Deathproof - DVD
Yawn...
Let’s face it people, Quentin Tarantino is skating. His career, with its meteoric rise with "Reservoir Dogs", dual points on a peaking curve that are "Pulp Fiction" and "Jackie Brown" and downward slide that was "Kill Bill vol’s 1 & 2", is now mostly kept afloat with snappy dialogue, genre homages, cool soundtracks, chicks crying and a singular performance that gets the most press.
"Jackie Brown" represented "QT" at the height of his powers. It had not one, but several stand out performances, (Most notable: Grier and Forrester), crisp dialogue, tight editing, a killer soundtrack, (the best of all his movies), plus the added ingredients of Tarantino deftly handling the works of another writer and the amazingly rare addition of a ‘soul’ which proved our boy was growing up. Just look at the chemistry, the desire, yearning and need from Grier and Forrester, for each other. No need for sex, or to make statements about race, age, or class, yet all those things are in those performances. That was a near perfect movie.
Now, we are sadly saddled with this extended version of his truncated entry into the "Grindhouse" double feature, which in truth, could have benefitted from some indiscriminate editing. I never got to view "Grindhouse" in the theater and now it looks like it will be next year when I can pluck down twice the price of a movie ticket to view it at home. Yet, my viewing of "Death Proof" could not have been much different that what appeared in theaters. I was running back and forth between my writing, film fest stuff and job searches and back to viewing this movie in segments. I feel that I did not miss anything. I saw it in chunks. I can see why they went with the "Grindhouse" version for theaters.
"Death Proof" is constantly described as nod to low-budget 70's chase movies, like "Vanishing Point" (Which gets referenced in the movie, a lot. I mean really pushing it for Tarantino.). Yet, it is never described in terms that actually tell you what it’s about. Check the ads, the press, the reviews, the DVD cover. All say it’s an homage to low-budget 70's chase movies like "Vanishing Point". Therein lies the ultimate fallacy of one Quentin Hurbert Tarantino.
"Death Proof" is about a stunt car driving serial killer called Stuntman Mike, a scarred and wasted (in terms of material, not intoxication) Kurt Russell, whom flirts with hot chicks and later kills them with his car. If you have seen the previews, you pretty much seen the plot of the movie. The in-betweens are filled with really long talking portions with QT overstuffing the dialogue. There is also a lap dance sequence that seems to have been cut from the theatrical run for no reason other than it featuring a lap dance. (You know because grindhouse guys used to cut stuff like this back in the day. You think it would have been raunchier.) Sure, the dialogue sounds cool but it is nearly 30 minutes until we see Kurt Russell, the supposed star of this movie spouting QT-cool dialogue when Mike mentions his stunt work on some old, obscure TV western. We take too long getting to know characters that are going to get killed off anyway, that it just seemed like an opportunity for characters to speak the QT Speak and Kurt Russell to "Act".
It’s supposed to be scary. Not boring. When the first crash happens nearly 45 minutes into the movie I was thinking "Geez! Finally!". I know this is the extended edition but I do not see how any of the added footage makes the movie enjoyable. It shows rather, that QT knows nothing about the pacing and tension-building of a scary movie. Which is what it is supposed to be. If you say it’s a chase movie, you’d be wrong. There is only one chase in the whole movie.
Then in the middle of it, for no apparent reason, he plops one-note actor Michael Parks playing a role he played a dozen times. For no apparent reason.
Another thing that bugs me lately about Tarantino is that no matter how tough and badass he makes the women appear in his movies, they always blubber and cry at the first sign of trouble. Why even the real stunt woman, who plays herself, begins to wail when Mike shows up. I disliked that about Kill Bill (but I tons of problems with Kill Bill.). And I would like to see a movie where a woman is on par, on level, on an even playing field as the men.
Anyways, Stuntman Mike begins stalking another group of pretties, led by Rosario Dawson, with that girl from "Sky High", the brunette, (And also starring Kurt Russell) in a cheerleader outfit, and two stunt women. (One, the real stunt woman Zoe Bell in a strong acting debut). This time, Mike gets in over his head as the women turn the tables and the only chase scene is on. The cheerleader gets left out of the rest of the movie, being in it for no other reason than she was wearing a cheerleader outfit. Crash. Beating. The end.
I know what some of you are saying. I am NOT supposed to take this seriously and that I am reading too much into it or expecting too much. Some others will say that I just don’t see what QT is doing (Yet, no one has ever stepped up to tell me exactly QT is doing. Not since KBv1, anyways.). That I don’t get it. I hear you. But come on.
Let’s face it. QT is making gimmick movies.
All his post-"Jackie Brown" work hinge on the audience connecting his movies with movies from other genres; KB touches on the Spaghetti Western, Sergio Leone (Please, let’s all leave Leone alone from now on. Please.) Shaw Brothers kung-fu movies, and Samurai Epics like "Sword of Doom" and "Miyamoto Musashi". You know, the stuff we are not supposed to take seriously and pat ourselves on the back for recognizing the flute from "Kung-Fu" or seeing a box of "Fruit Brute" or hear actors say something witty about kitsch 70's television. His "Inglorious Bastards" is to be a WWII epic, but we know he is just going to mimic Samuel Fueller. Right?
All of this gimmickery just lets him off the hook from making a full and complete movie again, movies like the people he emulates made/make, like he did once or twice. I know, "Jackie Brown" was an homage to the Blaxploitation flicks of the 70's. But watch it again and you can see he balanced that with a maturity and depth that he has yet to recapture. Some day, maybe. Until then we are stuck with the shallow pursuits like Kill Bill and Death Proof. One day that promising genius will comeback and surprise me and I will be there to watch it.
Death Proof DVD: not recommended.
Yawn...
Let’s face it people, Quentin Tarantino is skating. His career, with its meteoric rise with "Reservoir Dogs", dual points on a peaking curve that are "Pulp Fiction" and "Jackie Brown" and downward slide that was "Kill Bill vol’s 1 & 2", is now mostly kept afloat with snappy dialogue, genre homages, cool soundtracks, chicks crying and a singular performance that gets the most press.
"Jackie Brown" represented "QT" at the height of his powers. It had not one, but several stand out performances, (Most notable: Grier and Forrester), crisp dialogue, tight editing, a killer soundtrack, (the best of all his movies), plus the added ingredients of Tarantino deftly handling the works of another writer and the amazingly rare addition of a ‘soul’ which proved our boy was growing up. Just look at the chemistry, the desire, yearning and need from Grier and Forrester, for each other. No need for sex, or to make statements about race, age, or class, yet all those things are in those performances. That was a near perfect movie.
Now, we are sadly saddled with this extended version of his truncated entry into the "Grindhouse" double feature, which in truth, could have benefitted from some indiscriminate editing. I never got to view "Grindhouse" in the theater and now it looks like it will be next year when I can pluck down twice the price of a movie ticket to view it at home. Yet, my viewing of "Death Proof" could not have been much different that what appeared in theaters. I was running back and forth between my writing, film fest stuff and job searches and back to viewing this movie in segments. I feel that I did not miss anything. I saw it in chunks. I can see why they went with the "Grindhouse" version for theaters.
"Death Proof" is constantly described as nod to low-budget 70's chase movies, like "Vanishing Point" (Which gets referenced in the movie, a lot. I mean really pushing it for Tarantino.). Yet, it is never described in terms that actually tell you what it’s about. Check the ads, the press, the reviews, the DVD cover. All say it’s an homage to low-budget 70's chase movies like "Vanishing Point". Therein lies the ultimate fallacy of one Quentin Hurbert Tarantino.
"Death Proof" is about a stunt car driving serial killer called Stuntman Mike, a scarred and wasted (in terms of material, not intoxication) Kurt Russell, whom flirts with hot chicks and later kills them with his car. If you have seen the previews, you pretty much seen the plot of the movie. The in-betweens are filled with really long talking portions with QT overstuffing the dialogue. There is also a lap dance sequence that seems to have been cut from the theatrical run for no reason other than it featuring a lap dance. (You know because grindhouse guys used to cut stuff like this back in the day. You think it would have been raunchier.) Sure, the dialogue sounds cool but it is nearly 30 minutes until we see Kurt Russell, the supposed star of this movie spouting QT-cool dialogue when Mike mentions his stunt work on some old, obscure TV western. We take too long getting to know characters that are going to get killed off anyway, that it just seemed like an opportunity for characters to speak the QT Speak and Kurt Russell to "Act".
It’s supposed to be scary. Not boring. When the first crash happens nearly 45 minutes into the movie I was thinking "Geez! Finally!". I know this is the extended edition but I do not see how any of the added footage makes the movie enjoyable. It shows rather, that QT knows nothing about the pacing and tension-building of a scary movie. Which is what it is supposed to be. If you say it’s a chase movie, you’d be wrong. There is only one chase in the whole movie.
Then in the middle of it, for no apparent reason, he plops one-note actor Michael Parks playing a role he played a dozen times. For no apparent reason.
Another thing that bugs me lately about Tarantino is that no matter how tough and badass he makes the women appear in his movies, they always blubber and cry at the first sign of trouble. Why even the real stunt woman, who plays herself, begins to wail when Mike shows up. I disliked that about Kill Bill (but I tons of problems with Kill Bill.). And I would like to see a movie where a woman is on par, on level, on an even playing field as the men.
Anyways, Stuntman Mike begins stalking another group of pretties, led by Rosario Dawson, with that girl from "Sky High", the brunette, (And also starring Kurt Russell) in a cheerleader outfit, and two stunt women. (One, the real stunt woman Zoe Bell in a strong acting debut). This time, Mike gets in over his head as the women turn the tables and the only chase scene is on. The cheerleader gets left out of the rest of the movie, being in it for no other reason than she was wearing a cheerleader outfit. Crash. Beating. The end.
I know what some of you are saying. I am NOT supposed to take this seriously and that I am reading too much into it or expecting too much. Some others will say that I just don’t see what QT is doing (Yet, no one has ever stepped up to tell me exactly QT is doing. Not since KBv1, anyways.). That I don’t get it. I hear you. But come on.
Let’s face it. QT is making gimmick movies.
All his post-"Jackie Brown" work hinge on the audience connecting his movies with movies from other genres; KB touches on the Spaghetti Western, Sergio Leone (Please, let’s all leave Leone alone from now on. Please.) Shaw Brothers kung-fu movies, and Samurai Epics like "Sword of Doom" and "Miyamoto Musashi". You know, the stuff we are not supposed to take seriously and pat ourselves on the back for recognizing the flute from "Kung-Fu" or seeing a box of "Fruit Brute" or hear actors say something witty about kitsch 70's television. His "Inglorious Bastards" is to be a WWII epic, but we know he is just going to mimic Samuel Fueller. Right?
All of this gimmickery just lets him off the hook from making a full and complete movie again, movies like the people he emulates made/make, like he did once or twice. I know, "Jackie Brown" was an homage to the Blaxploitation flicks of the 70's. But watch it again and you can see he balanced that with a maturity and depth that he has yet to recapture. Some day, maybe. Until then we are stuck with the shallow pursuits like Kill Bill and Death Proof. One day that promising genius will comeback and surprise me and I will be there to watch it.
Death Proof DVD: not recommended.
No comments:
Post a Comment