POOR word of mouth from Day One, all because for some truly fucked up reason NO ONE had the courage -- not even the Weinsteins -- to tell Quentin "Uh, you're part is seriously slow, man. It needs some work. We’ve tested this and people are squirming left and right.” Anyone remember the HULK debacle? Anyone remember how truly pissed off Universal was that from the very first screening kids were coming out and literally text messaging friends and posts were instantly going online saying what a boring mess the film was -- which Universal ultimately blamed for killing the HULK right out of the gate on its opening weekend? Guess what, despite it being Easter weekend, the word spread fast yet again and is STILL spreading...
I'd love to see IndustryKiller! become a regular by GQtaste	Apr 10th, 2007 12:22:31 AM
on here w/ his post highlighted. The guy has brillant acumen when it comes to putting his thoughts in a post! Myself, I didn't care for QT's offering in the least. This coming from a guy who thinks Q has made two masterpieces and Jackie Brown just may be my favorite so far.
300 would have flopped, too? by 9000rpm	Apr 10th, 2007 12:23:07 AM
Yeah, I thought that claim was stupid, too.
Testing = Bad by 9000rpm	Apr 10th, 2007 12:24:54 AM
I read that the testing did not go well and they knew Grindhouse was weak.
Death Proof should have been more like Duel by Horace Cox	Apr 10th, 2007 12:25:20 AM
I thought Death Proof was great as long as Kurt Russell was on screen. The chicks in the movie were all cunts with the exception of Zoe Bell. Those characters are completely forgettable and their dialogue was boring, pointless, and by and large did not serve the story at all. But Stuntman Mike was tits. I think if DP would have been thematically closer to DUEL it would have delivered more bang and been closer to the kick ass experience they were promising. Best part of the whole thing was still the trailers. Outstanding!
Mori Let Us Down by Captain Mal	Apr 10th, 2007 12:26:36 AM
I was appalled at how bad "Death Proof" was. "Planet Terror" was lots of fun, and the trailers were cute (maybe a little too cute), but speaking as a Tarantino fan, I can no longer defend the guy by saying, "He's never made a bad movie." His half was practically unwatchable. The last ten minutes were okay, but getting there was the worst chore I've experienced in a theatre in a long, long time. Mori really, really needs to answer for his review. I feel betrayed by the best reviewer at AICN.
FIFTH: The so-called EASTER ARGUMENT... by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 12:31:18 AM
Finally, don’t give me this crap that it was Easter that killed it. Again, this was a niche film and odds are IF you were interested in seeing this, you ran out and DID see it. Besides, why would Easter Sunday be the big deal? Even if you ARE Christian, you still could have seen it Friday OR Saturday and STLL spent Sunday with the family. So the whole Easter argument doesn't fly at all. In fact, let's be honest: yes, they went with counter-programming in terms of when they slotted this, but they were CLEARLY counting ON the holiday to actually BOOST the box office -- that is, with kids being home and all. Truth be told, those who wanted to see it that bad DID see it opening weekend at SOME point. Also, this whole Weinstein bullshit that the Studio didn’t buy any Internet ads is exactly the diverting finger pointing that I mentioned back in Post #1. Hey, I’m a Freelance Writer and I work at home, and I saw PLENTY of commercials day and night, on all sorts of channels. Not to mention, regardless of a specialized pricey pop-up ad, IF you went to Yahoo movies or AOL Entertainment or whatever, you still saw this friggin' thing listed as coming up -- at which point you could click on a link and go to the official site or an official Yahoo movie page or whatever. Not to mention that if you were a real consistent movie-going fan, you knew this was coming out. Along these lines, someone above hit the nail on the head. Maybe teens just DON'T find a "machine gun leg" babe very cool and DON'T have any interest in that or a Kurt Russell car chase film. Truth be told, people DID see "what" GRINDHOUSE was and they just said "I'll pass." Which goes back to my core assertion -- ever think the movie bombed simply because no one actually wanted to see it?
the reason it tanked... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 12:32:32 AM
is because the general movie going public needed to have the term "grindhouse" explained to them - the sheep that go see the likes of the top 3 earners (multiple times probably) dont "get it" - theyre too young to remember what its riffing on - and once they do get it, they dont care - theyd rather see will ferrell and napolean dynamite in a movie thats familiar and comfortable - simple as that - as for the ice cube flick - i dont see "grindhouse" pulling in a large urban audience (black audience) - the ads for each movie and the opening weekend receipts proves this - the urban movie going public always turns out for a new movie - but only the movies they "get" - they get ice cube - like will ferrell - kurt russell killing hot chicks with a miscle car, although while very cool (in my opinion), is a much tougher sell - (average 18-25 yr old male movie goer) "kurt who?"
Few things to note by EdRyder	Apr 10th, 2007 12:34:19 AM
In the new Time magazine the reviewer (Mr.Douchey McBaggins)called upon you to just walk out before Death Proof starts... I didnt get to see Grindhouse.We all wanted to Saturday but the neices lame boyfriends parents wont let him see Grindhouse,..we saw Blades of Glory,.. and as I type this I want to fist fuck myself in the talkbox.!Next weekend! I looked up the numbers and GHouse did the same as The Reaping(11 mil)Equally shitty
Quint's wrong; they did spend money on MySpace buys by victormoreno	Apr 10th, 2007 12:34:54 AM
They did a buy to get an Artist on Artist feature on MySpace and there were in lind ads on MySpace all weekend. It was stupid of them not to do a Redline or 300 style MySpace buy though.
Regarding the dialogue in Death Proof by Horace Cox	Apr 10th, 2007 12:38:19 AM
I don't mind long expanses of dialogue if it is well written and executed. The only dialogue in Death Proof that I thought was well done was between Stuntman Mike and Rose McGowan's character. It was genuine and illustarted that Mike was somewhat of a living anachronism. The babbling between the rest of the chicks was unbearable because it was so pointless and unnecessary. It did nothing to develop the female characters or make me care about any of them. All I thought is that they were a bunch of worthless cunts and I was praying Stuntman Mike would save me from having to listenb to their bullshit any longer. QT is capable of writing brilliant dialogue that may be pointless in terms of the overall story, just watch Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction. In my opinion he failed to deliver quality dialogue in Death Proof with the aforementioned exceptions. However, the car chase and action sequences were superb and exciting as hell. They had me on the edge of my seat. Unfortunately, 20 or 30 good minutes do not make up for the hour of plain bad material in Death Proof.
Hey Mal and other Death Proof haters by Trader Groucho 2	Apr 10th, 2007 12:38:37 AM
Death Proof was what everyone who knows Tarantino's work would expect from Tarantino. The conversations the two sets of girls have are SO Tarantino. And he gave us - after referencing within the film itself his car chase touchstone movies - one of the best extended car chase scenes in recent memory - without a single frakking drop of CGI. RR & QT gave the audience an E ticket ride. Feel betrayed all you want Mal; a critic's write-up after all is just one considered opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Grindhouse's MySpace page has 15,000 friends Quint by victormoreno	Apr 10th, 2007 12:40:08 AM
http://www.myspace.com/artisto nartist Go there. 15,000+ friends and its all a thing on QT and RR. Go to MySpace EVEN NOW and see tons of ads hyping "FIND OUT WHAT WAS IN MARCELLUS WALACE'S BRIEFCASE" you watch the interview and when QT explains it, there's a missing reel. THATS the Grindhouse MySpace
Stunt Man Jar Jar by 9000rpm	Apr 10th, 2007 12:40:18 AM
That would have beeen an improvement, substitute Jar Jar for Kurt Russell and then at the end, when Stuntman Jar Jar is getting pounded on QT should have exploded a 100 blood packs as they tore SMJJ limb from limb. Yeah, I would have applauded that. That would have been a great moment for the zombies from Planet Terror to enter stage left, encircle the boring twats, and then rend the twats to pieces.
PROOF People love this movie PROOF Triumph poop sux by gusradio	Apr 10th, 2007 12:40:38 AM
As I write this Grindhouse gets 8.6 stars out of 10 on IMDB thats calulating 6698 votes. Did my mom vote no, shes busy watching Ms. Doubtfire but the people who did go see this film was in on the spirit of the thing and had fun. Triumph Poop paid just as much as the rest of us but forgot to have fun, your probably too old and should have gone to see the box office hit "Are we done yet" which is tearing this cool movie a new asshole. The years will pass, Grindhouse will eventually make a profit from word of mouth and a grinding DVD advertising campaign. Cult Film enthuists are far from worried about the box office rake. Do zombie films ever go #1 at the box office? What about slasher pics.. that has to have happened once or twice, i'm sure. This film is just too much fun to hand to grandma.. you wouln't let your mom suck on a crackpipe wouldja.... oh jesus i've lost my train of thought... THIS FILM IS FFFFFUUUUUUUNNNNNNNN! you probably should have saved your money and played Star Wars Monopoly with you laid back pals who all quit partying a long time ago. Shit it's past your bedtime...
Not that good by viranth	Apr 10th, 2007 12:41:17 AM
The movie wasn't THAT good as a whole, Planet Terror was the best part and the trailers of course. But Death Proof was so boring I now understood why the movie might have done so poorly. People have realized Tarantino movies are all talk! For 80 minutes it's just talking, then 10 minutes with some action. While in Planet Terror, it was 10 minutes talking and 80 minutes action. Also, it might just be that the movie rises next week, it was easter, after all. I have to disagree with your '300' statement, '300' would never bomb at the boxoffice. Because of Sin City, everyone loves Frank Miller so whatever movies come out with his name on them, they will get lots of people at the movies.
another reason by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 12:44:24 AM
no web saturation didnt help - but also - the ads that were all over tv for 2 months pandered to the uninitiated - the ads actually explained themselves - the ads open with a voice over giving a merriam webster definition of the term "grindhouse" - thus damaging the movies "cool factor" - and rendering the term void of any mystery (to the uninitiated) - lame - they (marketing) tried so hard to be hip - and it bit them in the ass - i dont remember crap movies like "hostel" or "turistas" explaining their titles in their ads
8.6 at IMDB. That's surprising... by 9000rpm	Apr 10th, 2007 12:52:23 AM
...and I predict that Grindhouse will not even make the top ten next weekend.
LASTLY: The (non) power of AICN and other sites by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 01:01:16 AM
And finally -- and Harry and company won’t like hearing this -- there's one final thing to consider. This really was another SNAKES ON A PLANE, another film hyped online for months that possibly peaked too soon or which frankly never had any real legs to begin with other than with online geeks themselves. Problem is, that also proves once again that sites like AICN or CHUD or LATINO REVIEW are NOT as powerful as they might believe, and they might be rather out of touch with mainstream America or the mainstream Mall moviegoer. So despite their getting behind something, despite their attempts to build a film up, and despite all the curse-swearing "hip" reviews they might write up, in the far larger scheme of things -- that is, in the larger scheme of the REAL world out there -- their opinion is NOT as carrying as they want to believe. In fact, with every passing day, as more and more people go online and start their OWN personal sites or do their OWN MySpace pages posting their OWN reviews and whatnot, everything gets fractured more and more...so sites like AICN or CHUD or whoever lose more and more of their power. It's just the pure and simple physical fact of dilution. I have a friend here in Hollywood that works in the marketing division of a major studio and he told me they were talking about GRINDHOUSE at work today, and ironically his boss said the SAME thing that someone else posted above. Namely, that no amount of advertising could have saved this thing because the MOVIE ITSELF was just something that the average moviegoer -- that is, the average moviegoer who helps make a Will Farrell comedy a $100 million hit -- just DIDN'T want to see a girl with a machine gun leg fighting zombies or Kurt Russell as a car chase killer. As his boss pointed out, it STILL comes down to the movie and in this case it was simply something that not too many people wanted to see. And I have to agree. In terms of why GRINDHOUSE bombed, yes, it really IS as simple as that.
deathproof vs planet terror by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 01:02:53 AM
i find it interesting that audiences and critics are divided on which of these 2 are the better movie - they were intended to be as different from one another as possible - like real double features (in the 1970s) - i remember seeing "straw dogs" with "battle for the planet of the apes" - i remember when theater floors were so sticky your sneakers made noises when you lifted your feet - i miss balconies - i like tarrantino's talky-ness - something he shares with mamet - planet terror, while fun, is a no-brainer - deathproof was the real challenge - creatively and for the viewer - and those that liked it for its "long stretches of dialogue and no action" totally get what qt was trying to do - attention spans have really shrunk a lot in the last 30 yrs
I'm really astounded... by slapshot	Apr 10th, 2007 01:04:06 AM
... that not ONE of you geeks has mentioned the obvious reason why the Easter argument is wrong: the Matrix. Violent R-rated film, opened Easter weekend '99, number one, raked in tons of cash, kept doing so for months. I'm also fairly astounded that so many people seem to have hated part or all of this film; I loved every single frame of it, and will probably go see it again next weekend, if Harv hasn't butchered it by then. (And no, kids were not buying tickets to something else and sneaking in; I saw it Sat. afternoon, one of the biggest screens in Memphis, and there were exactly twelve adults and no kids in the theater... plus 288 empty seats. Everyone had a great time, no one walked out.) Bummer that it tanked, 'cause I would love to see the movies that would be made from those 4 fake trailers. Maybe if it does well on DVD they could do them direct to DVD? Just not with a $53 million budget; seriously, did QT snort the money, or what?
Next weekend by 9000rpm	Apr 10th, 2007 01:08:30 AM
BLADES OF GLORY ARE WE DONE YET? MEET THE ROBINSONS Disturbia Perfect Strangers Pathfinder 300 THE REAPING WILD HOGS Redline SHOOTER TMNT Grindhouse
Accusations of ADD by Defrost	Apr 10th, 2007 01:15:41 AM
There is a difference between really smart dialog, and the mindless ramblings you hear at any college party on a Friday night once everyone gets destroyed. That was how I would describe the dialog in Death Proof. It was not as smart as QT's other films, and it seemed to go on forever.
Um... This IS 21st century America right? by UltimaRex	Apr 10th, 2007 01:23:20 AM
No ads, No audience. My two cents? Take half the cost of the whole "chop, re-cut and re-sell" thing and stick cheap ads EVERYWHERE.
hey, "Triumph poops!" ... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 01:26:05 AM
"mainstream america" and the "mainstream mall moviegoer" are stupid and moronic - your hollywood friend in marketing (wow, yer so freekin cool) would know this all to well - dont invest too much in what the mainstream thinks - unless youre in marketing, in which case theyre your meal ticket - but if we all bowed to the mainstream mob life would be pretty fucking unlivable - the fact that hiphop joe mall rat and his retarded teenie bopper myspace blind date didnt give "grindhouse" their seal of approval is a good thing - it means its the movie its makers intended - as you stated - the people that "get it" and wanted to see it, did see it - sooner or later the retarded sheep mob will "get it" too, then they will work hard to squeeze all the coolness out of it - or rather - ad agencies (marketing guys) will, by mining it for whatever they can in order to sell crap nobody needs to people that cant live without said crap
slapshot by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 01:32:01 AM
"the matrix" was an easy sell - hipsters dressed in hipster clothes machine gunning faceless cops and stiff robot-like dorks in brown suits - AND doing karate? - the movie came out at the right time (dot commers were the shit) - its audience was waiting for it in vast numbers - even people that felt alienated by it and its larger themes wanted to see "the cool movie with all the action and karate" - made the retards feel smarter and hipper
big weekend box off returns dont always = quality by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 01:36:10 AM
right?
^^ If you're expecting big weekend returns, DON'T! by McGsStepson	Apr 10th, 2007 01:41:58 AM
sorry man.
Soderbergs "The Good German" by GQtaste	Apr 10th, 2007 01:47:06 AM
Very similiar outcomes, no? Pet projects from another time. What else do they have in common? Nobody went to see the damn thing!
9000rpm, there's an irony to your list... by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 01:50:19 AM
I basically agree with your list, though given that it will be DISTURBIA's opening weekend, I'd probably take a chance and slot it one or two places higher. As a teen scare flick, and since this weekend WON'T be a holiday weekend, I think it might open okay. That said, it just occurred to me there's an irony here... GRINDHOUSE is a tribute to low budget schlock movies, the type which spawned the slasher/suspense genre that teens have since come to love. Yet they'll shun it...but WILL flock out to see DISTURBIA, which owes its roots to grindhouse cinema (not to mention a major steal from Alfred Hitchcock, but that's a whole other bitchfest in itself.) So ironically teens aren't interested in seeing Kurt Russell stalk and kill people and GRINDHOUSE bombs, but they will think it's "cool" to hit the mall and see Shia and friends go up against a killer who's stalking them. Once again proving that William Goldman was right and no one knows anything...
American audiences are the dissapointment! by Jon E Cin	Apr 10th, 2007 01:55:37 AM
Crappy movies like Wild Hogs, Ghostrider and some fucking Ice Cube movie have strong opening weekends and this movie doesnt..cause its too long?? Are you kidding me? So now they are going to split it up because american audiences dont understand a double feature....what the hell is wrong with the majority of people that watch movies?
OF COURSE EASTER IS TO BLAME by The Real MiraJeff	Apr 10th, 2007 02:07:04 AM
Are you guys serious? Of course Easter played a role in how things went down at the box office! You can't pretend it didn't affect it at all. Sure the film was never going to make $100 million but it absolutely should've opened better than it did and I'm very surprised it didn't. I picked this in my Fantasy Moguls box office league. I thought it was as sure a bet as 300. I mean, the numbers really are flabbergasting. First of all, I think it will have legs through the month, but maybe I'm crazy. There really isn't all that much coming out until Spiderman 3. Hot Fuzz is great but it won't do boffo biz or anything, and I don't suspect Disturbia or Fracture will either, which means this film is literally going to "grind" it out at the box office. That said, you have to give people a reason to see it. And that's where my cash rebate idea comes in. If Harvey wants to fully embrace the grindhouse concept, he should offer a cash rebate to people who buy tickets, literally making the ticket the cheapest ticket to buy at the movies. Why pay more money to see something half as short and ultimately, half as entertaining. What you'll lose in those 2 or 3 bucks a ticket, you'll gain with how many more people storm the theater gates. Next, The Reaping, believe it or not, played a significant role in how things shook out, because it's sort of the same audience and it took 10 million. If Grindhouse had opened at 20+, we'd be hearing how it was a relative success for a movie with such limited appeal. I really don't know what the Weinsteins should do. Honor the filmmaker's original artistic vision or take a risk, spend more money on more prints to try and recoup their losses. Part of me thinks the split would work, but part of me recognized the major backlash that could possibly occur, and the potential souring of the filmmakers' relationships with the studio, although I can't imagine that would ever happen. If they had waited one more week to release it, on Friday the 13th, I think the film would've done 100% better. Release date definitely played a part in things this time, and you'd be silly to ignore that fact...
RE: "Fantasy Moguls box office league" by GQtaste	Apr 10th, 2007 02:12:05 AM
What the fuck is that?
splitting this into 2 movies wont work... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 02:32:21 AM
grant it, each movie is good enough to stand on its own - but if weinstein does this, he will just have 2 movies that joe average wont go see - and for the same reasons - "dont get it, dont want it, dont need it, im a moron" - weinstein is a dumbass with no balls - take the hit to your wallet and keep yer integrity you pompous fat ass - what integrity?
Real MiraJeff, you can't split it at this point... by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 02:36:48 AM
You're more right about the backlash, at least in my opinion. Once you split this up ANY and ALL media will be constantly pointing out how it's just a money-grubbing stunt to try and make SOME cash off a failed film. At which point anyone who hasn't seen it will turn around and ask those who have IF it's even worth checking out, and more likely than not people will say "Eh, I'd just wait for the DVD. The zombie one was okay, the car one was slow and stunk." At which point you'd have (at best) lukewarm or (at worst) bad word of mouth going around all over again, thus killing it a SECOND time -- which frankly, for Weinstein, would then be a true P.R. nightmare.
how is the dialogue smart in deathproof by Bob C. Cock	Apr 10th, 2007 02:39:17 AM
when a bunch of drunk retard bitches are spouting it?
...On the other hand, I like your Ticket REBATE idea by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 02:39:40 AM
Actually, that's not a half bad idea. Universal tried it with CINDERELLA MAN, when the release date coincided with Russell Crowe tossing a phone at a hotel worker and he was getting shit press, not to mention the movie just didn't click with people despite solid reviews. So the idea of giving a ticket rebate or even staging a deal like Universal did, where you could pay to see the movie and IF you didn't like it, you could ask for your money back, might not be a bad marketing stunt to try out.
Ladies, listen it's very simple why the film 'bombs': by Evil Hobbit	Apr 10th, 2007 03:10:58 AM
Grindhouse will NEVER open like 300. NEVER. Why? Because no single person of average audience is interested in this type of film. I showed the trailers to lots of normal people who don't have any idea what an exploitation film is and well, they all go like: what the hell is that? What is the fun about that? It's a B-film. You see, no matter what type of marketing you unleash on this flick, it will allways be a weird film, a grindhouse film. And the comon people will NOT react to that in the way we do here on the talkbacks.
Triumph poops!...please by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 10th, 2007 03:47:14 AM
just SHUT THE FUCK UP ALREADY! at this point you should just write a noevl titled "I Hated Grindhouse and Now You'll Listen To Me Talk"...im sorry if you dont have real friends to listen to you psycho-babel bullshit but fuck you mut love to hear yourself talk. you didnt like it, we get it. you theory is that the "average movie goer" doesnt have an interest, we GET IT. it doesnt take 30,000+ words to get your simplistic theory down on paper. i FUCKING LOVED Grindhouse, and as anyone who knows me on this site will tell you, i'm too young to have experienced the real thing. did that have a factor in me wanting to see it? HELL YEAH! i wanted to have the experience of watching 2 exploitation flicks in one sitting. i wanted to fucking chill out for 3 and a half hours. why everyone thinks 3 hours is sopm kind of endourence test when it comes to movies is a mystery to me. maybe the fact that half of the target audience of this film probably DOWNLOADED it this weekend instead of going to see it has something to do with the numbers. you only hurt yourself guys. QT and RR did us movie nerds a favor and made us 2 great flicks and we repay him by ripping them off.
god my grammer sucks by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 10th, 2007 03:50:18 AM
fighting a bit of a flu...but as many have already said, proof-reading is for dummies and women
Simple Math by howlingdervish	Apr 10th, 2007 03:50:24 AM
The movie's three and a half hours; a normal theatre can only run it twice on a single screen per day. Blades of Glory is an hour a a half; a normal theatre can run it four or five times on a single screen. More showings = more moneymaking potential. Also, Blades of Glory has got 500 screens on Grindhouse. There's just no real way Grindhouse could take the number one spot.
thanks for proving my point... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 03:52:21 AM
...poeticwannabe and evil hobbit - joe lame ass isnt interested in this movie - what a surprise - poeticwombat, based on your arguement, does the big weekend $ for will ferrell and ice cubes movies indicate that they are good - will they be remembered for trying anything different a year from now - no - but will get another by the numbers forgetful cookie cutter waste of 90 minutes from both of them in a year if not sooner - yes
what i "dont get"... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 03:59:36 AM
is the continuing success for the napolean dynamite dude - is this guy still funny? i mean, not as napolean - does his acting range stretch past playing just dweebs?
wtf is up with harrys new avatar? by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 10th, 2007 04:04:14 AM
whats that supposed to be from? cant put my finger on it.
Shogun, obviously you're not even listening to people by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 04:05:05 AM
You said "why everyone thinks 3 hours is sopm kind of endourence test when it comes to movies is a mystery to me." Hey, get it right: for the most part, no one has complained about the LENGTH of GRINDHOUSE. No one has a problem sitting for 3 hours -- we all did it for things like TITANIC or LOTR or other films. What everyone is bitching about is that for a full 90 minutes Tarantino's half killed the movie. He was the final act, the "up note" you were supposed to go out on, and he dropped the ball big time. The result being it left a bad taste in many people's mouths and ultimately sucked a lot of oxygen out of the entire experience, thus ruining it. So quit trying to play the ol' ADD accusation game and blaming other people's dissatisfaction on the idea that they simply couldn't sit still for 3 hours and recognize that even GEEKS -- not "average movie goers" -- thought the movie was shit. Oh, and if you don't want to read my posts, here's a tip: DON'T READ THEM. What, you still haven't mastered that truly brain throttling trick of making your eyeball skim past something you have no interest in reading? Gee, then I guess you have something new to work on, don't you?
I'M the one not paying attention? by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 10th, 2007 04:16:57 AM
Triumph, did you even read tha article? your statement of "for the most part, no one has complained about the LENGTH of GRINDHOUSE. No one has a problem sitting for 3 hours -- " makes me think that you didnt. the people on this board might not be, but inthe article this TB is going off of, Harvey CLEARLY states that he blames the runtime for the most part. its called reasearch. some of us actually read the articles before we run out mouths on here. kinda helps us not look like dumbasses. but like i said, you seem starved for attention and just want people to listen to you. your 5 posts were almost exactly the same. guess thats what happens when people try to look smartr than they really are. if you read my post again, youll see i dont blame ADD for the movies performance. i blamed the weekend it opened on, the lack of good advertising and bootlegging. never once did i blame people atention spans.
Shogun, you're not getting what I'm saying... by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 04:30:57 AM
First of all, dumbass, when I said "for the most part, no one has complained about the LENGTH of GRINDHOUSE. No one has a problem sitting for 3 hours -- we all did it for things like TITANIC or LOTR or other films", you should have been literate enough to take note of the WE. I was talking about "us"...the "geeks" around here...and the fact that the very people the movie was targeted at DON'T mind sitting for 3 hours SO LONG AS THE MOVIE IS ACTUALLY GOOD. So, yes, I read the article and that was partially my point: namely Harvey is full of total shit. Look, if he actually thought the 3 hour run time was a problem, then he should've fucking cut OR split the movie up to begin with. But he didn't now, did he? And you know why? Because he thought that just like geeks sat through 3 hours of LOTR, they would sit through this. Because the thought he DID have a hit on his hands. The result being that his whole argument that the "run time" killed it is history-rewriting bullshit and is his way of diplomatically trying to NOT say publicly what we all ARE saying publicly: namely that QT killed the movie by making a shit film. If you can't see that, you need better glasses. Harvey's trying to spin doctor a MAJOR bomb (which would be problematic enough), but at the same time he's also NOT trying to come right out and say "Yeah, Quentin's half sucked. But I can't actually say that because I might want to work with him in the future, so I have to find another thing to blame it all on."
another reason this movie lost the bucks by hellnback	Apr 10th, 2007 04:40:01 AM
after going online and looking at many of the theaters showing this movie i noticed that a lot of them only had like 3 screenings of the movie. in several places ice cube's new movie had 10 showings in one day while grindhouse only had 3. at other places there were 5 or 6 but most had it at 3 screenings. in other words the length of the movie along with the lack of screenings at many theaters cost it to lose money. being easter was only second fiddle to the problem.
hey, Triumph poops... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 04:59:40 AM
i remember people bitching about titanic and lotr being too long as well - litlle girls gave titanic its legs (dicaprio) and geeks like me saw lotr more than once - everyone else thought they were too long - some people stay away from 3 hr movies because they cant sit still that long - they cant deal with going 3 hrs without using their queer cell phones
so, its the # of screenings... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 05:03:31 AM
makes sense - 2 shows daily - 3 tops - plus the turn-off of a 3 hr movie - if they change anything, rather than hack it, put deathproof up front - save the splatter for the 2nd bill
i dont think thats the case at all by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 10th, 2007 05:07:44 AM
i highly doubt that Harvey is trying to tiptoe around QT. im sure he saw the film prior to release and with his track record, theres not a doubt in my mind that he would have a problem saying "Quintin, your movie is dragging...pick up the pace". Harvey is notorious for being hard in his directors. look, i loved Death Proof but for different reasons i loved Planet Terror. Death Proof tried to let you get to know the characters and i think QT showed some balls when he spends 30 minutes with a group of characters, takes his time with them and lets us get to know them intimately and then *SPOILER* kills them in a very brutal fashion. anyone complaining about the diologue being "pointless" is, to put it bluntly, a fucking moron. what was pointless? we learned why these girls are in the area, what they do for a living, mainly that 2 of them are stunt professionals, and why they would have the balls to go after Stuntman Mike like they did. was it done in a slow manner? yes, but everyone should know by now that QT likes to take his time. he is a people watcher and likes to write real conversations, not just exposition. if ppl dont like thatm then fine, but if thats the case then they should stop worshipping Reservoir Dogs right now because that movie is just like Death Proof. we have maybe 2 action scenes and a lot of talking and name calling in between. not to mention a 10 minutes opening about guys talking about how much they tip a waitress. anyone who says Death Proof sucks and that Reservoir Dogs is genius hasnt seen the latter one in a long time and is remembering a different movie.
2 to 3 showings? by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 10th, 2007 05:12:52 AM
some of you must have small theatres because here (and im not even in a huge town) we have a range of 3 showings for the smallest in town, and between 7 and 10 showings a day at the larger theatres.
I didn't rush out Friday by Mr. Profit	Apr 10th, 2007 05:22:46 AM
Because it was the Catholic Holiday "Good Friday". Since I was younger I was taught that you can't do anything "Fun" on that day because it's the day Jesus was nailed to the cross. So my religious Puerto Rican ass went to see it Saturday. I think this is a rumor. They should wait after next weekend to see if the film has legs.
slapshot and jimmy by Trader Groucho 2	Apr 10th, 2007 05:23:50 AM
1. Grindhouse cost $53m, not just Death Proof. 2. The Matrix was an easy sell in retrospect. At the time, the studio did not expect it to take off like it did. Science Fiction + Kung Fu + Keanu effin Reeves? Warners trusted the Wachowskis with $50m because they showed their chops with Bound, but going in they by no means considered The Matrix an automatic slam dunk.
Shogun gunslinger by Trader Groucho 2	Apr 10th, 2007 05:35:29 AM
Excellent point. Actors are drawn to QT flicks because he gives them opportunities to stretch and actually use their acting muscles. Example - the scene in Jackie Brown when Sam Jackson realizes he has no choice but to kill his friend Bob DeNiro. Another - in Death Proof, the moment Rosario Dawson in the Dodge Challenger with the 440 engine gets it. And before that, when she talks her stuntgirl friends into letting her go with them, and her talking the redneck owner of the car into letting them test-drive without him along.
"Anyone complaining about the diologue is a moron" by Triumph poops!	Apr 10th, 2007 05:50:54 AM
Actually, Shogun, to be precise, what you said was: "Anyone complaining about the diologue being "pointless" is, to put it bluntly, a fucking moron." You then added: "What was pointless? We learned why these girls are in the area, what they do for a living, mainly that 2 of them are stunt professionals, and why they would have the balls to go after Stuntman Mike like they did." Congratulations. You just got across in 20 seconds and one run-on sentence what it took Tarantino a fucking eternity to convey. And, yes, that time crawled by SLOW as hell, was BORING as shit, and was an UTTER waste of screen time. Because aside from the few simple plot points that you just rattled off, we learned absolutely NOTHING of value NOR did any of the dialogue make ANY of the girls ANY less annoying. SO IT TRULY WAS COMPLETELY WASTED SCREEN TIME. Well, I take that back. We also learned that QT still writes stereotypical black women, Zoe can't act for beans, and the one girl that could have livened things up by taking off her clothes and having mad sex ala a true grindhouse era film got left behind at the farm and utterly disappeared from the movie. Which made it was yet another wasted opportunity...
Trader... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 05:52:28 AM
what you say is true - but my earlier point was that the matrix was ripe for the time - right movie right time - the studio wasnt sure - but the w bros were - the studio trusted them and won big - like when alan ladd jr trusted lucas when fox gambled on star wars - right movie right time big return - here, with grindhouse, great movie but with a niche audience - plus, people seem to be getting dumber - they want to be spoon fed - hence we have ice (fuck da po leece) cube in a huge hit "family" comedy - go figure - and will ferrell making a killing with another anchorman/taladega nights cake walk -
reservoir dogs... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 05:55:53 AM
was no huge hit when initially released - but it caught on - and is now one of the most referenced as favorite movies by the same dorks that opted not to see grindhouse
chicks dialogue by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 05:59:27 AM
the thing about qt's dialog for the chicks in dp is that its realistic - considering the type of movie - it sounds dumb at times because thats how the characters talk - thats why its so good - for those that are on board
"Man I got 3 kids to feed!" by bigdrawz	Apr 10th, 2007 06:30:12 AM
I'm seeing it tomorrow night with the kids easter weekend is off limits for movies all they want is that fake bunny to come and take all the credit for my hard work like that fat fuck saint nick.
300 by LocoMotive	Apr 10th, 2007 06:35:00 AM
Haven't seen Grindhouse yet, but i have seen 300. Quite possibly the dumbest piece of shit i have ever witnessed. So unintentionally funny. I couldn't believe it. Yeah those Spartans were tough! Fighting of armies led by a ladyboy! What was up with that friggin voice? Laughed my ass off. What a great portayal of the Persians. And what was that that Uruk Hai doing at the battle ground? He must've survived the battle of Midgar and waited around for another good fight. Sam Peckinpah must be rolling over in his grave after such lame use of slow motion. But i digress...
I'm surprised to read the budget was $53 by Franklin T Marmoset	Apr 10th, 2007 06:40:57 AM
For a film that's basically an in-joke that only a very narrow audience will appreciate, that seems like an awful lot of money to spend. If the film didn't perform well, I think it's because in-jokes annoy people. Not the three people who get it, obviously, but I honestly believe the vast majority of the filmgoing public don't have a bloody clue what the hell a 'grindhouse' is. I'm a pretty big film nerd, and I'd never heard it until it became every other word out of Quentin Tarantino's mouth. All in all, it seems like a bizarre experiment - let's make an expensive film that twelve people will really, really like.
A gun leg is a really stupid idea by GrubStreeter	Apr 10th, 2007 06:46:35 AM
Maybe that's why it flopped...
Dialougue in DP by PotSmokinAlien	Apr 10th, 2007 06:47:04 AM
you know i was thinking last night about the dialogue in DP and it is certainly boring at times. but think about this: QT has been living and breathing hollywood for 15 years, drinking it, snorting it, rolling around in it so he will smell like it to other directors and they will know to stay away. and he is still able to write EXACTLY the way that people talk after living in this golden fantasy land that is so divorced from anything resembling reality. boring or not what the ladies talk about is some of the realest talk i've heard onscreen (now if only he could have made it interesting all of the time instead of some).
It's three and a half hours long? by Mr Squirrel	Apr 10th, 2007 06:47:32 AM
That is the reason I won't be seeing it in the cinema. I only have a skinny little butt and it really gets sore after two hours. So does the 'N' word make an appearance? Or is QT no longer one of them 'n*****r-guys'?
Another stupid idea would be by PotSmokinAlien	Apr 10th, 2007 06:53:41 AM
MAKING THE FUCKING BOX OFFIC REPORTS NATIONAL NEWS. STOP DOING THIS. IT IS KILLING THE WAY PEOPLE SEE MOVIES.
Frank Marmoset by PotSmokinAlien	Apr 10th, 2007 06:59:45 AM
agreed, why not just actually make this fucking thing on the cheap, rather than spend more money making it look shitty with a computer? at least QT showd some restraint digitally, every pan down to rose's 2x4 leg i was like, yes robert rodriguez, you did that, hats off to you sir. never mind that if this movie was actually from back in the day the leg would have just stayed safely offscreen as much as possible.
Mr Squirrel... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 07:01:10 AM
can you think of any movies youd be willing to sit through for 3 hrs - if not, then you are proof that 3 hrs is too long for a moviegoer... with a short attention span
Yep, Snakes on a Plane syndrome. by rev_skarekroe	Apr 10th, 2007 07:06:15 AM
See, I loved "Snakes on a Plane" and though I haven't seen "Grindhouse" yet, I suspect I'll love it, too. But this kind of thing is a real niche market. It's a very vocal niche market, but it ain't representative of the general public by any means. Kind of makes me glad they didn't end up doing "Freddy vs. Jason vs. Ash" but the exact same thing would have happened there.
Gimme Grindhouse... by Dr Gregory House	Apr 10th, 2007 07:10:29 AM
...over some damn, gay movie about lame-ass robots that would get their ASSES handed to them by the Shogun Warriors and/or a bunch of green Catholic, Italian turtles who eat pizza and talk like yuppy pseudo surfers from the 80's.
More Hobo, More Shotgun by Spandau Belly	Apr 10th, 2007 07:10:59 AM
The answer is that simple.
Catholic Italian/American by LocoMotive	Apr 10th, 2007 07:12:55 AM
Catholic Italian/American Ninja turtles please...
PotSmokinAlien by Franklin T Marmoset	Apr 10th, 2007 07:14:52 AM
Do you know what it reminds me of? It reminds me of those jeans you can buy with fake faded patches and pre-frayed hems. People actually paying out extra money for clothes that give you a phony 'lived-in' look. I mean, steal some jeans off a homeless guy if that's what you're after - they're free! I think people go for this kind of superficial, artificially reproduced nostalgia when it's something they like - plastic 'wild west' towns at Disneyland and whatnot - but it seems like there aren't enough movie geeks in the world to appreciate what Tarantino and Rodriguez have done with this film. Hence, failure.
Those damn projectionist lol! by Mace Tofu	Apr 10th, 2007 07:44:34 AM
http://tinyurl.com/3cbsjb
Harvey Weinstein=Stalin by Samuel Fulmer	Apr 10th, 2007 07:45:36 AM
So he thinks anyone that doesn't live on the coasts in America needs to be "educated." Is he planning on making some Kamerspiels or a remake of Dziga Vertov's Man With the Movie Camera???
My two cents by Ninjamime	Apr 10th, 2007 07:51:45 AM
1)Easter weekend + R rating doesn't work. 2)So it didn't make a gazillion dollars on opening weekend. Big deal, it is all about staying power.
This is a stupid idea. by Halloween68	Apr 10th, 2007 08:02:04 AM
If they do this, all that's going to happen is PLANET TERROR will do relatively better (not much) and DEATH PROOF will tank. All the hardcore Tarentino fans have gone to see this already. From here on out, people are going to see this strictly for the experience. Why split it now? Plus, I think people are making much more of this 3 hour thing than is necessary. The opening weekend was freakin Easter weekend. Families went to the movies this weekend. Who's going to take their mom and pop and kids to see go-go dancers with an automatic weapon strapped to her stump? Give it another couple of weekends. It'll make back about as much as KILL BILL did. If you divide the two... One will suffer and won't get seen. The experience will be lost. In the end, I don't think neither will make anymore money than it will now. And a lot of people might feel cheated because now they have to pay 20 bucks to see the film instead of 10.
Weinstein's a cunt by NightArrows	Apr 10th, 2007 08:03:02 AM
And so are the majority of the asshats who didn't "get" this film. This place is hilarious. No one likes ANYTHING! Why the fuck do ANY of you go to the movies? Grindhouse was the best time I've had at the movies in a long time. Weinstein's a money grubing whore and should be Swimming with Shark'd™. 300 was indeed overrated, a beautiful film, but overrated to hell and back.
Guess I better see it this week... by Kid Z	Apr 10th, 2007 08:03:48 AM
... Before the chickenshit suits pull the thing!
Arent we missing a talkback about Bob Clark? by Teamwak	Apr 10th, 2007 08:08:27 AM
Didnt Moriarty post a new obituary commenting on the shitfest to old one turned into? Wheres it gone? Did it turn into a anti-immigration shitfest again?
Middle America by Ms. 45	Apr 10th, 2007 08:12:28 AM
I saw the movie this weekend 7:30 show. They were showing it on 2 screens (one big and a smaller screen). Parking lot wasn’t filled but a sizable bunch. I got the impression while standing in line that parents with kids were going to see MTR and AWDY. Teens and more than few adults (women grouped together and dates) were going to Blades. Inside I saw maybe 4 other women it was far from packed. Mostly late teen and 20’s and early 30’s males. The crowd wasn’t too vocal, I actually gasped 3 times. I enjoyed it but I see why it did soo poorly. To sell it to middle America and the that certain male demographic nationally you cannot have a female heroes. In both movies the ultimate hero is female. In PT, the triumph of the “lesbian” over the husband, the killing of the son and I’m sure more than a few men left feeling emasculated after the high pitched screaming from Russell as he got his ass handed to him by 3 women. This is not going to translate overseas either. The ads showcased Cherry Darling with a machine gun leg that sent out the wrong kind of phallic message (even though you guys thought it was cool) and men stayed away and they didn’t go back for a 2nd show. I think most movies that break box office records must have 2nd and 3rd viewings. If you look at 300 the ads showcased little if any talk from women, hyper masculine men, lots of talk of honor and kickin’ that black dude in a hole. The ads where by the book in seeking out its audience. Although I liked the movies they could have been better and QT in particular really didn’t follow the rules of exploitation films. If you are going to have female heroes (switchblade, all of Pam Griers 70’s work One eye for example) you really have to exploit them first. In Sweetback, the “black” myths are exploited before sweetback revolts; One Eye is forced into prostitution then revolts. No myths were exploited. In essence it made grindhouse a run of the mill movie like everything that has come out. Someone mentioned Devils Reject in one of these talk backs I agree this is the best example of “grindhouse” (P.S. that was a terrible name I had never heard this name before I think everyone knows these films to be exploitation films). But the werewolf of the SS sucked, good ideal but poorly executed. The only point that had me totally mortified was the sassy black girl. I cringed. It made me think that QT never got the point or really watched those blaxploitation films. It was like watching Foxxy Cleopatra in a serious film. I do think that it was a combination of Easter and this type of 3 hour movie that spelled doom for the box office. Titanic was rated pg-13 soo everyone could go and had Leonardo, a love story and that guy who hit the smoke stack and flipped. Although it opened prior to a religious holiday nothing in the movie put it at odds with the holiday. Plus people had a few days off so they could be generous with their time. When I went to GH I was already thinking about Monday. And why for the love do people flip their cell phone open while watching a movie.
JimmyJoe RedSky, three hr long good films include by Mr Squirrel	Apr 10th, 2007 08:13:31 AM
Once Upon A Time In America/The West and a few others. But I got a sore ass at the boring Pirates 2, and QTs films have been getting increasingly dull since Pulp Fiction. This is a spoof and spoofs should last two hours max. Also, most gigs should only last twenty minutes.
When I saw a preview of this by mr.underwater	Apr 10th, 2007 08:15:23 AM
I said "if they release as is (both movies being 90 minutes shown back to back) it will flop" so the fact that it did poorly and they're considering chopping it up (and both films can easily lose 30 minutes) does not surprise me in the least. It's not 1976 and your local multiplex isn't 42nd street. You're not using the theater as a place to shoot up and nod, or to get a blowjob. You're actually watching this shit. Why did this never occur to them in the very inception of this thing?
To all the dipshits by kilik777	Apr 10th, 2007 08:17:17 AM
that say Death Proof was boring or was weaker than Planet Terror must not appreciate true film cinema. Yes Planet Terror was great fun but Death Proof was better acted, directed and had a better payoff. http://tinyurl.com/pv8do
Change the Titles! by HarryKnuckles	Apr 10th, 2007 08:17:24 AM
If our friends at the Weinstein Company do indeed re-release the films, they should change the titles of both films (in tradition with failed films on the grindhouse circuit).
Switzerland gets shafted by binocore	Apr 10th, 2007 08:31:49 AM
Well I guess I was too lazy reading through all this. But in switzerland (I think Europe in general?) the 2 films get released seperately, with like 3 months in between and then re-released in it's original form.
NYC / LA by Dokkalvar	Apr 10th, 2007 08:32:38 AM
I saw this in a packed theater in NYC at around 9:45pm. It was raucous, loud and the best theater experience I've ever had the pleasure to enjoy. I've heard from friends in LA that it was the same for them. Maybe they're lying - they do that. It seems from all reports that it was YOU Midwest and South that let us down O lawd. Let me see, who voted for Bush? TWICE!? That's right, I'm resurrecting that old horse! You know what you did Midwest. Because of that you're like Schumacher to me these days; you just can't do right. But seriously, leave it alone and it will probably perform well this weekend.
They are just NOT GOOD MOVIES! by hatespeech	Apr 10th, 2007 08:33:08 AM
Together or separated, both movies are shit. Not good. terrible pieces of shit.
Wow Kill Bill anyone by DannyOcean01	Apr 10th, 2007 08:35:56 AM
For a film geek fanboy Tarantino sure does like to milk us...And don't give me that horseshit he has no say in this. Aren't we still fucking waiting for that sutured Kill Bill on DVD? And as others have said, two Grindhouse DVDs followed by the suturing of that fucking film which I'm sure they'll expect us all to be very happy about. Fuck you Tarantino, you're a fucking hack, and not some impresario.
Maybe they should've called it Drive-In by Samuel Fulmer	Apr 10th, 2007 08:37:16 AM
instead of Grindhouse. Grindhouse is a cool title, but I'm sure most people don't know what the title means. Drive-Ins played the same sort of crappy schlock represented by Grindhouse, and even many of todays youth know what a drive-in is (because they still exist in many places). Grindhouses are gone (or never existed in most parts of the country). Nowadays we've got cineplexes, art houses, and our second run 3 buck theaters but no grindhouses. Heck, they should've just released this film directly to the second run three buck theaters. That's where I'll be watching it, not in a Grindhouse, or a modern multiplex where I'll be forking down 9 bucks. Going to a big multiplex for Grindhouse would be like going to the Kennedy Center to see some indie band perform. It kind of defeats the spirit of the experience.
I personally know 5 people who saw it & we ALL loved it by JDanielP	Apr 10th, 2007 08:39:48 AM
Let it go at least one more weekend... and see what word of mouth does for it. And I preferred "DEATH PROOF" over the other. Very nice stunt work, by the way. The pacing. The whole bit. That was thrilling, QT.
Grindhouse is the new Zeitgeist! by Franklin T Marmoset	Apr 10th, 2007 08:55:25 AM
It's fast becoming one of those words that makes me cringe whenever I hear or read it. Like guesstimate. Euwwwwww. In other news, it has to be a certainty that this film will eventually be released on two separate DVDs, to be followed next christmas by the ultra deluxe 'now with extra grind-y-ness' quadruple disc pocket picker edition. People cam complain about Harvey Weinstein all they want, but if I had sunk $53 million of my money into this film, I would do whatever I could to get it back.
The film did half the Box office they hoped it would by Boba Fat	Apr 10th, 2007 09:02:40 AM
but it's still too early to write it off. They took a gamble with marketing and opening weekend and it didn' happen. But, the only two people I know who have seen it are female non horror fans and they liked it. Tarantino films have wide audiences that cover all ages. My mother in law loves Kill Bill 2! So, Miramax has to pray for good word of mouth and I don't see why that won't happen. I think there's a lot of spiteful, hindsight bullshit going on in this talkback. I'm not the biggest Tarantino fan but it seems like a lot of people here are just gloating.
always The Passion by liljuniorbrown	Apr 10th, 2007 09:02:49 AM
It kills me that alot of the geeks on the site cannot let go of the fact that Christian's and nonchristians alike went out and supported a movie on the life of Jesus Christ. Get over it people,it happened and the movie should have won a ton of Oscars, but the fact is no matter what religon you are or if you do not really belive in anything at all,you can admit that people are on a full fledge backlash against anything remotely Christian. I see no Jew bashing,no Hindu bashing, or no Buddisim bashing. Just Muslim and Christian. I went out and watched Grindhouse this weekend and I LIKED IT ALOT. I will also be going to see it again this thursday afternoon. All haters should really go back and look at the list of movies that have been trashed on this site in the last two days alone,it's like a who's who of great film making..Passion of the Christ, 300, Spiderman 2, Resevoir Dogs and Batman Begins just to name a few. I just don't get the hate. Firehouse Dog hate, i'm with you, Are we done yet hate, why not? But Grindhouse hate? Wow,these guys try and give us geeks what we want and we shit it back in there face's.
I'm a huge Tarantino fan and I have no interest. by Azlam Orlandu	Apr 10th, 2007 09:18:17 AM
Coming from a guy who saw Pulp Fiction three times in the theater and I went to see TMNT this weekend intead. There's simply a lack of interest in Tarantino and Rodriguez lately, I already know what to expect from their films and I feel that many others feel the same way. I've seen my share of eggagerated violence, sex and overuse of the word "fuck" from these guys. They didn't need to make Grindhouse to pay tribute to this genre of films, all of their previous films have already done this. I'm not saying that I won't watch Grindhouse eventually, but it simply isn't enough to get my $8. TMNT was amazingly fun and entertaining by the way. Flame on!
Tolerance by Samuel Fulmer	Apr 10th, 2007 09:18:59 AM
Some people who claim to be liberal and tolerent are usually some of the least tolerant people I know, especially when it comes to anyone who has religious faith. Just because Jerry Falwell acts like an idiot most of the time doesn't mean that every Christian should be lumped in with him. That would be like lumping every illegal alien in the same category as the guy who crashed into Bob Clark.
Triumph poops by Mr Incredible	Apr 10th, 2007 09:20:24 AM
Thank you for your insightful posts through several talkbacks bringing some levity to this movie. I was on the fence about seeing this train wreck, but now I will wait until it goes on DVD; in whatever form it will appear.
QT should do his take on Merchant Ivory by Samuel Fulmer	Apr 10th, 2007 09:20:30 AM
Call it Arthouse.
DEATH PROOF WAS HORRIBLE! by johnnymilkshark	Apr 10th, 2007 09:21:35 AM
Fuck QT. That movie was BORING as all get out. If you dislike Robert Rodriguez than stay the hell away from Grindhouse because his movie is the only one worth seeing. I want a redo with "Machete" and "Thanksgiving" as the features.
Almost 24 hours without a new article... by Frijole	Apr 10th, 2007 09:24:59 AM
LAME.
The ONLY QT movie I liked was Kill Bill Vol 1. by Mr. Profit	Apr 10th, 2007 09:28:33 AM
I didn't care for any of his other movies. But I did enjoy Death Proof a whole lot. I thought it was good with a satisfying ending. The writing was good and the characters spoke in a realistic way. Anyhow, another thing that annoyed me about my experience was I went to see the 7:15 Directors Hall showing, and the bitch kept warning me that the movie was really violent and it was 3 and a half hours long. After she mentioned it twice I had to remind her that I was a fucking adult who read up on movies before I set out to see them. If she did this to me, I'm sure she did it to more people. Also there were signs warning theater patrons that "Grindhouse" contained graphic violence. OK... I don't think the violence was crazy in this movie. There were more violent movies out there. Anyhow if they make a GH 2 I say we get Don't and Thanksgiving. you don't need 53 million to make those 2 movies. And why did people in my theather laugh at the Halloween Remake trailer? One guy leaving the theater thought it was a fake trailer. What a shame....
And The Passion was garbage... by Frijole	Apr 10th, 2007 09:29:22 AM
Well acted, well shot garbage... but garbage nonetheless. A 2 hour guilt trip. A fetishistic bunch of slo-mo torture nonsense. Yes, yes... It's "in the bible". For less than a page. How is seeing Christ brutally beaten for two hours uplifting? If Gibson had even traded half an hour of the torture for another half hour of Jesus's actual LIFE, I might feel differently. Oh and it IS anti-semitic. Passion stories are anti-Semitic by nature... but I could have overlooked that little nugget had Gibson not made Pontious Pilate this beleagured guy with no real grudge against Christ that was simply caught up in the rabid will of the Jews. Pilate was a murderous bastard through and through.
What 70's film genre will QT's next film mimic? by ExcaliburFfolkes	Apr 10th, 2007 09:32:23 AM
"Jackie Brown" - blaxsploitation films; "Kill Bill" - Kung Fu movies; "Grindhouse" - grindhouse flicks; what style will he cover next? Anyone have any guesses?
Let's not avoid the Pink Elephant in the room by Lost Skeleton	Apr 10th, 2007 09:33:02 AM
Easter weekend was the wrong weekend to release this. The movie or movies were really good and got great reviews. I saw it with a few of my boys and can say that these two flicks were the best comedies released this year. That said, America is a nation of C students that probably didn't get it anyway. Look at NBC cancelling Andy Barker!
The last 1/3 of Planet Terror is too shitty... by JKrow21	Apr 10th, 2007 09:34:36 AM
to have it turned into a stand alone film. Up until then, the film is really fucking good but then it just falls a part like "From Dusk Till Dawn" did. The movie holds out great promise for its reviewers but then just loses its steam. As for Death Proof, I really enjoyed it except I wish they had kept in the entire lap dance sequence and maybe cut some of that diner scene which dragged on way too long. The ending made the price of admission well worth it though. I haven't laughed that hard in a long time.
grindhouse flopped red states and blue states by rainbowtrout1265	Apr 10th, 2007 09:40:10 AM
"It seems from all reports that it was YOU Midwest and South that let us down O lawd. Let me see, who voted for Bush? TWICE!? That's right, I'm resurrecting that old horse! You know what you did Midwest." Do you have any clue what you're talking about. The "Midwest" did not vote for Bush twice. The region didn't even vote for him once. Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota voted for Gore and Kerry. Iowa voted for Gore and then Bush. Grindhouse flopped everywhere except NY and California. This has nothing to do with Red States vs Blue States.
I read an article over the weekend in the observer by emeraldboy	Apr 10th, 2007 09:45:06 AM
Which explained what grindhouse meant. It all started under val lewton in MGM in the 40's. There were two types of Movies, big vast spectaculars, like gone with the wind and singing in the rain. and not forgetting the movies of Cecille B de mille. The b-movies had miniscule budgets. Some were gems including curse of the cat people, There are some excellent Noir movies that came from Val lewton productions. People wnated spectacle and so b-movies were often neglected. AS the studio system faded at the end of the sixties. B-movies were reborn as indie cinema. At the heart of all this was roger Corman, who's film company made famous copolla, joe dante, james cameron, jack nicholson and many others. In the 1990's studios copped on to indie cinema, at the centre off this were the frankenweinsteins and Sundance film festival. The Cohen bros first and best movies were all indie. But the bigger their films became thier next films lost the indie egde. Intolerable Cruelty and the ladykillers are about as corporate kind of movies as you can get. The infant terribles of 70's movie making are scorcese, coppolla, The berg and lucas. Lucas is a billionaire, the berg is a billionaire too, coppolla not only has a film company to rake in the dough but has a vineyard to rake the billions in. Marty's the departed was the most successful film of his career. QT and RR will learn the hard way that eventually, you have to play the studio system. QT and his fans may not like it but in hollywood Money talks and bullshit buys the helicopter.
Look, this movie failed for ALL of the reasons given by Dasher	Apr 10th, 2007 09:45:42 AM
The subject matter, the 3-hour running time, Easter weekend opening, competition against family-friendly films, lack of big stars, poor marketing, etc..it was not any one factor that contributed to this film's demise, but ALL of them together. I don't think splitting them up as separate films is going to do anything. Harvey should eat the cost of this, ride it out, and pray for better returns in international/DVD.
Mel Gibson has turned from a director by emeraldboy	Apr 10th, 2007 09:57:28 AM
i admired into one that I have no interest in seeing ever again. I have no problem with him promoting his movies whereever and whenever. But he has no right to tell anyone to fuck off and then have that person evicted his/her place of work. If he doesnt like critics then he is a dictator(critics are like assholes everyone has they stink) and the fact that he no longer tolerates dissent, proves my point.
This Film will be selling for 20 Years! NOT A FAILURE by gusradio	Apr 10th, 2007 10:04:01 AM
Seriously, this film is a cult classic already! Set it right next to Eraserhead, House of 1000 Corpses, Texas Chainsaw, Dawn of the Dead, and Convoy. It was #4 at the box office People will be picking this one up on home market for decades. The content of this movie was geared toward longgevity and cinema enthousists.. they weren't going for the cround that "are we done yet" is going for.. no one is wetting their pants over the weekend rake except doomsayers like TRIUMPH POOP! Learn to have fun because this film is going to be in the theatre until late summer and then second run until fucking November!!! It didn't cost an extraordinary amount of money to make and they did it because it was seriosly fun to do and will turn a profit. Most of the actors were paid far less than their regular saleries just to be involved in a great time. Smile and enjoy the film because WORD of Mouth and repete veiwing is going to keep GRINDHOUSE pulling in money for the next 2 decades and beyond. Don't be surprised if theres a sequel either.
NO Way by pinche cabrone	Apr 10th, 2007 10:05:28 AM
No way man that can't we cant let it happen no no no
Ha-Ha-Ha by TopHat	Apr 10th, 2007 10:12:07 AM
Look at the fanboys making excuses! "Well, the movie came out during this time period, and the other one came out with this, and the wind was coming in from the south with the sun reflecting light off of Jupiter..." People just didn't want to see it. Deal with it.
Split it UP! by barzimeron	Apr 10th, 2007 10:12:23 AM
Having listened to a lot of my students that saw the film it sounds like it needs to be split up. They all seemed to enjoy Planet Terror and the fake trailers, but Death Proof did not do well with them. And it was not just that it was 3 hours long… Several said they where good about watching a second film, but they felt it was just not as good.. I had one say they should have flipped them and ended on a high note. As a male dink(35+) I was not that interested in seeing these movies, but if they did split them up I think from what I hared Planet Terror sounds like something I might just go see. And as far as getting the word out about the film, at lest here in Dallas the Kids knew about it and I know I saw the trailer on TV a lot. At the Cinemark too.
BLAME IT ON GLOBAL WARMING by gride9000	Apr 10th, 2007 10:15:49 AM
You twats, why don't you realize your opinion is not fact.
emrald boy by gusradio	Apr 10th, 2007 10:18:27 AM
"QT and RR will learn the hard way that eventually, you have to play the studio system." Are you kidding? Do you realize how much money those two have made film studios and distributors? Executive Producers take on Woody Allen and David Lynch films knowing that they will be a loss of box office just to put that experience on their resume. In the end, the sell the video rights to make a profit and lure more talent with having amazing real films in their backpocket. QT and RR have already wrote the same ticket for the rest of their careers but that doesn't even matter becuase they will both continue to create films that will do spendedly in the theare and home video rentals/purchases. Oh and it might break the brain cells of some doomsayers but Grindhouse will make a profit too. even if it's not at the theatre. Wienstiens might have hoped for better but they're hardly wetting their pants.. breaking the films up is a rumor. the 11mil it took in this weekend is already about 10-15% return on invenstment. in 3 days MFer! You'd have a hard time to make 10-15% return on invenstment in 3 days selling candy in gradeschool. I do have to admit that my #'s here a a little loose as I don't actually care about them.. the point it GRINDHOUSE is not a failure just because it isn't #1 at the box office.. it doesn't even fit the kind of formula to be #1 but it does fit a formula to ring a profit. end rant
This Idea Had Bomb Written All Over It From The Start by CutAndPaste	Apr 10th, 2007 10:20:44 AM
Most people don't want to spend $11 on a 3.5 hour inside joke.
I'd be happy to see Grindhouse 2 by Spandau Belly	Apr 10th, 2007 10:24:47 AM
But next time I think they should take the movie ideas like Machete and Thanksgiving and make them 40 minute short films and show three of them instead of two full length features.
gimmick movie by chaffg	Apr 10th, 2007 10:42:29 AM
Maybe this movie wouldn't have bombed had they made a love letter to good films. Instead, we get a gimmick movie which will be forgotten alongside junk such as SNAKES ON A PLANE.
Ice Cube used to be in N.W.A. by Nice Marmot	Apr 10th, 2007 10:49:21 AM
HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa HaHa. . . you get the picture.
ATTN: Fanboys, This Is A Good Thing! by SuperMikeChu	Apr 10th, 2007 11:15:19 AM
I happen to be a fanboy myself. Harvey put his trust in the filmmakers, let them (rightfully) overindulge and you see the results. I'm glad he did release the film in it's current form, took balls to go against his instincts but atleast he churned out a great night at the movies. Which is why he has the right to make a profit. If Grindhouse isn't being accepted in it's current form, well, what's wrong with re-releasing it to better suit the market? The people that Grindhouse was made for have already seen it, multiple times. Now it's time for him to get a return on his investment. There's no way that Grindhouse in it's current form will ever give Harvey a return. If we're the movie fans that I think we are, we should look forward to a different version of Grindhouse. Hell, I'd see any cut TWC will release. Planet Terror as with more footage thrown in, hopefully they'll go back and do reshoots for that missing reel. And Death Proof should be rereleased as Thunder Bolt, with all that footage thrown back in to make a 2 hour film. And Death Proof's missing reel was shot so no reshoots necessary. And won't Death Proof be released first? Planet Terror following it a few months later? That would give 'em time for reshoots, if that's even nececessary. As we all know, Grindhouse is being split internationally anyway, except in the UK and Oz so I'm sure those individual cuts are already conformed. This is all a good idea. We already saw Grindhouse the way it was intended, let it be everyone else's loss (and Harvey's gain) for not seeing it when they had the chance. Besides, this will all end up being good Grindhouse lore, years from now people will be telling new fanboys about how Planet Terror and Death Proof were actually released together, and not just a double bill but actually on the same print. People won't believe it. Let it be our own special memory of the film, like people that saw Star Wars for the first time before it ever had "Episode IV - A New Hope."
Great Idea by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 11:23:22 AM
How about everyone that loved the flick go see it again this weekend, and everyone that has not yet seen it, go see it. It may give this movie some legs and prove that Easter is not the time to release a grindhouse flick. I think the Weinsteins should cool their panties and give this baby one more weekend before doing anything foolish. I, for one, would go see neither movie if they are split in two, just out of sheer principle.
No Do-Overs 4 Grindhouse. by Honeysour	Apr 10th, 2007 11:27:29 AM
I’m still very excited about Grindhouse. Have plans to see it again! However, I understand why Grindhouse was released ahead of the pack for summer movies. Fear. They were afraid it wouldn't stand up to the big bad "3's" of 2007. I believe the reason why Grindhouse wasn't given a proper advertising campaign was due to this fear. Fear that the younger generation of movie goers won't know what a "double feature" was or what exploitation films like I Spit on Your Grave (the one movie that made Roger Ebert curse) are, and the feat that two admired directors couldn't master another collaboration. The fear of failing at the box office; which with all due respects; it didn't. A Rodriguez/Tarantino movie with very little hype coming in 4th. That’s good! Although it came in behind an Ice Cube movie, which sucks. It was in the top 5 of Easter movies. That says two things, people have no morals and every weekend is good for boobies, zombies and chicks with attitude. Fans of the exploitation genre, but more importantly the two directors were invested in sitting for as long as they could to see all of Grindhouse. I saw it opening day, in a moderately packed theatre of adults who only left to pee while Tarantino's dialogue was being chewed up on screen. And I saw all of Grindhouse in the evening after I saw 300 in the afternoon. So that was 5 and a half hours of movies that I sat through and didn't once think I was wasting my time or money. Learning that the DVD release is going to be two separately release disks pisses me off. Just another "special edition" ploy to take more of my money and give me multiple copies of one film. But that’s what the business of movie making has boiled down too right? Getting the most BANG for your buck. Well try this scenario, re-releasing Grindhouse as two separate entities during the blockbuster movie blitz of the 3's (Spider-Man, Pirates, Shrek) as well as Harry Potter and Transformers (hardcore geekdom crowd movies) you're not only going to see dismal numbers, Planet Terror will get more money than Death Proof, Tarantino will cry, women and children won’t care and the people who originally invested would have already seen Grindhouse as it was intended, so you'd most likely not get their return cash. Most intelligent people will see this as a mad scramble for attention and stay away out of spite, thus be spending their money buying tickets to the "3's" reinforcing Grindhouse's dismal display and waiting for the 4 disk "original, as intended" DVD "special super sexy mega edition" release with all the stuff they "missed". Or… would have already downloaded the UK/Europe version(s) if they were so inclined. You took a risk, it wasn't a bad one; not enough people supported you and it didn't pay off. Such is life. And like most cases in life... there are no do-overs.
Tarantino = Kevin Smith by pinkfloyd2000	Apr 10th, 2007 11:29:08 AM
Both talentless, overrated hacks. Tarantino should go back to making movies like Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs & Jackie Brown, and less kung-fu/horror shit like Kill Bill, Grindhouse, Dusk Til Dawn, etc. Kevin Smith. Jersey Girl. Dead to me.
I guess all release dates are a gamble by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 11:32:59 AM
I figured the some movie season was essentially a go with the release of Grindhouse. I can't help but to blame the holiday weekend, it definitely prevented me from seeing this movie and I still can't wait to see it this coming weekend. Take a look at Devil's Rejects: it scored so high in advance previews that Lion's Gate sticks it out there right smack in the middle of the heavy summer movie season. The result: lackluster box office. I guarantee if it were released Labor Day weekend, it would have done twice the business. Then again, these types of movies can be an acquired taste I guess.
Awareness of what Gindhouse is by lennon211	Apr 10th, 2007 11:34:12 AM
After seeing GrindHouse at a preview screening last Wed., I went to my local indie video store that specializes in all things weird. I rented a few trailer tapes of old grindhouse movies. Well, I had my girlfriend watch them with me, and suddenly lights came on for her as she recognized exactly what she had seen at that preview screening. Suddenly she loved the whole thing. And for those of you that are firing off about this movie, just because it's cool to be "against the grain", find something better to do. Why not gripe about how mainstream it's become to judge a movie a failure if it doesn't come in at number one over it's opening weekend. For those that did like it, find some friends that might wanna go and share the experience. It's a really cool experience if you're prepared to let it be an event. I've seen it 3 times now and appreciate it more everytime I see it. Oh yeah...I liked both halves of it...not just Planet Terror, but Death Proof as well. I thought that both were a lot of fun.
Tarantino by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 11:36:02 AM
Eh, I can't agree with equating QT with Kevin Smith. I really do enjoy QT's movies, yet I have yet to be able to sit through a single KS movie without checking the time. You know, the great KS who has ssooooooo many great movie ideas, yet none have come to fruition nor has he ever put out a great movie. Hey, what ever happened to Kevin Smith's awesome Jaws 5 idea? Can't wait to see that.......
IMO by justcheckin	Apr 10th, 2007 11:54:41 AM
I enjoyed the film as is... the length, the gorefest, it was awesome. I think it targets a specific audience and that audience was there this weekend. I think it will do better next weekend. It is going to have some word of mouth credit and I'd actually go see it again myself. They should wait and re-release cuts later.
Bad Strategy all around by Foosk	Apr 10th, 2007 12:05:04 PM
Sitting through a 3-1/2 movie experience is really not the most advisable thing to ask an audience to do. What my suggestion would be is to make each feature an hour long with the fake trailers as a bumper. Realease an easy to swallow 2-hours 15 minutes long. Then down the line restore the other half hour of footage in and release each film as separate full length versions, which we all would have flocked to because we loved the films as hour long pieces and there would be the inevitable promise of more sex and violence. (Plus I would have removed the dirt, the scratches, the missing reels and all that nonsense that most of the audince didn't get for the full length versions.) So now we have paid to see these films three times. Then of course there is the DVD strategy of the complete Grindhouse theatrical version package which would have the trailers (which are arguably the best part of the package) and the even more extended director's cuts which do not include the trailers but do include even more footage than the rereleased theatrical cuts. So now we have shelled out three times for the DVD. So what you are looking at is a 6-time sell for basically one movie. Instead we have bloated egos all around (Harvey Rodriguez, and the self impressed Quentin) expecting that we will go flocking to see an homage to a by gone era which nobody gets simply because RR and QT say it's cool. Well and we all know what the results have been. A bomb and eggs on the faces.
Triumph..would you prefer this? by the_shogun_gunslinger	Apr 10th, 2007 12:13:00 PM
Girl 1-Jee, it feels so good that we're off that movie set for 3 days! Girl 2- Yeah and with my favorite actress, make up girl and fellow stunt woman! Girl 3- and i cant wait to drive a Chanllenger...that would be TOPS! Girl 4- i just hope we arent being stalked by some super scary guy! BEGIN CAR CHASE!!!!! yeah dude, that would have been MUCH better. i cant blame you for disliking Death Proof especially after this statement..."and the one girl that could have livened things up by taking off her clothes and having mad sex ala a true grindhouse era film got left behind at the farm and utterly disappeared from the movie. Which made it was yet another wasted opportunity..." go watch Redline you douchebag. i think thatll be a little more up your alley
"Didn't do well in the South..." by Kid Z	Apr 10th, 2007 12:15:42 PM
... There's the rub! Once again the Redstaters pull everyone else down. These people are uneducated, ketchup-sandwich-eating, farm-animal-screwing pinheads. They don't get irony, they only get fart jokes. It must be tough trying to market anything in what is basically two separate countries wrapped up in one... The USA... and "Dumbfuckistan"!
Kid Z by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 12:30:11 PM
On what are you basing your beliefs on? Sounds like a real well-rounded, enlightened upbringing.
Er...DevilCat? by Boba Fat	Apr 10th, 2007 12:33:40 PM
those were George Lucas's intentions for Raiders and Grindhouse isn't bad it just hasn't attracted people outside of it's geeky fanbase. I don't understand why so many people, especially on this site, see that as a reason to attack it.
Because that's what these talkbacks have turned into... by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 12:35:42 PM
a forum to attack anything that shows weakness. I swear that people on here can smell blood from a mile away.
Don't GET IT? by ProfGriffin	Apr 10th, 2007 12:42:20 PM
What's to get? Violence, infected, zombie-like blood oozing creatures, strippers, fast cars, Kurt Russell, Werewolf Nazis, holiday killers... Not sure what more can be 'dumbed down'. It was pure 3 hours of entertainment and was FUN! But you see...movies HAVE to be accessible. In order to work. The idea of making a profit may not mean a thing to us genre fans, but to the studio beancounters...the ones who give filmmakers money to make movies like this....it does matter. In fact, it's the ONLY thing that matters. So... Get ready for a slew of horror remakes and reimaginings...the general public has spoken and the studios will respond. I applaud Robert and Quentin for this...it's a artistic triumph, a freeze-frame of a time period long gone...but it's a commercial flop. No excuses. As far as the dumbing down of the public...bullshit. It's entertainment. Who's to say that one man's MEAT is not another man's poison...you know? I can't wait for Spidey 3, Pirates At World's End and other summer blockbusters. There's a reason why their called Summer Blockbusters...but in May, the world will be scratching their heads and thinking...what happened to Grindhouse? Sad...I wish it were different. But it's too much of a gag to sustain itself. It's a in-joke to those who 'get it' and let's face it, most people don't...and they are NOT buying the tickets.
elitism by rainbowtrout1265	Apr 10th, 2007 12:44:14 PM
The true grindhouse movies (and the whole experience)were the complete opposite of elitist, and now we have the Blue State elitists whining and crying that Grindhouse didn't perform better in parts of the country. Political snobbery and film snobbery seem to go hand-in-hand.
Lousy idea, I wanted a double feature dammit! by KillaKane	Apr 10th, 2007 12:45:54 PM
Does'nt square too well with the whole ethos of recreating a cool exploitation double bill programme. Unless hte two are relased in markedley different cuts from the originals, what's the fucking point? (other than to wring out more bucks from the punters, "Damn you Weinstein!"- at least it's in context ;-)
Harvey Scissorhands by Pastehead	Apr 10th, 2007 12:53:16 PM
Terrible idea. GRINDHOUSE will find its audience. There will be repeat viewings. Word-of-mouth will be, and is, strong. I wouldn't be surprised if its box office numbers stayed the same for several straight weeks. Harvey Scissorhands needs to leave the film(s) alone.
LOL! Blue-state elitists! by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 12:53:43 PM
That's some funny stuff, a talkback about a movie's box office problems turning into a political shooting match. Perhaps I was too harsh on Kid Z?
Check This Out!!! by RomeroZombie	Apr 10th, 2007 12:54:57 PM
Heres a little tidbit I picked up on the fangoria website http://fangoria.com/news_artic le.php?id=4058 I think the argument about the running time being the culprit is a bunch of bullshit....Just think back to a couple of tiny movies directed by Peter Jackson.Clocking in around 3 plus hours each they did pretty damn good.Thanks for listening.
This movie should be left alone. by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 12:55:43 PM
I said yesterday that the current multiplex model of first weekend grosses just isn't working. Give this movie a few more weekends in the theatre instead of just yanking it out to rush it to DVD.
Excuses, excuses by I Dunno	Apr 10th, 2007 12:56:19 PM
I loved Grindhouse but come on, how much money did they expect it to make? Horror movies stopped doing well months ago. The torture porn free ride is over. And releasing it on Easter wasn't genius but couldn't have crippled it that bad. As for the running time, I never fully understood that excuse. Sure, it runs fewer times per day but you're still going to have roughly the same number of people who want to see it. The suits need to realize that internet buzz means precisely DICK in this business. If they want to make money, they have to stop pandering to us and go after that Ice Cube Family Shitfest dollar.
Ice Cube Family Shitfest Dollar by Boba Fat	Apr 10th, 2007 01:06:18 PM
is that like the Star Wars stamps? :)
gusradio: This Film will be selling for 20 Years! by 9000rpm	Apr 10th, 2007 01:12:48 PM
Yes, and the interest lost on the budget/marketing will be lost forever. This dog will never hunt down dollars.
There is no Blue or Red State by Ms. 45	Apr 10th, 2007 01:18:57 PM
Just a whole lota purple. http://tinyurl.com/r3ggj For Blue state people you sure are easily led to false perceptions.
I Dunno by gusradio	Apr 10th, 2007 01:19:29 PM
"If they want to make money, they have to stop pandering to us and go after that Ice Cube Family Shitfest dollar." and this would be a positive move how? I'm sure that the idiot 2 hours of what little life you have on this earth down the drain films will always be moneymakers but why would you want them to shitcan creative, fun, and unique projects like Grindhouse? 10-15% return on an investment in 3 days time IS NOT FAILURE!!! This film/two films will be making $$$ for two decades. i hope they don't separate the two films but if they do at least I was there repesenting.
when i told people i saw grindhouse by roccotheripper	Apr 10th, 2007 01:21:57 PM
a lot of them were like HUH what's that??
Vern's Review of GH : LIked DP, Disliked PT by TheDohDoh	Apr 10th, 2007 01:22:55 PM
Vern just posted his review and it's well-written with some funnyness on top. He references the "underbelly of the talkbacks" and mentions the infamous DP detrators who called the 2nd batch of girls "cunts" and "dumb bitches." I think his assement of Plant Terror is spot-on, including his breakdown of RR's filmography and filmmaking. He equates PT to Carpenter's Mars debacle rather than this great films like Escape and The Thing. The Freddie Rodriguez rip is nice too - I really couldn't help from thinking this guy was too much of a pretty boy to be a badass. I was surprised to see him call Death Proof a "great film" and think he's holding back a few punches here. He confesses that the structure is "weird" however and that it's a bit "arty" for a grindhouse feature, a la Vanishing Point. My main complaint is that QT splurted for months if not years about how badass this movie was going to be, then unloads an art film for us to stare at in awe like apes grasping the fucking monolith in Kubrick's 2001. I'm really surprised with Vern here. I mean, this is a film that some skinny, bald, elitist film professor will defend in a college class 10 years from now. And that makes me want to shoot myself, b/c this is not an enjoyable movie. Why do I feel that QT is going to shut himself in like Howard Hughes and start making the equivalent of math rock from here on. That's what Death Proof is: a really good math rock album posing as Iron Maiden. Which is kinda an oxymoron. Agree, Vern and TBers? Here's a link to the world's top (only?) Seagalogist: http://www.geocities.com/outla wvern/ I've mostly voice my severe dislike for QT's DP and haven't talked about RR's Planet Terror. I think that's because I felt really let down with the lowbrow trash that was Once Upon a Time in Mexico. Desperado was a beautiful and exciting bit of film, but that's the last time I felt that RR was running on the same track of talented cool as QT, and that was sometime ago. Sin City was enjoyable, however, and a return to craft for RR. He seems to enjoy making Movies By the Pound like Master P used to make records, and Planet Terror is no different. It's not an intelligent piece of filmmaking, with the exception of the great score. RR is a genius when it coems to scores and music for films, see Kill Bill. I understand that PT is supposed to be trash, but it doesn't have to be as sophomoric as it is. As Vern says, it's lacking heart under a thick glaze of style. I expected QT to knock this one out the park. Now I'm wondering if he's even in the park anymore. Maybe he had to get this one out of his system. But if Inglorious Bastards mirrors the dialogue in DP, that's the end of QT's career in my opinion. When you strive for perfection with every film, it'd be hard to say that that most like won't be your achilles' hill. But that's why I love QT. The man makes masterpieces and when he's off (as in DP, for the first time), he fails miserably. We love him enough that some of us will still champion it, but that's not being a true film buff of film lover, that's the bias we all despise in the Talkbacks.
9000rpm by gusradio	Apr 10th, 2007 01:24:17 PM
your right it's waterworld. i hated it and hope to see "Are we Cornholed Yet?" next summer. grindhouse will make it's 60 something million back by the end of the year.
gusradio: This film/two films will be making $$$ for tw by 9000rpm	Apr 10th, 2007 01:30:47 PM
You don't get it. The studio has almost $90M tied up in this pig. Every day they loose more money on the interest not collected if they'd just left the 90mil in the bank. Sure, some on the investment is getting paid back but the investors wanted a waaay quicker sure thing than Grindhouse's crapfest. If it takes them 20 years to make their $90mil back they will be upside down on this for eternity. Besides, most of these guys will be dead in 10-15 years. Do you think they are making movies that will finally pay for themselves after they're dead?
Brilliant Hollywood strategy! by fishpillow	Apr 10th, 2007 01:42:14 PM
What can we do with a bomb? SNORT We'll make two bombs out of it! Yes men cheer!
Re; Brilliant Hollywood Strategy by TheDohDoh	Apr 10th, 2007 01:48:40 PM
Haha. The day that Harvey Weinstein takes a call from Nikki Finke on a wet deck is the day I slit my throat. Guess I'm dead ain't I? Seriously, Weinstein is just spinning this whole bullshit anecdote about splitting the film to cover up the embarassing smell of shit permeating from Grindhouse. I never thought two directors who's work I always look forward to as much as any other would combine like Voltron and turn out such a lousy picture. HARVEY WEINSTEIN WOULD NEVER FUCKING SPLIT THIS MOVIES UP, ARE YOU KIDDING? DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THAT WOULD FUCKING COSTS IN EDITING, PROMOTION AND DISTRIBUTION? IT'S ALL SPIN TO SLOW DOWN THE MASSES FROM TALKING ABOUT HOW BAD IT IS AND FOCUS ON THIS SOMETHING THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. IT REDIRECTS THE BAD WORTH OF MOUTH TO "THE PROBLEM OF LENGTH" WHICH IS NOT THE PROBLEM.
Think about it by wewereright1054	Apr 10th, 2007 01:52:53 PM
Not sure if this was covered yet, but why did they release that kind of movie, without much fan fare, on Easter weekend? Only die hard fans would got to see it. If they put it up against 300 or something like that then the die hard fans would be split. How many people really like the movie and told everyone they knew what a kicking movie it was? An interesting way to create a buzz, we will see if it works.
I'm no genius but.... by Mr. Profit	Apr 10th, 2007 01:54:08 PM
Wouldn't it have made more sense to release this on this coming Friday The 13th?
9000 You know more about his $$ than he does. by gusradio	Apr 10th, 2007 01:58:39 PM
"With theatrical receipts, overseas sales, television and home-video revenues, "Grindhouse" will turn a profit on its $53 million budget, Weinstein said. The company hoped that word of mouth from those who did see it would sustain it at theaters in coming weeks, he said." -Yahoo Movies
For such a piece of shit, the critics seemed to by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 01:59:11 PM
like it. Perhaps the critics just 'get it'. As for the bashers, I quote Dr. Evil, "You just don't get it Scott, do ya'". I think you little attention deficit disorder dweebs with the attention span of a fruit fly should just go back to playing your PS3. Blockbuster video has rotted your brains and has helped drain this country of cinemamtic culture.
#108 at imdb by gusradio	Apr 10th, 2007 02:06:32 PM
This film is #108 on thetop 250 at imdb.com it rates a 8.6 out of 6,698 votes, the critics seem to like it too. the haters just forgot to have fun.
Why is the box office such a big issue? by Mr. Profit	Apr 10th, 2007 02:14:34 PM
Didn't Kingdom of Heaven tank badly here but went on to make like 500 million world wide? It tanked here, whatever. Who cares? I enjoyed the experience. I thought it was solid all around. Hey, Batman Begins was a "disappointment" initially then it went on to make money. GH is still only weekend #1. I'm sure this movie will make some money back. And if not? Stuntman Mike can always come back in a Versus movie with Michael Myers and Jason. People like Versus movies. They are AWESOME! Especially if they are PG13 like AVP.
I'm torn by Cysquatch	Apr 10th, 2007 02:16:51 PM
As much as I would love to see Grindhouse make a ton of money so we could see more Grindhouses (Don't and Thanksgiving double feature) I have to admit it was nice having an entire theater to myself. I left work early yesterday and went to a 12:10 showing. I was literally the only person in a relatively large theater. I was able to blaze a wheel before, during and after the show as if I was sitting in my own home.
9000 You know more about his $$ than he does. by 9000rpm	Apr 10th, 2007 02:20:38 PM
I know the production budget was $67M not $53. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/m ovies/?id=grindhouse.htm And even $67 is probably conservative, and with marketing and ancillary costs it's getting closer to $90M.
Don't worry by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 02:33:29 PM
If the new Weinstein DVD distribution model doesn't sink them, GH will make a ton of money in home video purchases. This worked for Austin Powers, and how many of those sequels have we had to suffer through?
cookylamoo.. by clone-o-mat	Apr 10th, 2007 02:36:29 PM
is made of wisdom. We geeks think we rule the movie world, but the majority out there just doesn't think like we do. That's why transformers is going to do well regardless of what color Optimus Prime is. That's why Grindhouse will fail no matter how it's packaged. If you can't explain a high budget movie in one line, it will fail.
About critics! by fishpillow	Apr 10th, 2007 02:45:10 PM
"Perhaps the critics just 'get it'." Oh yes, they all got their checks! Grindhouse sucks! Here's your check. Grindhouse rocks!
Without much fanfare? by mjbok1	Apr 10th, 2007 02:46:56 PM
Of all the things that contributed to the currently dismal BO of Grindhouse, lack of fanfare, advertising is not one. You couldn't turn on the TV or radio without seeing/hearing about this movie. QT and everyone else have been going all out pimping this. I think this coming weekend will be really telling. I'm sure there was a slight impact being released on Easter weekend, but I don't think it was a major impact. One thing that I haven't seen mentioned is how much AICN has moved the BO. After the chest thumping 300 article from Harry, this movie should have made huge dollars based on the nearly universal praise in the tons of articles here. I would say that this site might be able to add a million or two TOTAL to box office, but that's it. Not that a couple million bucks is something to sneeze at, but it shows that this site (and others like it) have minimal effect on how well (or poorly) a movie does.
mjbok1... by clone-o-mat	Apr 10th, 2007 02:55:34 PM
That's easy enough to figure out. AICN adds approximately (Serenity's BO take) to a movie's BO total.
here's a thought by garin w. sparks	Apr 10th, 2007 02:57:07 PM
Bob and Harvey have 3 "filmmakers" under them..Q.T,Robert Rod, and Kevin Smith...they have how many 100 million dollars movies under their belts? they have a cult following and that's about it..everyone knows this
a couple sincere questions for Triumph Poop by Vern	Apr 10th, 2007 02:57:15 PM
You are obviously obsessed with this movie(s). I'm not attacking you by saying that, I can relate, but I just want to ask you what the deal is. You didn't like DEATH PROOF. What takes you from not liking DEATH PROOF to writing this much in-depth analysis of every single angle of the marketing? What's it to you? It seems to me like we're missing some piece of the puzzle that would explain why you are taking it so personally. Myself, I dug the movie and I'm very happy that they took the risk to do a double feature like this. There are exactly two reasons why I feel I should give a shit about the movie not making money: 1. I was hoping they would do some more RR/QT double features later on. 2. I hope this doesn't stop them from making MACHETE. Otherwise I don't see why I should care, and since you probaly don't want any spin-offs or sequels, I'm wondering why exactly you have any interest in the topic at all, let alone a huge, overwhelming obsession. If you were talking about your take on the movie the whole time I would get it, but that's not what I see here. At the top you stated that it failed "because it sucked." Then you spent literally thousands of words making maybe half a dozen arguments that had nothing to do with the quality of the movie: teens don't know what the movies are that are being referenced, teens need big stars in movies, teens don't know what ALIENS is because they are on the internet all day whacking off, teens don't like the machine gun leg, the budget was too high for the teens to see a proper emulation of the low budget movies that the teens don't know or care about, it wasn't test screened for the teens so the adults weren't able to have their computers analyze what the teens thought of the movie, etc. I am asking you honestly, unless you are some creepo who works in marketing, why do you give a shit what these teens think? Teens have always had bad taste, that's life. All of the garbagey TV, movies and music that we must dodge to get through life are popular among teens, some of them wear giant pants and evil clown makeup, others spend all day text messaging each other and voting for who should win on game shows, or creating sex videos with their phones, and apparently yes, they would rather see Will Ferrell ice skate than see the new Tarantino picture. This is a simple fact but why do you and I, as adults, care? And why are you holding their teenager tastes on a pedestal like it's some ancient wisdom, like it was a bad thing for somebody to take the risk to make a movie that's for somebody else's tastes? It seems to me all it comes down to is that you, personally, with your tastes, didn't like DEATH PROOF, and somehow have to turn that into a marketing seminar. You're talking about it like it's an objective scientific fact that DEATH PROOF "SUCKED". Well, from where I'm standing, DEATH PROOF is clearly, by far, the better of the two movies. It's got the far superior filmmaking chops, the better characters and story, the more entertaining experience. PLANET TERROR I enjoyed as a silly homage to a real movie, but it's an empty, sloppy, superficial experience. DEATH PROOF is more what I'm into, it's a real movie, and a good one. No, it's no KILL BILL but there's no question in my mind that of the two it will ultimately be the most remembered and discussed. No question. Well that's how I see it anyway, but you are telling me different, we seem to be at a stand still. Maybe what we should do now is acknowledge that people have different tastes and let the marketing people figure out why it is that your bad taste is apparently more common across the country than my good taste. Just kidding. Although it's true. Just kidding again. Maybe. thanks bud.
clone-o-mat by mjbok1	Apr 10th, 2007 03:00:15 PM
Though that is a good example, there is no way it's that much.
nice work vern. by stuntman mikey	Apr 10th, 2007 03:06:15 PM
couldnt agree more.
With all do respect Vern by TheDohDoh	Apr 10th, 2007 03:06:42 PM
Nice of you to drop in, but this is a post regarding the BOX OFFICE PERFORMANCE of Grindhouse. So, there will obviously be discussions on the marketing and all that crap we could care less about. Moreover, I'd love to see you further your opinions of Death Proof in the talkbacks, rather than questions the sanity/interests of a multi-poster. But, yeah, FUCK TEENS! Hah.
This board proves why by stuntman mikey	Apr 10th, 2007 03:09:39 PM
the movie didnt perform as well as it should have...if only the rest of America were as passionate about film as a medium as the fanboys on the net. Yet somehow i cant imagine a talkback session filled with such diverse opinion analyzing, lets say, Wild Hogs....sad...but unfortunately we will not likely see a GH2, yet Wild Hogs 2 - Even Wilder is being cooked up as we sit here and get our panties all up in a collective bunch.
Gusradio... by moto	Apr 10th, 2007 03:13:06 PM
Dawn of the Dead opened number 1. That's a zombie movie... FYI. And regarding the flick making a profit. It will in the loooong run, yeah. But the budget was just below $70 million and Weinstein admitted that marketing was $30 million. Point being, with all of the hype from the filmmakers and fanboys beforehand, no matter if/when it makes a small profit, the movie was a HUGE disappointment. Watch it fall this coming weekend. Bitchslapped by TBers favorite Shia!
dohdoh's gotta point, V... by clone-o-mat	Apr 10th, 2007 03:16:19 PM
plus, I'd like to hear honestly, why you like Death Proof so much. No sarcasm, I swear. I just respect your opinion and I'd like to have enjoyed DP more, but I just didn't. Left me flat. Everyone who is defending DP here usually just says it rules and then calls someone a name, which, believe it or not, doesn't really help me get it.
Grindhouse separate? by kristo2	Apr 10th, 2007 03:19:52 PM
Saw GH Sunday night. Also wonder if the BO $$$ may be skewed, our theater (1 of 3 at 24-plex)was half full of young teens. Most of them were there at the end too. GH SHOULD have been out months ago, pre-300 and pre-summmer movie overloads. We enjoyed much of PT, but then DP?? Mostly felt like a BAD Dukes of Hazzard episode. Both could be EASILY cut 15 min and keep the trailers. The Nazi one was weak, Roth's and Machete rocked! Machete in 2008! PT was enjoyable in all its silly goriness, think Robert got what he wanted with this one. A little weak in the end but we didn't get bored ! DP? Kurt Russell saved this one for sure. Would have left if he wasn't in it, and he wasn't in it ENOUGH!!! Useless chatter & characters leading nowhere, added nothing & same with the guys buying drinks. Girls who got murdered didn't mean much, no one interesting besides Butterfly and big mouth Julia. Second group a little better, but then it all felt like a second movie? Tennesse looks NOTHING like that (CA)but maybe that was his intent. Even GREAT stunts can't save this one - looks like Quentin threw it all together in a week's time (maybe)
This idea... by jabbayoda	Apr 10th, 2007 03:22:58 PM
...is a shitload of fuck.
VERN... by moto	Apr 10th, 2007 03:27:47 PM
I actually share Triumphs viewpoint, but no offense to him, the reason he's posting so much in my opinion is because someone in a previous post said they love his posts and feel that his should be regularly highlighted like your posts. I think it went to his head a little (No offense Triumph, I share your viewpoints... just interesting to see so many long posts from you after that compliment from whoever it was). Having said that, Vern, I think the obsession with marketing and box office numbers comes from this. The passionate supporters of Grindhouse would be doing the same thing against "haters" if the movie succeeded. They'd be saying "SEE, you guys were wrong. It made $30 million opening weekend. It made $150 million or whatever overall in the end so $150 million worth of audiences loved it, so your opinion is WRONG. You're an idiot if you don't like it." Let's be honest, that would happen. So either "side" would be hearing the same thing if roles were reversed. We heard it during the Superman Returns TBs, and a number of other flicks. It's a justification that people can fall back on in order to make the opposing forces' opinion seem null and void... the idea that numbers don't lie. WE'RE ALL GUILTY OF USING THAT ARGUMENT to support our opinions.
Vern...why it's a big deal by 9000rpm	Apr 10th, 2007 03:34:26 PM
For two years you’ve heard nothing but hype over the soon to be released new Beatles album. It’s the coolest thing ever, they’re creating a sequel to Sergeant Peppers. The official release day arrives, you stand in line with thousands of other Beatles fans to be one of the first to hear the new masterpiece, and it’s crap. You look more closely at the cover and it’s not The Beatles, it's The Beetles. You rush back to the store and complain. The twit at the till tells you go home, it’s the best disc ever and you must be an ADD-addled teenager not to ‘get it’ or someone who lives in the dumb half of the United States as opposed to the enlightened half, or even worse, you don’t appreciate the new sequel because you never heard the original Sergeant Peppers in the first place. Some people would just swallow it down and go home. Others would come back with a gun and blow the entire store away. Triumph Poop is somewhere in the middle.
Don Imus' racism v QT's dialogue by Trader Groucho 2	Apr 10th, 2007 03:37:32 PM
Imus called a bunch of a college girls a very rude name. He and his producer couldn't even correctly recall the Spike Lee movie they were trying to reference (School Daze), and in their fumbling Imus' producer called the Rutgers girls "jigaboos". What Imus and his producer did went out over the PUBLIC airwaves, was racist AND sexist, and inexcusable. QT, by contrast, used the N-word and some other colorful metaphors in dialogue in which he aimed for realism in a work of FICTION, and at that, Tarantino's fictional dialogue was not going out over the public airwaves. Let's be sure to keep the line between real people using racist and sexist slurs against other real people, and fictional dialogue clearly drawn.
TARANTINO AND RR LOST ALL CREDIBILITY WHEN... by moto	Apr 10th, 2007 03:38:29 PM
... when they spent nearly $70 million making a "grindhouse" flick, and then continued to slap themselves on the back when promoting the film as a grindhouse movie. In my opinion, they should have had the balls to make each movie for $5 million or under (still well over what REAL grindhouses movies cost), and showcase their abilities as filmmakers to make the most of it, just like the REAL grindhouse directors did. Their credibility went downhill after spending that much money to do a damn grindhouse movie. Be inventive. Keep it real. Make it for pennies like grindhouse movies really were. Then you would have still turned a huge profit (even with a low $11 million opening) in the long run, studio would be happy, and your credibility would still be solid. It was irresponsible, self aware, and self indulgent. It was like watching a video store clerk win the lottery and spending it all making a whack job of a home movie to show his friends.
Cut it into three movies by DonMagicWan	Apr 10th, 2007 03:40:50 PM
The third can be Sydney Tamiia Poitier shaking her hair around some more in slow mo' smoking a phatty. Gadamn that girl is hot. Where's my blues butter...
One more thing... by DonMagicWan	Apr 10th, 2007 03:44:49 PM
Can they refilm the ass whoopin scene, replacing Kurt Russell with Don Imus? What a nut bag.
Re: ALL CREDIBILITY + QT's "Most badass gh movie ever" by TheDohDoh	Apr 10th, 2007 03:44:59 PM
Actually, I don't think the budget is of any concern. It's the fact that QT had a huge budget, claimed to be making the most hardcore, extravagant grindhouse movie of all fucking time and then simply filmed a slew of bad actresses talking vapidly for nearly his entire segment. The question is, what were they actually eating during the diner scene's filming, caviar?
I was going to add something, but it's been written by Mr Incredible	Apr 10th, 2007 03:45:22 PM
moto, 9000rpm....thank you. God, I can imagine how fun the talkback will be in July for the TRANSFORMERS movie.
This figures by #1 Zero	Apr 10th, 2007 03:51:08 PM
When AICN ran the posters for Grindhouse on one of their stories I thought back then that there would be no way this would be a double feature. I just couldn't imagine how a studio and movie theatres would settle for making half the money they could make if this were two features. Less showings = less box office and ticket sales. One of these movies released this month would have made 12 million the first weekend and the other one released a month or so later would have made about as much while the first was still making money. As for the quality, Planet Terror was absurd and almost a comedy with maybe a little bit too pervese a sense of humor. The testicle jokes were a bit much. And I thought that Deathproof had very few references to grindhouse movies compared to Planet Terror. There weren't as many screen pops and old film scratches and it actually had good dialogue. I've read where Tarrantino was actually fooling us into thinking that his version was going to be as over the top as Rodriguez's and then surprise, it's an actual movie up to his quality standards. Anyway, Deathproof was just bizarre, Kurt Russell was Bizarre and not really as much of a "badass" as he was advertised.
ZODIAC'S DIALOGUE IS A GREAT COMPARISON TO DEATH PROOF by TheDohDoh	Apr 10th, 2007 03:51:26 PM
Now Zodiac was a "talky" movie where the dialogue both meant something and was intriguing. Death Proof is a "talky" movie similar to Linklater or Kevin Smith at their worst. I can see where Zodiac didn't make a mint, b/c people don't have the attention spans and just want to see people die. THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT ZODIAC NEVER CLAIMED TO BE A HARDCORE SERIAL KILLER MOVIE, WHEREAS QT/DEATH PROOF FROM THE START CLAIMED TO BE DEFINITIVE HARDCORE GRINDHOUSE ENTERTAINMENT. SO YOU CAN'T GET MAD IF PEOPLE DON'T DIG DEATH PROOF, B/C THEY WERE ESSENTIALLY RIPPED OFF. QT never said that "I'm making a movie that's an homage to grindhouse actresses." If he did, we might view it differently. He promised a "car slasher" movie that would "fulfill the promises of the old grindhouse posters that the films couldn't because their budgets and talent compromised what the film actually was." Capice?
TF TB.. by moto	Apr 10th, 2007 03:56:52 PM
I can't wait!! It'll be the same old shit. Huge box office numbers will be the supporters' key argument while haters will focus on "It's not G1 so it raped my childhood and the mass audience that paid north of $100 million are idiots". I can't wait for the flick. I want to just have a good ole fun time... as I am a HUGE G1 fan. Funny thing is, the arguments will be reversed compared to Grindhouse. Fanboys love to use TF supporters "just want to see robots transform and have fun" against them, even though they're defending Grindhouse by saying "It's not supposed to be taken so seriously... I had a fun time watching it". Interesting how an argument works only when it supports that person's point of view.
Another problem with the advertising... by JimmyLoneWolf	Apr 10th, 2007 03:57:23 PM
Was the fact that the ads wereunable to really capture the transgressive elements of the films. There was really no way to convey the extreme nature of Planet Terror to audiences...all viewers at home saw was the "gun leg"...and some people may have felt the movie was entirely ABOUT a girl with a gun leg (rather than the small part of the film it actually was).
Well stated, Vern by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 04:02:11 PM
I just can't devote myself to such long analyses when I'm at work. My suggestion for the realease of future R-rated films teems are going to see: have the same studio that's releasing the R-rated movie simultaneously release a family friendly flick. That way, thay're guaranteed big bucks one way or the other: the families that go to see the family friendly stuff, and the teens that buy the family friendly movie tix so they can sneak into the R-rated movie. C'mon, it's a win-win situation.
SK229... by clone-o-mat	Apr 10th, 2007 04:02:34 PM
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Give the characters their own voice, not just yours!
Maybe grindhouse flopping is actually a good thing. by knifeandfork	Apr 10th, 2007 04:03:22 PM
Maybe the commercial faliure of grind house will be a wake up call to tarantino, instructing him to change his tactics and try to make a film that doesnt rely on the codes, conventions and audience knowledge of yesteryears exploitation films .Dont get me wrong, i love tarantinos stuff, but its about time he tried something different.
And before anyone anyone says it... by moto	Apr 10th, 2007 04:04:51 PM
Yeah, I know Transformers is different because there's a fanbase from the show.
The reason it didn't do well... by smackfu	Apr 10th, 2007 04:05:13 PM
Let me preface this by saying I love Tarantino and Rodriguez, and I can't wait to see Grindhouse. That being said, the movies do look pretty stupid. Yes, they're supposed to look stupid, they're a homage to campy stupid movies, but they look really, really stupid. So beyond us Tarantino/Rodriquez fanboys, a lot of the movie going public are going to be generally turned off by a movie that presents itself as being nothing but ridiculously over-the-top campy violence. A lot of guys are going to have a hard time convincing their ladies to go see a movie who's main feature as displayed in the trailer is a girl with a machinegun for a leg doing flying rocketlauncher drop-kicks.
Moto, DAMN YOU by Jak0lantern01	Apr 10th, 2007 04:06:04 PM
for making me post DAmN YOU MICHAEL BAY in this TB. It's well tainted now.
'What we were already planning to do for Europe' by henrydalton	Apr 10th, 2007 04:07:47 PM
Worst thing that I've heard all day. And believe me, I've had a REALLY shitty day.
Harvey Get The Scissors Out by Havok2000	Apr 10th, 2007 04:11:12 PM
No one will read down this far ... I have complete freedom ... I can say anything ... So I'll say this. Quentin Tarantino's film "Death Proof" should've been a 22 minute short to open up the Stuntpeople's Awards Banquet where Zoe Bell is to be honored for kicking ass which she does. Expanding it beyond the 22 minutes it wanted to be did no one any good especially the audience. Rosario Dawson should be the cream in an actor sandwich but not have to talk so much. Less is more. The rest of the acting in DP is far lower than negligible. Zoe Bell is probably quite personable and magnetic in real life but that doesn't translate to acting and neither did the performance of the woman my friend called Hot Wanda Sykes and I called Samuel L. Jacksonwoman. Yes there were B, C, D and Z grade "actresses" in exploitation flicks but they took off their clothes, shot guns and were badass. And DP was fun for the final twenty minutes where the girls were badass even thuogh they were clothed. But the dialogue leading up to that, despite one reviewer calling it "vintage Tarantino" or some such rot is absolutely insufferable. I suspect 2nd weenkend business will drop off 80% becuase these Tarantino cocaine-inspired jabberjaw-fests represent the kind of conversations between idiot girls that guys will chew their own arms off to get away from. Remember, there are many kinds of ugly. Robert Rodriguez' film was slight but it was fun. And when Tarantino got the details of his film right - the soundtrack, the credits - it was enjoyable - but Rodriguez got more of the details right - the super-extreme close-ups, the color timing mismatches, the sound problems. When QT went into his flat-space, twenty (30? 80?) minute girl-banter trips to Hell. he deemed to lose all interest in grindhouse flicks, audience interest, film momentum or where and how he was going to have sex with Zoe Bell that evening (I presume that's what it all had to be about, right? ... giving her this shot to step into Uma's shoes??) MY STRONGEST RECOMMENDATION is for the Weinstein's to recut these films. Slice 5-10 easy minutes off of Planet Terror. add back a little more sexy Rose McGowan --- then go to work on "Death Proof" with a pair of pliers and a blow torch - now there's some dialogue worth remembering. They turned "Cinema Paradiso" from an uneven beautiful mess to a world-beloved fairy tale ... and that was only a prelude to what they'll have to do here.
If You're Thinking Of Reading Even Further ... by Havok2000	Apr 10th, 2007 04:17:19 PM
DON'T! The guy who got the schlock trailer absolutely pitch perfect was Edgar Wright with "Don't!" (I think that was the actual title) Far and away the best piece of filmmaking of the evening, followed by "Thanksgiving" and then the chase scene in "Death Proof" and then "Planet Terror" and then Rob Zombie's and then having my balls chewed off by gerbils and then the rest of "Death Proof."
Cinematic culture? by Mattyboy122	Apr 10th, 2007 04:39:21 PM
I've been reading this site for a long time, but with the phrase 'film geek' being thrown around so haphazardly, I decided to check in. I've got a newsflash for those of you who say the people who didn't see this movie are responsible for the death of cinematic culture in the U.S.: so are the people who did see this movie. The pieces of crap like Wild Hogs and Are We There Yet? are no better and no worse than this QT/RR strokefest. Isn't it about time you "film geeks" got off Tarantino's balls? The guy rehashes movies, and not just any movies, he rehashes bad movies, and calls it his own. And on top of that he's pretentious about it; it's as if the man revels in his own bad taste. This is NOT cinematic culture. This is the recycling of a near-worthless genre (aside from giving a few great filmmakers chances to make movies before moving on to making real films, like Coppola and Scorsese). Now, yes, this is the type of film that turns off Joe Blow from down the road, but that doesn't mean it's any more intelligent than Blades of Glory. And whoever says Grindhouse is 'new' or 'different' needs a dictionary and needs one fast. The point of Grindhouse (hell, the point of all of Tarantino's films) is that it isn't new. It's all been done before, but is thrown together in a hodge-podge with some 'hip' dialogue and it gets lapped up. Being a film geek should mean having the ability to differentiate between a good film and a bad film, so all of you guys sucking on Tarantino's cock should turn your film geek cards in at the door. Either that or start worshipping real filmmakers, guys who come up with something new and original and don't just regurgitate bad 70's exploitation films. Anyway, my rant is done.
Vern, Death Proof was a real movie??? Really??? by Spandau Belly	Apr 10th, 2007 04:44:35 PM
I'm sorry, but Death Proof was as much a gag as Planet Terror. I can see how somebody would like DP, but not as an "actual" movie as you call it. The abrupt ending was obviously a gag and leaving that fourth chick with the hillbilly back at the ranch and never following up on it was also a gag. If this was a serious action-drama you'd never let that shit fly. But as a goof movie it's very funny. Planet Terror was a more obvious genre, but both films were equally ironic and not meant to be The Deer Hunter or something.
Yeah by Evil Chicken	Apr 10th, 2007 04:51:19 PM
The timing sucked with an Easter weekend release date. That’s just poor marketing execution. Still, I think word of mouth will count for something. We haven’t heard the last from “Grindhouse”.
maybe QT should do a Stuntman Mike movie by future help	Apr 10th, 2007 05:14:01 PM
an origin and other kills...
To Vern by MikeHoncho	Apr 10th, 2007 05:20:02 PM
I am a teen. 15. And I loved Gindhouse in ridiculous amounts. I read this site every day, spend hours on the internet every day looking up movies and watch about one a day. This year so far I have seen 35 films IN THEATRES, and these are good movies, and the majority of those are very good movies. While I think that your comments do apply to some teens, it is not fair to completely generalize like you did for there are the kids, much like me, who know movies and care about movies just as much if not more than anyone else on here.
Good for you, MikeHoncho! by Childe Roland	Apr 10th, 2007 05:36:26 PM
You stood up for yourself without coming off like a totally immature asshole. About the only issues I had with your post to Vern involved your unnecessary use of caps for emphasis and your assertion that there were 35 good movies in theaters this (or any other recent) year. Other than that, though, you give me a small glimmer of hope for the next generation of AICN talkbackers.
Why do people think this has anything to do... by mr.underwater	Apr 10th, 2007 05:38:54 PM
with Easter? If anything, it should have increased box office (since a lot of people had Friday off of work). The problem is "so bad it's good" does not get asses in seats, look at Snakes on the fucking plane as proof. At least that was only 90 minutes of "So bad it's good" Three hours plus? For fucking get about it. This flick was a flop on inception. Everyone involved should have known better (and I more or less enjoyed it, but c'mon...)
Anchorite by Frijole	Apr 10th, 2007 05:45:15 PM
Vern's beef wasn't simply that Triumph was attacking the marketing. It was that Triumph was all over the board (literally and figuratively) coming up with all these supposed reasons that the movie didn't meet expectations monetarily. The least of which was the movie itself. And that in at least one post Triumph was seemingly deriding the movie for having limited appeal. As if it is a BAD thing for a movie to be made and released outside of the creativity-by-boardroom&testsc reenings mass-market horseshit that seems to be de rigeur these days in our theatres. I don't think Vern would have said a thing about it had Triumph simply stuck to slamming the movie itself or even the marketing. It was when Triumph pooped (whether it was totally intentional or not) on the idea of movies that the are niche by nature being made... that the rest of his arguments went tits up.
Trailers made a difference by Lilana	Apr 10th, 2007 05:54:49 PM
300 had an amazing trailer. It showcased the look perfectly, it did what a great trailer should do and created a buzz, you wanna see that action for a full length movie. Grindhouse trailers were self indulgent. The plots of the movies barely registered and the 'hook' i.e. the whole grindhouse look isn't something most ppl get. Savvy marketing would have focused on the characters made them more iconic.
THIS is why by Logan_1973	Apr 10th, 2007 06:23:03 PM
You can blame Easter all you want. What it comes down to is 90% of the public does not understand the concept of a "grindhouse". With most of the moviegoers in the 20-28 age bracket, then that era is just before their time. Also consider this: The age of the 3-hour movie is over. This is the age of high-speed download kids. They want it all in 10 minutes or less. The mentality is no longer there for a 3-hour epic. People hear "3hours" and immediatly turn away. Sadly, LOTR was probably the swan song of the Epic movies.
I own Runaway Bride! by thebearovingian	Apr 10th, 2007 06:35:41 PM
You know you do, too! 'Fess up!
Quint, here's a thought: by Orbots Commander	Apr 10th, 2007 07:07:18 PM
I brought this up in Harry's review talkback but at the risk of repeating myself: you can't really compare 300 and Grindhouse. Although both were violence-laden, R-rated films, 300 had a broader audience appeal due to its subject matter. It did attract its target young male audience, but it also reeled in date crowds and even much older folks in the 40-60 year old age bracket; 300 had the benefit of being in the genre of 'historical epic', however tenous that claim was. It had the GLADIATOR audience. GRINDHOUSE meanwhile never broadened its appeal past the young male crowd. The Easter Weekend thing was spot on as well, even more so this year. Why? This was the once in every four year event where Good Friday and Easter were celebrated both all the major Christian denominations, including the Catholics AND the Eastern Orthodox Christians (Russian, Greek--I being of that faith, East European, etc.) Didn't you catch all those news articles on and off-line about record crowds attending Mass in Jerusalem at the Holy Church of the Sepulchre? It didn't impact GRINDHOUSE for religions reasons per se, only what you brought up: many, many people were tied up with family functions and late night to midnight Masses all weekend.
Oops, typo, left out a sentence fragment: by Orbots Commander	Apr 10th, 2007 07:14:47 PM
It should have read, Good Friday and Easter were celebrated by all Christian denominations including Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians, ON THE SAME DATE. It only happens around once every four years.
i was looking forward to seeing this for a long time... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 10th, 2007 07:42:32 PM
...i cant say the same for spiderman3, shrek3, pirate movie3, shitfest3, will-ferrell-as-an athlete3 and so on - for every movie like grindhouse we get dozens of unoriginal forgetful crap movies - that i will never see - i dont care how much they earn - hooray for mediocrity
Tarantino deserved a flop by Rupee88	Apr 10th, 2007 07:43:21 PM
Kill Bill sucked balls and it was a hit...he deserves to be punished..and that is coming from someone who has Pulp Fiction as his favorite movie ever and Reservoir Dogs far up there. Too bad he dragged Rodriguez down with him though.
Red vs Blue by Dokkalvar	Apr 10th, 2007 07:49:11 PM
I can't believe some of you people took that hook line and sinker. I mean there are a lot of reasons why no one in the midwest or south went to see Grindhouse and it has nothing to do at all with their retardation.
I've been reading alot about "Splitting Grindhouse" by ldm882	Apr 10th, 2007 08:04:46 PM
into 2 films. Kurt has been hanging with me the whole time. He hasn't laughed once. Obviously, this is not okay.
Did it really fail?? by Dijonase24	Apr 10th, 2007 08:39:07 PM
I honestly don't think it failed. I just think expectations were way too damn high. It'll probably make its budget back by the time DVD sales are added to the mix, but I didn't believe for a second that this would be a smash hit. It's pretty simple really: most people (the "masses," if you will) see a preview for Grindhouse and they see a cheese-fest featuring a chick with a gun for a leg. That is not a movie with universal appeal. That's a movie most people avoid.
How can anyone still contend WORD OF MOUTH will help? by Charles Grady	Apr 10th, 2007 08:39:17 PM
It's dropped off sharply every single day, as a simple trip to Box Office Mojo will testify. Besides, genre/horror/sci-fi/fanboy movies almost neeeeever pick up steam as they go... the core fanbase comes out in the first two days, and then that's it. They usually drop 50-70 percent by week two. GRINDHOUSE will likely make 5 MILLION next weekend, and top out around 30 million domestic. Too bad. Maybe they should've had Travolta getting hit in the face with a crow. I understand that fat bumpkins with too many kids think that shit is hilarious. Like 130-mil hilarious.
Leave it...it was fine by Zombienation	Apr 10th, 2007 08:47:21 PM
if you don't like the 3 1/2 hours then dont drink soda or have the theaters cut out real upcoming movie trailers
Bet Cimino, Harlin, May, and Ron Underwood are happy by Charles Grady	Apr 10th, 2007 09:03:31 PM
They just got some company.
MikeHoncho by Alonzo Mosely	Apr 10th, 2007 09:16:49 PM
Don't try and argue around it, we all hate you because you are young and have a myriad of possibility in your future, whereas we are all old sad bastards who face the reality everyday that it isn't going to happen for us...
Movie by BDT	Apr 10th, 2007 09:45:28 PM
I've seen GH 3 times...that's 10 hours of my life and a good amount of $$$ I've spend on this movie. I've also been involved in marketing most of my adult life and I just want to say to ANYONE who wants these movies separated: SHAME on YOU! The grindhouse theme, the double feature, the trailers...come on, it is all a part of the experience. I cannot believe any marketing person in their right mind would take away the very "gimmick" or theme of this movie event out of panic over an Easter weekend return. Yeah, and while you're at it, why don't you separate MOVIE MOVIE and just call it MOVIE? I will lose what little of the lingering respect I have for the movie industry if they separate these movies.
Translation of Harry's comments: by ArcadianDS	Apr 10th, 2007 09:47:25 PM
"The movie failed because they didn't buy more AICN ads."
HOW ABOUT.... by wackybantha	Apr 10th, 2007 10:08:17 PM
...we all shut the &%$* UP and see what happens with the box office this coming weekend. And THEN we can proceed to insult each other. Say what you will but I LOVE that song played during the end credits of Death Proof.
I Guess by pasterby	Apr 10th, 2007 10:08:41 PM
Kurt Russell laughed too soon. Everything was not okay.
Discussed? by WesReviews	Apr 10th, 2007 11:15:26 PM
Discussed for years to come? What is there to discuss? Here is Death Proof in a nutshell. GIRLY GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, VROOM VROOM, CRACK!, GURGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, VROOM!, CRASH!, FADE OUT, GIRLY GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, GIGGLE, VROOM VROOM, SCREECH, VROOM, SKULL CRACK! , GIGGLE, GIGGLE, THE END. Yes, quite the curriculum for film students, folks. Next week's lesson, compare and contrast The Babysitter's Club to Death Proof.
Poop! by Masked Avenger	Apr 10th, 2007 11:21:07 PM
While Vern you may be right, one must consider your trying to have a serious discussion with somebody who calls themself Triumph Poops! It's rather absurd.
Date of release, length, blah, blah blah by beb	Apr 10th, 2007 11:39:56 PM
None of those are the reasons that Grindhouse failed. It failed because it sucked. Neither film would ever be released individually so if they do split them, they will be even more of a bomb. The people that were going to see them already did. And they didn't give good word of mouth. It is a bomb. Get over it.
honestly by jonboy83	Apr 11th, 2007 12:14:39 AM
i would buy planet terror, there is no way in hell i would ever watch death proof again except to see if its really true that stuntman mike really lives and got the scar from those chicks at the end.
Finally saw it. by Frank Black	Apr 11th, 2007 12:22:05 AM
I had a good time. It was long and part of me wish it had been cut down to 2 hours with the ommitted scenes restored for the DVD but I am glad I saw it and I hope they make more. Its pretty easy for people to knock these guys and wish for their failure but how can you fault them for just doing what they love? People have this set idea of what movies are supposed to be (even this film teacher above who thinks that generations to come won't know who Quentin Tarantino is) and these guys are just making movies for themselves and a few of us who dig the same kind of ride. Was Grindhouse a masterpiece? Nope! Was it more fun and original than a lot of the mainstream crap from the last ten years! Yup! This movie wasn't supposed to be a massive success because it was always for a small audience! It will make its money back on DVD and even more overseas. No one is worried about what kind of money it will make because despite what the naysayers say, Rodriguez and Tarantino will continue to do their own thing and we will continue to tune in for it. Splitting it in two is a bad idea and the reason I changed plans to see it tonight. I wanted the intended experience. We should be happy that these guys have cracked into the mainstream as far as they have because they are closer to teh independent film spirit than we have seen in years. There are a lot of direct to video movies I would love to see in the theaters and a lot of "bad movies" that never get seen because of closed-minded attitudes from "film teachers" who are failed directors. Whatever, I just spent $200 importing the special edition DVDs of Jean Rollin's movies so I won't claim to have great taste but I know what I like.
I know I'm late, but I just read through some of this.. by Traumnovelle	Apr 11th, 2007 01:40:58 AM
..and Triumph poops! fucking nailed it on the head. I just wanted to mention that.
Who's The Rube Now? by Roboteer	Apr 11th, 2007 01:56:44 AM
'Red Staters' refused to pay up and sit through a 3 hour tribute to trash cinema mediocrity? That makes THEM stupid? Worth wading through all these TB's for that gem. Priceless..... The best move now, don't cut it in two, but about 10,000 pieces and sell it to fan boys on e-bay. Might work, IF they had any money beyond their weekly allowance.... Eventually most fimmakers' fatal flaw is the hubris of past success. Plus QT/RR wouldn't be the first to totally misunderestimate the marketplace. They just didn't think it could do THAT to them, to paraphrase QT himself. Hollywood writer William Goldman noted with the proper humility, when it comes to what audiences will go crazy over, "Nobody knows anything." No salvaging this now. Whether a disappointment or disaster, next week will tell. Here, the length does work against it as theater owners will be anxious to dump it sooner rather than later if numbers fade.
The Shogun Slinger by howlingdervish	Apr 11th, 2007 02:49:29 AM
The Shogun Slinger said: "some of you must have small theatres because here (and im not even in a huge town) we have a range of 3 showings for the smallest in town, and between 7 and 10 showings a day at the larger theatres." I was referring to the number of showings PER SCREEN, not PER THEATRE. If Grindhouse is playing on three screens in a single theatre, it's able to be shown between 6 and 9 times a day. If Blades of Glory is playing on three screens in a single theatre, it's able to be shown between 12 and 15 times a day, because it's nearly half as long as Grindhouse. Shorter running time = more showings. More showings = more chances to make money.
Ya know what I think.... by xredhand69	Apr 11th, 2007 03:18:43 AM
Well...I think that the movie is gonna do alot better in the long run that we're all giving it credit for. I, for one, have been hearing more about it in the last few days then before the release. I mean, alot of people in my world are talking about it. To put it in perspective for the good reader....I have a Touch Of Geek in my blood. Meaning, that I read the site daily and I was aware of the movie before most of my friends (whom are the epitone of the target audience, young, hip, male). I talked the movie up alot and no one , I mean know one, was aware of the release. I own a little rock club on the east coast. I'm around alot of people, all the time. From Monday till tonight I know at least 30 or 40 people that went to see it. I have a feeling that we're gonna see a giant word of mouth upswing in the numbers. In fact I'd bet on it.
thanks fellas by Vern	Apr 11th, 2007 03:19:31 AM
but let me clarify. I honestly didn't mean to have a "beef" with Triumph, I was trying to ask him if he could explain why that's the angle he's going after. True, the article has to do with box office, so his comments were relevant. Fair enough. But it did strike me as odd how far into it he got, and I was wondering what he would say if I asked why. Anchorite, I don't make a living dissecting movies (maybe some day) and I didn't mean any type of bitch slap. I probaly shouldn't have said 'marketing', it's more the demographic dissection that is weird to me. I've been consorting with movie nerds for years and one thing I still can't figure is the obsession with box office. Of course there are times when it's a relevant topic but it really did seem like Triumph was saying that the reason he didn't like GRINDHOUSE was because it was "niche" and not specifically designed to make the maximum possible amount of money for the Weinstein Company by appealing to every single last idiot that has 9 wadded up dollars in his or her pocket. Moto is right, if it made more money than TITANIC then fans of the movie would be using that as "evidence" that it's good, it happens every time, and it makes no sense either way. It seems to me we should spend less time worrying about the money that those asshole brothers are gonna get from us and more time on the movies themselves. Unfortunately these are patterns we see over and over again. Horrible, horrible movies make lots of money sometimes, and really good ones often make none. Like somebody pointed out, ZODIAC seems to be everybody's favorite movie of the year, and it hasn't made a profit. But even Joel Schumacher's Batman movies made money, I think. There are just so many examples that it's always weird when any of us try to conflate box office success/failure with quality/lack thereof. And Mike Honcho, sorry if I offended you bud. Obviously there are always gonna be smart young people like you, there has to be someone to hate all the other kids. Although I often go into "get off my lawn!" mode and get horrified by your generation, I really don't mean to single you guys out. Every generation has horrible music they make popular, otherwise there would be no radio stations. And kids had nothing to do with making Celine Dion, The Secret, or Wild Hogs popular. You know what I really think is gonna be weird about you guys, you are growing up with the internet, with DVD commentary tracks, all this information at your fingertips that was never there for Roger Ebert or anybody like that. There is gonna be an unstoppable generation of supernerds, I'm telling you. Imagine how over-the-top Tarantino would be if he had grown up looking up shit on IMDb. It could get dangerous. Anyway thanks again everybody. P.S. For the guy who wanted more detail of why I liked DEATH PROOF, I got a whole review at http://www.geocities.com/outla wvern/ReviewsP#ghouse
INLAND EMPIRE by JAWS 2	Apr 11th, 2007 03:46:07 AM
How come no one’s talking about Inland Empire on this site? That film was the most excruciating piece of shit ever – it’s three hours long and shot on a video camera. And it makes no sense. And it’s constantly out of focus. Grindhouse has got nothing on that monstrosity.
Re: More showings = more chances to make money. by Mace Tofu	Apr 11th, 2007 05:59:51 AM
That would be true if GRINDHOUSE was packed but from the totals it looks like 80-100 people per theater showing so even with the longer running time the seats were there if anyone wanted them. I'm going to see this Thursday with 2 friends but even then that will only add about $20 to the BO. GRINDHOUSE( If it cost $ 53-67 + 30 Million more on ads) will be a BOMB in the US at this rate. They really spent TOO MUCH on this film given movies like GALAXY OF TERROR were done for $1 million. PLANET TERROR should of been done for $7 million ( like Roberts earlier films) and really no reason DEATH PROOF should of cost more than $1 million given it's girls talking and 2 car crashes. SCI-FI Horror Movies like EVENT HORIZON only did $26 Million total BO. Even something like STARSHIP TROOPERS did $55 Million total. Anyone making a Hard R sci-fi would be wise to keep their budget under $20 Million just based on the BO track record of R rated Sci-fi Horror. But hey they still made more money than the FOUNTAIN did in it's run. RR used to be a wise man with his budgets and seemed to be proud bringing in $30 million dollar epics that looked like they cost twice as much ( none of the Spy Kids would of been hits if he spent what he did on Planet Terror). I hope everyone was well paid upfront for this project. Too Bad they overspent to make it look like they didn't. And don't think with your dicks RR & QT while shooting a movie as it hurts your work in the long run as good pussy will make you do stupid things( was that the main reason we didn't see the titties of the women you two were banging on screen?). Thanks for the effort guys. Really.
There are some directors that can do wonders with by emeraldboy	Apr 11th, 2007 06:50:01 AM
a small budget and then blow it all with a bigger one. one example of this is irish filmmaker Paddy breathnach. I went down is his best film. all other movies he has made have all stunk in comparison. His last movie was the turgid man about dog. the makers deliberately opened that movie outside dublin and away from dublin media. Which got up the noses of the D4 media but bizarrely the movie broke all sorts of records. Before man he made a dire movie in the uk about hairdressing. awful, awful, awful. Take damien o'donnells first short film called 35 a side. he has just gotten better with every film. I love all his films.
TOO SOON!! by Pageiv	Apr 11th, 2007 07:18:26 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =ciG-Xs7mBwU
ONE: Ok, Vern, I'll answer you. Here we go! by Triumph poops!	Apr 11th, 2007 07:25:12 AM
Hi there, Vern (and hello to any other Talkbackers who’ll bother to read this response. I hope everyone's doing great.) It was nice of you to direct a question at me personally. Then again I don’t know if I should feel honored or feel like a deer caught in the headlights of an oncoming car! But in as gentlemanly way as possible, I’ll do my best to respond to the points you brought up. In your latest post you just wrote: "True, the article has to do with box office, so his comments were relevant. Fair enough. But it did strike me as odd how far into it he got, and I was wondering what he would say if I asked why." Well, first of all, to answer your opening comment...uh, that is back in your OTHER post...it’s not a question about being obsessed with THIS movie per se. You know, maybe I have it wrong, but I thought the whole POINT to a site like AICN was to be obsessed about movies, PERIOD. And when I say that, I mean literally everything about them top to bottom. From the moment someone gets a magical spark and types “Fade in”... through the script making the rounds... through preproduction and casting... actual production... post production... testing... reviewing the final film on its opening night... followed by the truly best part, getting together with fellow geeks and diehard movie lovers to dissect it all, again top to bottom. Because that’s what geeks do best -- they discuss and debate and over analyze every bit of minutia possible given their love for the medium. Well, that’s always been true of the geeks I’ve hung out with. I mean, seriously, if that’s NOT the point then why should I (or anyone here) give a crap about, well, pretty much ANY article you (or any of the other guys) ever put up? I mean, if that’s NOT why we’re all here, then you tell me, Vern: why the hell are you guys wasting web space and bandwidth putting up an interview with Shia talking about his young Disney TV days? Why put up a photo of Salma Hayek and then in an adolescent teen boy manner have your web headline be “Hottest CEO of a company ever!” Why put up an in-depth review that equally uses a ton of words to dissect an UNPRODUCED Superman screenplay? Why run emails from people you don’t even know that declare “Dudes! I just got back from the multiplex! Here’s a review of an UNFINISHED movie, but I thought you’d love to hear what it’s like in ROUGH form RIGHT THIS SECOND!" So to start, I guess I should say two things. First, maybe I owe everyone an apology. If somehow my postings offended anyone due to the fact that I posted quite a few...well, I’m sorry. Really. It was Easter weekend, I was home with a touch of the flu and unable to sleep, so since I was killing time on the Net, it was fun to simply talk about things since this was clearly THE geek film of the moment to discuss and debate. The posts were flying fast and furious and I was posting away FOR fun as well, caught up in the geekiness of discussing it all with...well, fellow geeks. Because again, I thought that was the whole POINT here. And to go back and forth as much as we liked and have a blast dissecting all the minutia.
Zodiac Made more money Opening Weekend by Samuel Fulmer	Apr 11th, 2007 07:55:43 AM
13 mil vs. 11 mil.
TWO: Why such specific Marketing posts, Vern? by Triumph poops!	Apr 11th, 2007 08:02:57 AM
That’s easy: I was simply trying to answer the question at hand, or least as I saw it. To begin with, there’s already a wacky dynamic at work here. For some reason I’m responding to a criticism from you, but the whole reason this talkback even exists is because Quint put up an article – web link included – that spotlighted thoughts Harvey Weinstein is having over how he can salvage this movie, since obviously that’s the Number One thing he’s sweating bullets over. See, I actually feel bad for Harvey. I honestly do. This guy put $53 Million on the line, which swells to over $100 Million once you tack on ancillary costs, all because he DID believe in taking an artistic chance. And contrary to what you or others might think, Vern, that’s a ballsiness I can totally salute. Speaking as someone who lives in LA, who’s worked on the creative end of certain things, and who’s been involved with projects where I’ve literally had to put my entire bank book on the line, I know what Harvey’s going through. Not to a $100 million scale, but I certainly know what it’s like to proudly say "I've created something and gosh darn it, I did it for the art! I’m putting this out there because I believe in it!" Of course, I ALSO know what it's like to put on your best game face and SAY that, all while you're sweating bullets and REALLY thinking "Sweet Heaven above, PLEASE tell me I’m going to get my money back! What the Hell was I thinking!?? So while some of the geeks around here (perhaps even you, Vern) will whoop and holler and stomp your feet about how great DEATH PROOF was, while you’ll thump your chests and yell, "It was fucking worth it! We don’t need Will Farrell comedies! Fuck teenage movies! Fuck the losses! It was worth the experiment to do something new! It was the best time I had in a theater in ages!" the truth is there are WAY larger issues here, a lot of which I just thought some people might want to discuss and/or debate. I mean, sure, in the end GRINDHOUSE was worth it for you. Believe it or not, I’m GLAD you had a good time, Vern, but you’ll have to excuse me if I also happen to feel pretty damn sorry for the guy now left holding a bag that’s missing 90 MILLION BUCKS. It’s moments like this that I truly feel bad for ANY “creator” who takes a chance on something, who gambles on a personal dream, but ends up living a nightmare instead and now has to deal with a total vampiric blood bath. And I mean that seriously. I might not have liked DEATH PROOF the way you did, Vern, but that doesn’t mean I don’t salute that they TRIED to do something. In any of my posts where I’ve talked about why I thought it failed, I’ve never said they SHOULDN’T have tried. I simply argued why I thought they didn’t get it right. So don’t take what I said wrong or, even worse, start to misstate things. I feel for the GRINDHOUSE crew across the board, particularly Weinstein. Because right about now poor Harvey’s the quintessential teen who just tossed an open house kegger to impress a few friends, where everyone came, drank, completely trashed the place and then staggered off happy and content... ...Only problem is, he’s now left all alone to clean up the mess everyone else left behind before his folks get home. Unfortunately, their car has already pulled up in the driveway outside and they're almost at the door -- much like any banks or creditors who bankrolled GH are already speed dialing Harvey likewise looking for some answers. So BECAUSE of the Weinstein article and BECAUSE of the question Quint posed, it just seemed to me that this shifted into a very unique thing on AICN -- a fun BUSINESS discussion. Seriously, reread the very last thing Quint wrote: "I don't know what the exact formula is, but we do know that 300 and Grindhouse were going after similar audiences. They had different release dates and different advertising strategies, but one was a huge hit and one underperformed. Thoughts?" So, yeah, I had some thoughts. While everyone was tossing out reasons ("It’s the studio’s fault! They didn’t buy web ads!" "No, no, it’s Easter’s fault!") I thought it simply made sense to begin at the most BASIC starting point of all: namely, perhaps in everyone's overzealousness, people were overlooking the simple fact maybe...just maybe...the movie ITSELF just wasn’t very good. In short, the classic not seeing the forest for the trees. Or as I noted in that same first post, perhaps it failed simply because it was niche directors making a niche film that was a tribute to seriously niche films from literally DECADES ago that today’s audience has absolutely ZERO connection to -- all of which combined to create too much of a niche novelty item to draw very many people in. Which is what I still think the film's biggest problem was in the end. Hey, argue "artistic integrity" all you want, but it was the law of diminishing returns because you kept niching it and niching it and niching it until you niched yourself into a corner that, frankly, you just weren’t going to be able to recover from business-wise. I mean, come on, let's get real. For all the blustering about "originality" and "daring experimentation" or a "harkening back to a classic film genre", here's the deal. In several week's time, there will be an album out by this year's AMERICAN IDOL winner. You know, that show that is top of the ratings and which 40 MILLION PEOPLE watch every week and get so into that they race to their phones to participate. That same week, a minor imprint label will put out a CD of a lost master for a Blues guitarist from the 1960s who is a cult figure famous for...well, he's famous if you're actually INTO the Blues. If you're not, forget it. You weren't even born when he was playing, you've never heard his music in this day and age, and if you're not into Blues music in general, then you're not gonna care ANYWAY. So comparatively speaking, gee, I wonder whose CD is going to do well and whose is going to sell to a very select audience. Mind you, they may be a very intelligent and tasteful audience, but it's still going to be a pretty small buying niche. Hmm, now what does that remind me of? Wait, I have it on the tip of my tongue...
THREE: So with that in mind, Vern... by Triumph poops!	Apr 11th, 2007 08:20:25 AM
So from that starting point, Vern, I thought it made sense to debate (or refute) certain other ideas, such as a definite lack of stars, the Easter release date, and so on. I also thought it would be better to discuss each notion point by point for ease. And since I was the one tossing them out there, I ALSO thought it was only fair that I defend each one of them with a short explanation as to "why" I was thinking that way. Hey, go back and look at the VERY FIRST LINE of my follow-up post which clearly says (quote): "I'll just post these other thoughts one by one, then everyone can feel free to debate away..." And that was it. I tossed out 6 different core ideas -- and, yes, they mostly centered on how the movie was handled or marketed -- and I simply thought that IF anyone wanted to join in and pick them apart they could. It was all meant in a spirit of fun. As I said before, it was all about being a true geek over movies and debating the minutia, which to me means HAVING to discuss the business end since that clearly DRIVES the business. Uh...that sounds odd, but I think you get the point! On the other hand, I wasn’t aware that AICN had a policy for "how much" you can post. I admit I got caught up in the fun of it, the fun of the debate, but I thought everyone else was having fun too. Besides, I figured if someone didn't want to read anything I had to say, they’d just skip past it since there’s obviously a zillion other posts to read here. So again my apologies if I somehow violated an AICN code that I wasn’t aware of OR if my notion of bringing up multiple ideas of debate and then bouncing back and forth between them irritated anybody. That was never my intention. Then again, to some degree, I could get a little sarcastic and defensive here and say I’m sorry for trying to bring up real business concerns that DO exist here in Hollywood and which DO affect a film’s performance, no matter how much you might want to deny it. I don’t know, maybe I got it wrong and I’m in the wrong place. Maybe you guys want this place to be nothing more than the "FLAMES ON OPTIMUS ARE FOR PUSSIES! LUCAS RAPED ME AGAIN! SALMA, LET ME RUB MY DICK IN FRONT OF YOU!” movie discussion site...
Fake double feature with fake trailers isn't new by Samuel Fulmer	Apr 11th, 2007 08:22:44 AM
A film called Movie Movie that came out in 1978 had the same gimick. Instead of being a double feature of 1970's grindhouse schlock, it was a double feature of films inspired by 1930's Hollywood movies. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00 77952/
Triumph, you don't owe any apologies by Mr Incredible	Apr 11th, 2007 08:25:18 AM
Whether you liked or disliked GRINDHOUSE, that's an opinion and everyone has one. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm getting tired of this "if you don't like this or that movie, you are retarded" attitude. It's childish and stupid. We ought to be able to have a discussion about these things, and be able to agree and/or disagree with some manner of intelligence. We should all be able to appreciate and examine the different points of view, whether we agree with them or not.
FOUR: Why you SHOULD care, Vern... by Triumph poops!	Apr 11th, 2007 08:38:21 AM
You know, Vern, you also contradicted yourself a bit in your post. First you asked "What takes you to writing this much in-depth analysis of every single angle of the marketing? What's it to you?”, but then you said "There are exactly two reasons why I feel I should give a shit about the movie not making money. (1) I was hoping they would do some more RR/QT double features later on and (2) I hope this doesn't stop them from making MACHETE", but THEN you finally concluded "Otherwise I don't see why I should care." Well, okay, I’ll tell you why you should care about boring ass marketing discussions, even at a geeky film site. Because it would be ridiculous for any grown, thinking adult in today’s world NOT to recognize how much a role it plays in any film’s final box office tally, or for that matter any product’s final success...period. I don’t care if it’s a movie, book, TV show, video game, breakfast cereal, detergent or a flea collar you just tossed on your dog, it’s all the same thing. And yes, Vern, that’s WHY you should care about even the slightest details how GRINDHOUSE was made, packaged, marketed and handled. Because now it literally becomes a model for how NOT to handle the NEXT niche or genre film that’s coming down the path. So you should study it well. You should examine it, rip it apart, argue about it, and certainly commit it to memory. Because the next time you see the same warning signs, the same dark clouds starting to form on the horizon, maybe you or a place like AICN can move fast enough to save a movie you really love or really respect and want to see succeed. if anything, maybe AICN should look at the way it treated both SNAKES ON A PLANE and GRINDHOUSE and say to yourselves "Hey, what happened here? I thought we had a winning hand with both of these things. I thought we had the excitement for them all wrapped up. That the hell happened?" So let’s be honest here. As boring Ass as this might be to talk about to some (well, that is compared to spending hours debating such finer points in life like how often Tarantino uses the word “Bitch”), how a film is marketed will obviously play THE defining role in who hears about it, it will determine what demographics will EVER become interested in it, which will ultimately determine who shows up and thus how well it does. Period. So yes, Vern, discussing, debating and dissecting boring ass marketing really COULD be the key to you seeing those sequels you want so badly. Or far more importantly, IF other films of a similar nature will even be green lit. Which is omething ALL of us geeks and ALL of us who so dearly love movies have a vital stake in.
Hey there, Mr Incredible! by Triumph poops!	Apr 11th, 2007 08:45:59 AM
Good to see you again. Hope you're doing great and thanks for the nice words. Actually, it's funny. Vern asked why I was bothering to discuss things so in-depth, but it was Mr. Incredible here who had the perfect response to that when he noted above "God, I can imagine how fun the talkback will be in July for the TRANSFORMERS movie." Incredible, I'm still laughing over that. Good one!
Oh, and finally to Masked Avenger... by Triumph poops!	Apr 11th, 2007 08:51:47 AM
You said: "While Vern you may be right, one must consider your trying to have a serious discussion with somebody who calls themself Triumph Poops! It's rather absurd." Ah, yes. Because coming online and naming myself the Masked Avenger would have been so much LESS absurd...
Finally, a talkback that addresses one of my... by rbatty024	Apr 11th, 2007 09:11:41 AM
pet peeves: conflating box office with quality. It was so rampant during the Superman Returns days. Whatever you think of a movie, please have the brains to attack the film rather than how much money it made. I remember arguments for using box office to determine quality that went something along the lines of, "well, when it backs up my opinion then box office proves whether or not a movie is good."
The title of this movie was another problem by Dasher	Apr 11th, 2007 09:50:49 AM
That's a marketing issue, but most people don't know what a "grindhouse" film was/is, and they were probably confused by the separate titles within the film. Of course, all of this was probably understood by most AICN readers, but remember, we're talking about Joe Sixpack here. I even read an interview with Rose McGowan where she had to explain the concept to her confused interviewer ("No, 'Grindhouse' is the OVERALL title of it"). Maybe if it were called "Double Feature" or something like that, people would have gotten it.
It would be like calling a film Giallo by Samuel Fulmer	Apr 11th, 2007 09:58:24 AM
because that means about as much to the majority of the world as Grindhouse does.
Talkbacks??? Hell, no. These are the...Sharkbacks!!! by JDanielP	Apr 11th, 2007 10:11:53 AM
Movie people should just look the other way. There's too much hate in this place. And these waters run deep. (And GRINDHOUSE was a fun.)
Triumph poops, you're awesome! by Spandau Belly	Apr 11th, 2007 10:42:04 AM
I'd love to have you on my show. It's called "Vern Got Served" and it's an ironic throwback to a niche cult market of television shows such as The Gong Show. I'm going on the air opposite American Idol on the advisement of Harvey Weinstein.
Let the Weinsteins burn by Nabster	Apr 11th, 2007 10:48:05 AM
its about time their profit driven, creativity killing tactics vanish. Okay this may never happen in the movie making biz, but these two represent the worst of them.
rbatty024 by Defrost	Apr 11th, 2007 10:55:13 AM
I think with something like Superman Returns you can point to the fact that word of mouth being so bad for Superman Returns was why the movie made nowhere near what people were expecting.
FWIW by Steve_Dooku	Apr 11th, 2007 11:29:52 AM
I have found these Grindhouse talkbacks to be fascinating reads. And T.P. your posts were clearly very informed and articulated well. I don't get why those who liked the movie would care if somebody didn't. Whatever the case, a thesis paper could be written on the reactions stated here alone.
Figures... by stewiegriffin	Apr 11th, 2007 01:00:44 PM
The problem isn't the movie, it's the STUPID audiences here in the U.S. Reports are saying some people are leaving after the first film thinking that's the entire movie, anyone with two brain cells or who has payed any attention to the advertising knows it's two movies in one and will run for more than two hours. Of course asking the same audience which elected Bush then put him in the White House for another four years to grasp such a concept ( or any concept for that matter ) is too much. Not to mention, attention spans with these morons are about the same as that of a knat so asking them to sit still for more than 10 minutes would be out of the question. Remember, these are the same people who are putting trash like "Are We There Yet" on top of the charts. Pathetic.
thanks Triumph by Vern	Apr 11th, 2007 01:25:26 PM
for indulging my question. I think you took it different from how I meant it though. There is no reason to apologize (or pretend you are being asked to apologize), or to think you're not allowed to write a bunch of long posts. Don't be intimidated by the black box, I think that's just my reward for getting threatened by Dave the Demon. I was just honestly curious what was driving you. And I think I understand a little more now. But I still don't buy "we should care about box office" thing. When those cases come up where a great movie is getting ignored, you do what you can, but I don't feel like dedicating my life to the box office success of movies I like. Of course I would like to see the movies I liked be successful (go see THE LOOKOUT) but if not I'm not gonna cry, I gotta be realistic that 1. like you said, most of the assholes on this planet watch AMERICAN IDOL and really, I should be hiding in a cave instead of trying to get them to watch THE LOOKOUT, and 2. if some corporation loses out on some money it is really not gonna be the end of the world. Especially don't feel sorry for the fucking Weinsteins. It's great that they've supported Tarantino and Rodriguez, but that doesn't make up for all they've done to damage movies. Maybe if they take a dive on GRINDHOUSE it can be considered their first small contribution to the "sorry about fucking over all those Asian movies for so many years" fund. Not only do they continue to do that shit, they have this new thing where they have an exlusive deal with Blockbuster so the independent stores and other chains can't get THE PROTECTOR or GRINDHOUSE without waiting until it comes out and then going to pay retail at Circuit City or somewhere. The idea I guess being to have terrible distribution of rentals and make it a huge pain in the ass to rent it so you will just give up and buy it. Yes, they took a risk on this movie, but that's because they wanted our money. They are not on our side. As for SNAKES ON A PLANE, I think it's time for we as a society to move on. That was a great title and should've been a great movie, but it wasn't. It wasn't a big success because most people aren't like me, they don't want to see an awesome movie about snakes on a plane. And they are lucky because they didn't have to be disappointed like I was.
stewiegriffin you're a moron by 9000rpm	Apr 11th, 2007 01:54:44 PM
And an idiot. It’s because PEOPLE ARE STAYING and seeing DP that word of mouth is so bad and Grindhouse is doing so poorly. Maybe that’s what the Weinsteins should do, instruct theater owners to move people out of theatres before DeathPoop goes and ruins the whole experience.
Good God TRIUMPH... STOP TALKING by moto	Apr 11th, 2007 02:46:18 PM
LOL... sorry, somebody had to say it. Nothing but love Triumph...
Women in Cages, Dolemite, Pink Flamingos... by adeepercut2k	Apr 11th, 2007 02:47:31 PM
and all these 70's exploitation films are not loved by every one. It doesn't take someone special to love these films. It's not extra cool to love these films...but for some reason some of us love these films. I and 4 of my close friends love these films. All the rest of my friends hate these films and hated Grindhouse as well. It's not hard to understand why Grindhouse didn't do as well as so many thought it should have...most people don't like exploitation films. When radio people are offending audiences with "nappy headed hos" and "dank box", it's obvious that a large portion of the US citizenry are a bunch of pussy whiners that think that being offended is a threat to their person. As if what some old fart says is gonna destroy my world. Fuck Imus! These pussies don't like shit like Grindhouse. Opening night, about a 1/5 th of the audience left Grindhouse by the end of the first film cause they were disgusted by the film and are whiny pussies. (or are they whiny pussys?) Those that stayed were the same ones clapping and rooting for more gore in the first film. I liked the film and had a fun time, but didn't think it was nearly as great as PF, Dolemite, giallo shit, last house, etc. But I love that I could finally go to a first run theater that aired such wonderful garbage. Here in San Diego, the Ken cinema has stopped showing 70's exploitation since they were taken over by the whores at landmark. Now we get the occasional Japanese horror film, or latin-origin drama/horror/thriller; but pretty much now it's full of all those "high art" euro cinema dreck. Real boring shit. (by the way, I'm not averse to european cinema, just the shit they bring over lately.) No ball, balless euro cinema. Am I pissed that they might split the film...I guess so, but like someone else mentioned...it's not the first time Weinstein fucked up a film and it's not gonna be the last. I had my experience the first night and am glad I went. P.S. Tarantino needs to understand the value of varying hills and valleys, not just steep cliffs and falls. He disappoints me more and more. Oh well, maybe Cuaron and del Toro have some more up their sleeves for our viewing pleasure.
...all i know is... by mr ahole ramirez	Apr 11th, 2007 03:59:56 PM
...if REDLINE comes closer to first place in the box office than Grindhouse, then America is dumb (well dumber since Bush got re-elected)....
BEST TALKBACK EVER!!! by thegoldencalf	Apr 11th, 2007 04:01:22 PM
kudos triumph poops, kudos
Vern, thanks -- and look on the bright side by Triumph poops!	Apr 11th, 2007 04:08:38 PM
For all the debating that does over, over, over analyze "why" something like GRINDHOUSE (seems) to utterly tank, the movie DID get made, you DID get to see it and enjoy it, and while it was still glued together as a double bill you DID get to have the kind of magical theatrical experience you wanted. Which means maybe so did some other guy or girl (of any age) who will walk away with that same exhuberant feeling and one day they'll try a similar experiment -- only this time the stars will be aligned in their favor. As I said, I'm actually GLAD they tried. For all sorts of reasons, it just didn't seem to work THIS TIME. But for all the horror movies that have been bombs in the last 20 years -- and there have been some real stinkers -- its not like Hollywood turned around and said "Ok, that's it! NO ONE wants to be scared anymore. No more horror films. Take 'em all off the production slate!" So maybe the NEXT psuedo post-modern Grindhouse film will be the one that clicks and THEN you'll get more of what you'd like to see. And look on this bright side as well. In a few days we'll really see IF the Easter argument had any merit. MAYBE it will do better this weekend. Or MAYBE it will do yet another low 7-11 million, but that will turn out to be it's stable threshold. THAT will turn out to be its legs. Which could be okay. Because while that's still rather low, IF it could go slow and steady that way for another 3 weeks or so, you'd have a 53 million movie that did do 40 or so in business, so by the time you DO take into account DVD and a European run, you'd be fine. Everyone makes their money back, everyone breathes easier, and now no one thinks the experiment was THAT bad -- and so they'll now be far more willing to try it again in some form. So ironically as opposed to opening weekend, THIS is sort of the all-important weekend that will determine its fate. So given your passion for this film, which I salute and admire, if ever there was a time for you or Harry or whoever to be telling everyone to see it, talking them into it, or writing intelligent articles about "why" it's an important movie AS a film, these next 5 days are it. But it was good tossing ideas with you, and I hope you're doing well.
I work in one of those independent stores by Jak0lantern01	Apr 11th, 2007 04:12:25 PM
that will be affected by the new Weinstein distribution model, on the side. It actually happens to be one of the largest stores of its kind in New York. We got a bit of a kick out of the Weinstein thing, especially since the kind of people that come into our store are the kind of people that Grindhouse was aimed at. It's the blockbuster crowd that failed the Weinsteins, not the more cultured individuals that truly appreciate film (I know, it sounds snobby, but it's true). Blockbuster crowd = the people who don't understand what those black bars are on the top and bottom of their T.V. screen when watching a DVD.
By the way by Jak0lantern01	Apr 11th, 2007 04:14:53 PM
adeepercut2k, I really have no idea what Don Imus has to do with the 'failure' of Grindhouse or any other exploitation film. It just sounds cheap and easy, if you ask me.
Moto... by Triumph poops!	Apr 11th, 2007 04:17:24 PM
(imitating the Shat in Wrath of) MOTOOOOOOOO! Nothing but love back at ya, bud. Hope you're doing great too.
Re: More showings = more chances to make money. by howlingdervish	Apr 11th, 2007 04:39:49 PM
Mace Tofu said: "That would be true if GRINDHOUSE was packed but from the totals it looks like 80-100 people per theater showing so even with the longer running time the seats were there if anyone wanted them." That's why I said "more CHANCES to make money." If Grindhouse is only playing at 12, 4, and 8, and Blades of Glory is playing every hour, which is easier to just spontaneously see?
To AnimalStructure... by MikeHoncho	Apr 11th, 2007 05:23:08 PM
In regards to the comment about 30 to 35 new movies coming out this year, I did not necessarily say movies that came out this year. I said in theatres this year. Atleast a good third of that list was movies from last year that did not reach any theatres in my area until now. Sadly Sacramento is low on the indy theatres, and I am still doing various forms of catchup, such as last weekend the Host finally came out here and I saw it. THis may be a film from last year, but I regard this as a film I saw this year. And I may have included a couple of second times I have seen movies, and maybe even third times. But the total of films I have seen in theatres this year is 35, and a lot of that list is good.
I get it now... by beb	Apr 11th, 2007 05:27:12 PM
,,,the Weinsteins were trying to take an unappreciated genre and bring it to the cultured masses just like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon did. After years of hitting the theater in Chinatown for my kung fu fixes, I had to go to the local arthouse to see the inferior copy foisted on us by Ang Lee. Well, they did get it right by making an inferior product but they forgot to subtitle it.
Jak0lantern01... by JimmyJoe RedSky	Apr 11th, 2007 05:31:06 PM
i totally agree - about the "blockbuster" crowd - kims or tower? - kims right? - i left ny 2 yrs ago - miss it - anyway - i was in a bestbuy a while ago and over heard a couple looking at the dvds - the guy picked up "v for vendetta" and the lady said "whats that - i dont want to see that - its about devilry" - devilry? - new word - i think she thought the "v" in the box art was a pentagram - this is in st.louis mo - bush country - people are stupid
I work at a video store on by Mattyboy122	Apr 11th, 2007 05:50:53 PM
I work at a video store on the weekends and I guarantee that plenty of stupid people will lap Grindhouse up. The same stupid people who say Grindhouse is 'new' or 'interesting.' It's recycled trash cinema...you know, the kind that appealed to these 'mouth-breathers' back in the day? So you're basically calling people stupid for not liking a movie that recycles a genre that stupid people loved 30 years ago? Makes perfect sense. Or you could, you know, not waste your time on people who revel in bad taste (at least the people who see Wild Hogs don't have any delusions of grandeur about the film, unlike people calling Grindhouse a 'work of art') and try watching some real movies for a change.
Wait a minute by IvelNoslo	Apr 11th, 2007 06:08:32 PM
Hey Stewiegriffin, I voted for Bush (and I somewhat regret this, but not entirely), and I LOVED Grindhouse. Don't think for a second that just because a guy voted for a Conservative, well then, he must like to watch nothing but run-of-the-mill Hollywood crap and wouldn't enjoy a double-bill because he couldn't understand the advertising. When you vote for Hillary, keep inmind she (and Kerry) wanted Bush to do something about Iraq and Saddam's WMD's before we went to war, alright? Anyway, I don't know if this is a regurgitation of a previous post (no way I'm reading all 581 of 'em), but Weinstein claiming that they 'failed to educate audiences well enough in the South and the Mid-West'. Then, he blames the running time of the film for lack of theater attendance...well, Harvey, how about YOU DON'T PUT THE FILM OUT ON EASTER WEEKEND WHEN PEOPLE WOULD RATHER SPEND TIME WITH THEIR KIDS AT A CRAPPY FAMILY FILM INSTEAD. Everyone was at home with their families! No way could I get enough time away from the family to go see this flick, and I wouldn't want to! I left work early on Monday so I could see it! Also, PLEASE don't blame the directors' 'indulgence' in wanting their films put together despite a three hour running time. Harvey should blame himself instead of throwing out sideways slams to two guys who put their movies in his hands. If he won't learn from his mistakes (watch everyone, the 'Halloween' remake will STILL be released on August 31st...why not any Friday in October?), well...I'll still wince when I see his name attached to something I wanna see, because God knows it'll be shelved or released at the wrong time or whatever...you know, do you think Weinstein even cares to make money from his movies? I'm not so sure.
Nah, neither Kim's nor Tower by Jak0lantern01	Apr 11th, 2007 06:10:33 PM
On the Island. Anyway, Mattyboy122, this is the kind of movie that gets people of the old-fashioned type excited, and not because it's trying to pass itself off as high art. It's mainly because it's just the opposite and revels in it. My weekend job has exposed me to so many more off the wall types of movies that I may never have known about nor paid attention to. When we saw the trailer for GH, we knew it was an absolute must-see, because we 'got it'. I guess I really shouldn't rag on a lot of you, most of you are all too young to understand that there was a time before the internet and home video, when great movies would get multiple runs at the theatre and it was always an event, vs. now when a movie is lucky to even make it to the theatre and survive more than two weeks. Simpler, and yes, better(?) times.
Death Proof has the goods by IvelNoslo	Apr 11th, 2007 06:14:21 PM
It's been said before over and over again, but people lack patience these days. The film was talky in spots (at times, Tarantino stood out worse in the dialogue than he did in his actual physical role in the film) but it didn't hurt the movie for me. And when the first batch of girls gets it? I was riveted and appalled. Never had THAT happen to me in a slasher movie before.
I really wanted to like by kadayi	Apr 11th, 2007 07:33:44 PM
I really wanted to like Death proof, but whenever it turned into a verbal assault vehicle for QTs love regarding all things obscure I found it really jarred. I can buy into Jules and Vincent in Pulp fiction trading trivia badges, but good looking 20 something ladies is another thing entirely. Kurt was excellent, as was Rose and hat's off to the stunt department and special effects, but the second act onwards was no Faster Pussycat by any stretch of the imagination. It was Kill Bill all over again, first half excellent, second half...wtf went wrong...
The best of the two... by Bruno Diaz	Apr 11th, 2007 09:04:22 PM
is Death Proof. Although I really liked Planet Terror. Tarantino schooled Rodriguez big time. All that dialogue really resonates for some sublime reason. Death Proof really clinches Tarantino as a visionary genius for me. It's so present. You feel like you're right there. Rodriguez is obviously really talented, and I like him. He's a hard-worker and a formalist, doing everything he can to work towards making cool kick-ass stuff, and his efforts largely pay-off. But Tarantino just shows up with something inexplicable. It's easy to slam him for including all that dialogue. But I was way more glued to the screen throughout all of Death Proof, and there were times during Planet Terror when I was bored. The whole Grindhouse experience was just awesome. I plan on going again at least two more times. I'm hoping they let this run ride out, because it works. Obviously the Easter weekend release was a bad idea. But this is the most kick-ass time at the movies I've had since The Departed. I loved it, and I hope they make more like it.
Well, I for one... by Style_92	Apr 11th, 2007 09:43:42 PM
would go see death proof if it weren't handcuffed to Planet Terror. Zombies just aint my thing, man.
If Grindhouse splits, QT will issue this statement: by The Atomic Worm	Apr 11th, 2007 11:32:18 PM
"Ok, so me and Robert, we had like this really cool idea, okay? It was going to be just like those f*ing cool grindhouse movies we loved when we were younger, alright? But now like, nobody's going to see it, okay? And we feel just like Monte Hellman after he made Two-Lane Blacktop, alright? But that's cool, okay? Because me and Robert ::scratches chin and sniffs:: we aren't in it for the money, alright? But there's like, this whole other side of film, that's like a business, okay? And that sucks because they're, like, about to foreclose on my condo and take my fing Miike prints as collateral, alright? So like, if Harvey wants to split it in two, that's like totally cool, okay? Because it'll be a fing brand new experience for the fans, and I need some f*ing $$$$$." Commence kissing of Weinstein's ass.
Apparently, its a done deal now. by slapshot	Apr 11th, 2007 11:38:44 PM
Biggest chain in the Memphis/mid-South area is Malco Theaters. Malco.com is listing "Grindhouse: Planet Terror" and "Grindhouse: Death Proof" as separate features with separate showtimes, effective Friday. No idea how they're charging for them, but the films have apparently been split up. Damn you, Harvey...
If that is indeed true.... by beatnikslacker	Apr 12th, 2007 12:52:10 AM
im sure as fuck glad I saw this last weekend. split films kills the concept completely.
More on DEATH PROOF by Vern	Apr 12th, 2007 01:12:45 AM
Although I'm disappointed that so many of the newsies hate DEATH PROOF, I'm not gonna try to convince them they should like it. But I want to say a little more about why I like it. To me the story and characters are the important thing, not the way it fits into the history of slasher movies and car movies. But those things are great too. I am more familiar with slasher movies, so I liked the way it followed the traditions of the genre-- up to a point. Judging by the first half of the movie, whatsername from out of town is the final girl. She's the one that notices Stuntman Mike, nobody else does. She's like Laurie in HALLOWEEN, she's the one who figures out there's a problem. And they keep talking about this lake house and whether or not there will be boys there, so you can see where it should be going. But then it takes the left turn. The second half to me is more like Tarantino's version of an independent car movie, not like DIRTY MARY or GONE IN 60 SECONDS (although those are mentioned in the movie) but the artier ones, specifically VANISHING POINT and TWO LANE BLACKTOP. But because it's Tarantino's version it's all about talking instead of driving. Any of you guys who were bored by DEATH PROOF, I wonder what you think of TWO LANE BLACKTOP. I like it, but to me it is unfathomably boring compared to DEATH PROOF. Instead of talk talk talk it's quiet quiet quiet. If this was a Monte Hellman movie they'd still have the camera rotate around the girls in the diner, but they wouldn't be talking, they'd just be eating and staring off into nothingness. It's kind of funny that the movie is doing so bad, because it's one of the rare movies where just about everyone I come in contact with has already seen it, and a surprising amount of them have seen it 2 or more times. Several of them saw it at drive-ins, which must've been great. If I just judged by the movie fans I know I'd swear it was a huge hit, but they are clearly not a scientific sampling of the American public. That's why this morning when I read that Tom Hanks was being paid the most money ever to be in the prequel to DA VINCI CODE it was the first time I realized that was a big hit movie.
Finally... by 9000rpm	Apr 12th, 2007 01:36:31 PM
...the last word.
Grindhouse #10 by 9000rpm	Apr 14th, 2007 05:35:20 PM
Grinding to a halt, watching Pathfinder and Redline speed by. Oh, the pain....
we'll see by 9000rpm	Apr 17th, 2007 11:04:00 PM
Gone in 3 weeks
we'// see by 9000rpm	Apr 17th, 2007 11:05:10 PM
Gone in 2 weeks
we':: see by 9000rpm	Apr 17th, 2007 11:06:14 PM
Gone in 1 week

Talkbacks

The Weinsteins to separate GRINDHOUSE here in the US?

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks