Speed Racer

Will a significantly younger demographic be more appreciative of the Wachowski’s fading talents?

DETAILS:
Released - 9 May 2008
Certificate - PG
Running Time - 134min
Directors - Andy Wachowski and Larry Wachowski
Screenwriters - Andy Wachowski and Larry Wachowski from the original cartoon by Tatsuo Yoshida
Producers -Grant Hill, Joel Silver, Andy Wachowski, Larry Wachowski
Cinematography -David Tattersall
Editing - Roger Barton and Zach Staenberg
Music - Michael Giacchino
Theatrical distributor - Warner Bros
Country - USA


SYNOPSIS:
Speed Racer (Emile Hirsch) is a natural behind the wheel of a fast car. His aspiration in life is to win the hotly contested crucible cup and live up to his tragically dead brother Rex (Scott Porter) and his successful legacy. True to his parents, Pops Racer (John Goodman) and Mom Racer (Susan Sarandon), Speed decides to turn down a more than tempting offer from the corrupt Royalton Industries in order to support his families business. By refusing to represent Royalton industries on the track Arnold Royalton himself (Roger Allam) vows he will do everything to hinder Speed’s chances at winning the Crucible. With support from his loyal girlfriend (Christina Ricci) Speed decides to team up with his rival Racer X (Matthew Fox) to beat Royalton at his own game, win the cup, boost his families business and end the corruption in racing once and for all!


REVIEW (My letter read out on Mayo and Kermode's Film Reviews, BBC Radio 5 Live):

Dear Sonny and Cher,

Has the good doctor become nostalgically deluded in his old age? Having recently seen Speed Racer I was appalled by the Wachowski brother’s inability to engage with an audience. An entire film cannot be carried by its ‘extraordinary design level’ it still needs a gripping plot and likeable characters to enhance the experience. How can you say such a storyline is irrelevant? This is precisely what separates the art of cinema from video-games. As a theme park ride Speed Racer would be vaguely entertaining, but as a film it is wishy washy, zip zang nonsense. Any self respecting child will look beyond this flashy direction and be bored at its lack of substance. Visually striking it may be, but it is nevertheless instantly forgettable. Perhaps Mr. Mayo should employ the doc’s son to review children’s films in future rather than allowing him to embarrassingly attempt to channel his own inner child.

This so-called hallucinogenic spectacle has somehow hypnotised the good doctor and burned away his retinas as he is too blinded to see the sold-out filmmakers that hide beneath.

Ben Lamb from Hull


TO SUM UP:
The Matrix sequels were overcomplicated nonsense, V for Vendetta was too dull and Speed Racer is far too simple and dumbed down. The Wachowskis desperately need to find the correct balance between substance and action even if they are making films for children. Promoting family values to youngsters is admirable but the messages will go 'wooosch' over their heads in amongst the tedious and repetitive action sequences. Overall a passively entertaining film for children and I think it was admirable of Mark Kermode to admit he was wrong on this occasion.

IRON MAN

Robert Downey Jr. has his stark break into the mainstream

DETAILS:
Released - 2 May 2008
Certificate - 12A
Running Time - 125min
Director - Jon Favreau
Screenwriters - Mark Fergus, Hawk Ostby, Art Marcum, Matt Holloway
Producers -Avi Arad, Kevin Feige
Cinematography - Matthew Libatique
Editing - Dan Lebental
Music - Ramin Djawadi
Theatrical distributor - Paramount
Country - USA



SYNOPSIS:
Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is the CEO of the worlds leading weapons manufacturer; Stark Industries. Relishing in his rich playboy lifestyle his world is turned upside down on a trip to Afghanistan. There to demonstrate the capabilities of his company’s new Jericho missile he is captured by terrorists and forced to build them his new weapon. Instead he hones in on his engineering skills to build a suit of iron and escapes. On his return to America he is a changed man. Having experienced the suffering his weapons bring to the world he wants to develop his Iron suit to bring peace and prosperity. On his mission to change Stark Industries intentions for the greater good his PA and potential love interest Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) is more than willing to help but his second in command Obadiah Stone (Jeff Bridges) has better ideas.

REVIEW:
Marvel’s influence on Hollywood these recent years has been phenomenal. Stan Lee and his associates have given birth to a whole new genre: the superhero movie. Iron Man itself also marks the next chapter in Marvel’s legacy as it is the first film to be fully financed by their studios. This may seem a somewhat risky decision as Iron man is by no means the most popular comic book and the franchise itself not as bankable as Spiderman or X-men, but Marvel seem to have pulled it off. By releasing Iron Man a couple of months in the shadow of The Dark Knight when there are little blockbusters and no comic book releases to compete with more people will be inclined to see it. With a whole host of films under their belt there is no time like the present to increase their business empire.

Although in the traditional Marvel fashion Iron Man is first and foremost an origin film. This would not be the birth of a Marvel superhero franchise unless we typically had the entirety of the film depicting an average guy undertaking a heroic transformation. Usually a superhero film can suffer from this plot convention like the Fantastic 4 which spent too much time establishing too many different characters changes rather than the development of a collective plot. But despite this minor limitation Iron Man’s dramatic opening appears to offer something different with a vaguely political feel. As Stark’s jeep is immediately seized in Afghanistan and he has to escape from a terrorist’s lair this is extremely attention grabbing cinema. As the Jericho Missile flies behind Tony Stark towards the distant mountains as he stands upright to demonstrate its capabilities to potential buyers is certainly visually striking.

But it is Robert Downey Jr., taking this role effortlessly in his stride, who carries the weight of the film on his shoulders. A cookie, loveable and humorous rogue but at the same time a geek with a tough side is a fairly layered character to portray. Downey Jr. has managed to make the drastic transformation in character from rebel to freedom fighter with a limited time space far more believable than say Tobey Maguire could have done. Downey Jr. has certainly brought a lot of his own personality to this role. His changing of the written dialogue to his own improvisations and humorous quips has given Iron Man a lot more charismatic and human qualities than various other wooden marvel heroes. In the best casting since Indiana Jones Tony Stark is a witty, fresh and charming bloke. As for his supporting cast; Jeff Bridges as a villain carries a little more bite and intensity whereas Gwen plays herself. As a love interest thrown in to add sex appeal she does give a bit more for Downey Jr. to play off than most would. Iron Man is definitely the first marvel film since X-men 2 to come of age and take on board the ambitious characterisation of Batman Begins, at least to a degree.

Iron Man is in many ways different to most Marvel superheroes. Not genetically changed he has to look deep inside his intelligence during times of desperation and has to turn to his conscience when confronted with the evils of his company. As a superhero he is always himself, he just puts on his hi-tech suit to channel his heroic qualities. The majority of the films running time is devoted to Tony Stark enhancing and modifying his suit but due to Downey Jr. this is very entertaining and in no way as boring as it sounds. His presence adds to the films charm as there is not an overly frantic a pace. With amazing visuals providing glimpses of dazzling effects such as flying through near space, there is not too much of an overindulgence in action.

Although in the last twenty minutes Iron Man seems to run out of steam. Suddenly there is a showdown between Obadiah and Stark both in Iron Suits. It seems just as the film is going somewhere different and original like Batman Begins it ends up copying modern trends in the same vein as Transformers and the fantastic 4 in a severe anti-climax. It may not be a superhero film which changes or subverts the genre but it still does more than most within its laid out conventions.

TO SUM UP:
Not the best superhero film but not exactly far off, an enjoyable flick to wet our appetites for The Dark Knight. Now we have established his character bring on Iron Man 2!

A review of April

I have signed a contract which promises exclusivity to StudentBeans, so to view my article in full, please: Click Here

NEVER BACK DOWN

From ever giving into seeing this tripe

DETAILS:
Released - 4 April 2008
Certificate - 15
Running Time - 113mins
Director - Jeff Wadlow
Screenwriter - Chris Hauty
Producers - Craig Baumgarten, David Zelon
Cinematography - Lukas Ettlin
Editing - Victor Du Bois and Debra Weinfeld Music - Michael Wandmacher
Theatrical distributor - Momentum Pictures
Country - USA
Awards - MTV movie award for best fight

SYNOPSIS:
Due to a brief loss of sanity at a high school American football game rebellious teen, Jake Tyler (Sean Faris) has to move schools for his violent and seemingly uncontrollable actions. At first his new schoolmates seem friendly enough and he instantly befriends the popular Ryan McCarthy (Cam Gigandet). However the truth soon surfaces at a typical alcohol and stripper filled adolescent house party. Due to the evils of the internet his schoolmates know the true reason for Jake’s expulsion and force him to fight Ryan where he is beaten to a bloody pulp. Annoyed at being the joke of his new school Jake feels compelled to defeat Ryan at a local underground fighting tournament and show everyone who is really the boss. Persuading mixed martial arts veteran Jean Roqua (Djimon Hounsou) to coach him will be successful in gaining popularity and obtaining Ryan’s girlfriend Baja Miller (Amber Heard)?..........................who cares, really?

REVIEW:
The commonly used mantra ‘never judge a book by its cover’ is one that is used in many walks of life. Although in many circumstances this is can be applicable to cinema. When looking at the poster for Never Back Down plastered all over bus stops and city centres I was right to assume that this film was the adolescent clap trap that the poster seemed to advertise. Such a desperate marketing campaign suggests the studio’s lack of faith such in a film. With a scantily dressed women in a tight fitting yellow dress accentuating her curves whilst looked upon by two handsome but expressionless young males I was right to presume this film would be the sexist nonsense that was advertised.

With so many faults to chose from it is difficult to pick somewhere to start. As a teen angst movie Never Back Down is very poor indeed, if anyone enjoyed this film they need to take a serious look at themselves. Often we like to indulge in bad films to laugh at their absurdity but Never Back Down is not even this good for so many reasons. Even the most laid back film goer will feel let down.

What Never back down was trying to achieve was a sort of Fight Club for adolescents. The main character’s name being Tyler is more than a giveaway. Instead of this being Tyler Durden’s days at school this is in fact Fight Club without any political significance, black humour, sharp dialogue, complexity or any where near as culturally observant. Apparently all ‘cool’ American adolescents should fight each other to gain respect and win over women. By constantly referencing violence on computer screens and mobile phones the filmmakers seem to think this happy slapping plugging will appeal to the youth culture of today which is quite frankly insulting. This is a very stripped down Fight Club with no talented scriptwriting, acting, cinematography or direction to the fight scenes themselves which seem to be the whole point of the movie. There are definitely some unintentional homosexual overtones as there is a constant focus on the greased up male leads rather than any real resonance.

The casting is diabolical. All these so called high school students look old enough to teach the lessons themselves. Absolutely no one is likeable with all the characters lacking any real sense of psyche. McCarthy has no apparent reason to be evil, he tries to look mean and beat innocent people up just for the sake of it. Through the various close ups of his annoyed face in no way is he intimidating or cool, Rebel without a cause he is not. On the other side, Tyler gets angry from time to time primarily due to his fathers death which is the extent of the emotional depth to this film tries to explore. I just don’t understand why Tyler can’t just find new friends than intensely train to win this idiots respect? As well as this Never Back Down is filled to the brim with clichés. You would have thought that so many years after the Rocky series the filmmakers would have better ingenuity than to show a montage of beefing up training with the 80’s written all over it. Similarly having the most popular jock in high school going out with the most beautiful girl, jeez I have never seen characters like that before!

But predictability reaches a whole new level in the final showdown between Tyler (good) and McCarthy (evil). What I want to know is why is it in these films that no matter how long or hard the good guy has been beaten up he will always suddenly find a final surge of strength to just about defeat the bad guy? However, to make up for this, despite the fact both characters have almost killed each other they are suddenly best of friends at the end. Beat people half to death and they will respect you enough to become your friend apparently.

As you can tell the plot is extremely incoherent and makes no conceivable sense. According to screenwriter Chris Hauty; all American teenagers indulge in lesbian kissing and fighting parties. The message to this film is unbelievably offensive as everyone is driven by the mentality that you must fight to get anywhere in life. Apparently it is perfectly acceptable to gaily beat up some strangers in a fit of road rage. Fighting = popularity = sex especially when you are a teenager. Just by glamorizing and drawing attention to the happy slapping culture is no way of delving into it. Jeff Wadlow’s direction of the over stylised fighting scenes themselves lack any real punch, bloody realism or intensity. Various popular bands thrashing guitars in the soundtrack such as My Chemical Romance in no way adds any sort of tension. All in all never back down is just overloaded testosterone filled rubbish with an undercurrent of homosexualism.

TO SUM UP:
An offensive and morally bankrupt film which glamorises adolescent violence. Instead of having anything worthwhile to observe about its increasing significance in our culture Never Back Down just adds to it. A marital arts instruction DVD will be far more worth your while.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the coward Robert Ford

A few months in the life of Jesse James

DETAILS:
Released - 30 November 2007
Certificate - 15
Running Time - 153mins
Director - Andrew Dominik
Screenwriter - Andrew Dominik based on Ron Hansen's novel
Producers - Jules Daly, Dede Gardner, Brad Pitt, Ridley Scott, Tony Scott, David Valdes
Cinematography - Roger Deakins
Editing - Curtiss Clayton and Dylan Tichenor
Music - Nick Cave and Warren Ellis
Theatrical distributor - Warner Bros
Country - USA
Awards - Oscar, Golden Globe and Screen Actor's Guild Nomination for Casey Affleck as a supporting actor and Oscar win for Roger Deakins' Cinematography, Empire award for best film and various other critical awards and nomiations

SYNOPSIS:
The most notorious outlaw in American history, Jesse James (Brad Pitt), and his gang are coming to the end of their long reign. Being in the media spotlight for so long has certainly taken its toll. Having spent many years on the wrong side of the law they have grown significantly weaker mentally and physically. In the last months of Jesse James’ life his gang severely deteriorates as his associates end up either dead or arrested. With the reward on his head rapidly increasing Jesse knows his death is becoming increasingly imminent. A confused, paranoid and temperamental man the last thing Jesse expects is that the man who will put him out of his misery will be the young Robert Ford (Casey Affleck) the latest addition to his gang who has idolised Jesse since childhood.

REVIEW:
If you managed to catch The Assassination of Jesse James in 2007 then you will be in the stark minority. One of the most anticipated films of the year was given such a short release campaign, blink and you would have missed it. However, critics pining and pleading with people to see this film has kept it firmly in our minds till its DVD release.

On initial impressions this is certainly a beautifully shot film. The gorgeous settings and costuming combined with Roger Deakin’s cinematography make The Assassination of Jesse James absolutely stunning to look at. Along with Andrew Dominik’s direction, often including slightly unfocused framing, the film maintains an intriguing yet slow paced and sombre feel. The infamous train robbery scene contains some of the most iconic imagery in the past few years of cinema and Dominik’s ambiguous and mysterious plot certainly can never be accused of being predictable. Although the most appraisable aspect to this film is its authenticity. Deliberately an anti spaghetti western piece the image of Jesse James is in no way idealised. In one particular shoot out scene, the camera remains static to give a realistic and matter of fact feel instead of creating over the top action cinema. The films purpose is to separate the man from the myth in a historically accurate piece. The Assassination of Jesse James has certainly achieved this and created its own artistic style of cinema. This is more of a historical period drama than a traditional western. So why did it do so badly at the box office?

Well despite a star like Brad Pitt being onboard, who can sell tickets alone, this film is unmarketable. This is like no other western ever seen before and Brad Pitt’s role is one he rarely tackles. At first he seems to be an intimidating, larger than life figure with a significantly aged and troubled inside. He is without a doubt an interesting character, in one harrowing scene where beats up a teenager for information, he soon realises he is in fact beating himself up and questioning his methods. The problem is that Pitt seems to be guilty of his past roles and celebrity status. He is a tad unconvincing as Jesse, he looks the part but as soon as he opens his mouth he seems to be Brad Pitt in historical dress rather than the complete Jesse James package. Usually in his roles he tries to hide his age but here he is accentuating it and he cannot be taken seriously. Surprisingly it is Casey Affleck who steals the spotlight. He proves he is a talented actor in his own right and has cast away the shadow left by his older and bigger brother. A snivelling, slimy and weak Robert Ford he was deserving of his academy award nomination for best supporting actor but rightly lost out to Javier Bardem’s magnificent portrayal of a bounty hunter in the Coen’s No Country for old men. Casey Affleck has certainly proved that he has a natural talent. All the characters in this film are by no means obvious stereotypes but what they do all lack is a certain likeability.

After an hour it all becomes a little unconvincing and at times tedious. All the dialogue seems to be mumbled and there is little emotional drive given the characters circumstances. They are supposed to be hiding their inner emotions but this is not effectively done as we are not terribly bothered about what they really feel. Similarly the constant narration from Hugh Ross is not required, the characters should explain to us their story rather than an incessant school teacher voice bringing context to what feels like every scene. This self indulgent film takes far too much pride in what it has achieved rather than developing events. Not terribly gripping the Assassination of Jesse James would have benefited from some more editing. At times it feels like a dictatorial history lesson rather than a film.

By the time the film seems to develop it is far too late. At last some well needed tension comes into play in the last couple of scenes where Jesse shares a house with the Ford brothers. Jesse’s temperamental snapping leaves the brothers in a constant state of paranoia making every little aspect of life, such as eating meals at the table, uncomfortable. But the film does not end with Jesse’s death, in the films most interesting turn the Ford brothers travel around the States enacting the assassination itself as a performance in several theatres. The straining relationship between the brothers turns Charley Ford to alcoholism and Robert Ford’s inability to cope with such negative fame. Labelled as a ‘coward’ by the whole country this leads to his downfall and eventual assassination. The whole film has been setting up these scenes and by now we have all lost concentration. I recommend having a break midway through to maintain your interest for this dramatic conclusion.

TO SUM UP:
Not the perfect film we have been led to believe by various critics. Now seeing Jesse James it is obvious why it did not win any major Oscars but one for its cinematography would not have gone a miss. Although it was let down by its lengthy script, lack of editing and at time development there is a lot here still worth your consideration. At least there was a masterpiece in here, somewhere.

THERE WILL BE BLOOD

Paul Thomas Anderson proves oil runs thicker than water

DETAILS:
Released - 15 February 2008
Certificate - 15
Running Time - 158min
Director - Paul Thomas Anderson
Screenwriter - Paul Thomas Anderson based on Upton Sinclair's novel Oil!
Producers - Paul Thomas Anderson, Daniel Lupi and JoAnne Sellar
Cinematography - Robert Elswit
Editing - Dylan Tichenor
Music - Jonny Greenwood
Theatrical distributor - Buena Vista International UK Country - USA
Awards - Oscar, BAFTA, Golden Globe win for Daniel Day-Lewis and oscar win for Robert Elswit in Cinematography among countless amounts of other wins and nominations in film festivals and critic circles


SYNOPSIS:
When Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) accidentally stumbles upon some oil he soon turns from silver miner to a very successful oil prospector with an entire business empire at his feet. Ruthless, greedy and fuelled with rage Daniel will let no one come between him and his thirst for oil. On an ominous tip from Paul Sunday (Paul Dano) Plainview soon starts drilling at the impoverished Sunday ranch in Boston. By flashing around his adopted son H.W. (Dillon Freasier) Plainview sets out to exploit the poor townspeople under the illusion that he is a family man who will provide a better life for them. Although this is not as easy as he initially thought due to preacher Eli Sunday (Dano) who questions Plainview’s true intentions as a respected figure in the Christian community. As Plainview grows older his determination to succeed and become even richer brings his true inner self to the surface plunging him in a state of near madness and slowly alienating him from those closest around him.

REVIEW:

Daniel Day-Lewis is a peculiar yet intriguing character himself. At the height of his fame and critical acclaim he quit acting to pursue his lifelong dream; shoe cobbling. But he was soon brought out of early retirement when Martin Scorsese had a leading role for him in his historical epic Gangs of New York. A fairly flawed film it was Day Lewis’ dark performance as Bill the Butcher which held it together. Since then Day-Lewis has built up a reputation as the most selective actor working in Hollywood today. Only signing up to around one film a year at most you always know you are in for something special. Even the most talented of Hollywood actors can be accused of typecasting themselves by playing similar roles but Day-Lewis is truly the most versatile actor of our time, when his name is on a film we never know quite what to expect.

There will be blood is certainly no exception. A performance which is outstanding even by his standards he has totally immersed himself in this rage driven psychopath. Every slightest twitch in his facial features is planned down to the smallest detail. When he is in front of the camera he absorbs every part of his body into Daniel Plainview. In one particular scene, where he holds a gun to his on-screen brother’s head, a close up of his angry pulsating face lifts off the screen intimidating the audience to cower in their seats. Only Day-Lewis can narrow the gap between viewer and performance this far. Allegedly the original actor who played Plainview’s brother left production as he felt to intimidated by Day-Lewis and it is obvious why. To top it all off the most surprising thing about Day Lewis’ unpredictable performance is his knack for comic timing and the amount of dark humour he expertly delivers in this film.

But Daniel Day-Lewis is not the only thing brilliant about this film. He is also complimented by an effective supporting cast. Despite fairly brief screen time Paul Dano in particular has pushed his geeky teenager roles long behind him as his insane preaching certainly sends a shiver down our spine. He gives a lot here for Day-Lewis to play off. Also the music score by Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood single-handedly gives the film an atmospheric edge maintaining our state of unease. By using old fashioned instruments in a contemporary fashion his loud strings are bleeding and weeping with emotion. Such a striking film score deserved an Oscar win let alone a nomination.

Although it is due to Paul Thomas Anderson’s complete vision that all these contributing factors are brought together in one coherent work. With so much talent on board it is Anderson’s script and direction which is the true star, but this is not immediately apparent. There Will Be Blood is by no means an easy watch. It requires your complete devout attention and once you are sucked in you are completely absorbed in Daniel Plainview’s world. When the film begins the sound of loud unsettling strings drowns out your ears to the image of two vast hills of the American West, immediately creating a sense of nervousness as a very striking way to grab our attention. Then for the subsequent opening twenty minutes of the film not a word of dialogue is uttered. Through nothing but silent actions does the events progress.

With the immediate appearance of a linear plot structure and unfolding of events we are wielded into a false sense of security. There is so much more going on here beneath the apparent surface. There are a lot of underlying messages involving politics, capitalism and religion making this film a hell of a lot to digest in two hours and forty minutes. But I would quite happily sit through it again to decode its complexity. There will be blood is not the usual success story praising the American dream. Plainview’s success story takes a back seat and is never really explained as the complex relationships with those around him and the conflicts within him are at the forefront of our attention as we see his life slowly deteriorate.

With so much shocks, violence, black humour, murder, love and hate it is very hard to classify this film with a genre, is it a biopic, period drama, black comedy, epic, thriller or even western? Well whatever genre it may be, it is only once you have left the cinema that the events will begin to set in and make sense leaving you to truly appreciate the mind blowing cinema masterpiece that this is There Will Be Blood.

TO SUM UP:
An anarchic Citizen Kane that is not only one of the best films of last year but one of the greatest films of all time.

Grindhouse

An homage to the old style of cinema…sort of

DETAILS:
Released - 6 April 2007 (USA)
Certificate - 18
Running Time - 3 hours
Director/Screenwriter - Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez
Producers - Bob Weinstein and Harvey Weinstein
Cinematography - Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez
Editing - Sally Menke and Robert Rodriguez
Music - Robert Rodriguez
Theatrical distributor - Momentum Pictures
Country - USA

SYNOPSIS:
Two feature length B-Movies are combined into one double bill to replicate to modern day audiences the experience of the old 70’s Grind House style.

In the first film Death Proof Stuntman Mike (Kurt Russell) is an ex Hollywood stunt car driver with a sick obsession for young women. In his customised ‘death proof' car he relishes in arranging murderous car crashes and walking away unscathed. Although whilst preying on a group of women in Tennessee he meets his match in the form of stunt woman Zoë Bell (herself), fellow stunt woman Kim (Tracie Thoms) make-up girl Abernathy (Rosario Dawson) and B-movie Actress Lee (Mary Elizabeth Winstead).

Then in the second feature Planet Terror when an experimental bio-nerve gas is accidentally released from a remote military base into the local Texan town, many are infected turning them into flesh eating zombies. A group of survivors led by mechanic El Wray (Freddy Rodríguez) which include his machine gun legged stripper girlfriend Cherry Darling (Rose McGowan), Doctor Dakota (Marley Shelton) and the hard boiled Sheriff Hague (Michael Biehn) fight to survive and save the rest of the world from such a mass epidemic.

REVIEW:
As soon as Tarantino and Rodriguez fans heard they were both collaborating to make two separate films as part of a joint project mouth’s watered with anticipation. So much hype dominated their cult following that Grindhouse merchandise was bought under the assumption that such a film was guaranteed to be a masterpiece. However, after a surprisingly disastrous performance at the U.S. box office the hype soon died down when the Weinstein brothers chose to separate and lengthen the films into two separate pictures to make up for such a loss. Worldwide fans were in disarray, pleading to see films as one collaborative project.

Eventually when Tarantino’s Death Proof reached our screens it soon became apparent why Grindhouse was such a flop. It was not due to America’s misunderstanding of the homage, they were just unimpressed with this boring film and rightly so. This is by no means a revisionist exploitation picture but simply a very poor Tarantino film. Just by filling the film with deliberate mistakes such as the Technicolor changing to Black and white and a car abruptly disappearing from the screen due to a dodgy reel for no apparent reason does not make it an exploitation picture. These little ‘gems’ are neither amusing nor integral to the film. Under the false pretence of being a b-movie this just seems to be an excuse to show the carnage of a car crash annoyingly from several different angles.

At two hours this film is far too long and drawn out. As a single feature it definitely does not hold its own and does not feel like a film in its own right. Every character seems to talk like Quentin Tarantino. Spouting constant bullshit at an incredibly fast rate the women lack any charm and are not likeable let alone believable. Death Proof had the potential to be observant of a female culture but the entirety of the film sets up a group of women wanting to do some bizarre stunt with a car.

The last couple of action scenes at the end are mildly entertaining and Zoë Bell’s stunt work is far more impressive than her acting. But these brief scenes do not save this film from being an utter bore. Not scary, gory or remotely funny this is not a worthy homage to a dead and forgotten form of cinema. The only reason worth watching this extended version would have to be Vanessa Fertilo’s lap-dancing which was cut from the original. It seems Quentin has run out of material to steal from others and has started borrowing from his previous work. In one particular scene when the group of women are talking round a circular table his camera movement is exactly the same as the opening scene from Reservoir dogs. By relying on his old techniques with nothing new to observe about our culture Quentin has well and truly sold out. Good at writing gangster films and directing action Tarantino should stick to what he does best as he is not a versatile filmmaker at all, especially when it comes to horror.

After the utter shambles that was Death Proof I was initially a tad reluctant to see Rodriguez’s Planet Terror. Although when I actually got round to seeing this film I was pleasantly surprised at how Rodriguez’s efforts seemed to lift the whole Grindhouse experience. Whereas Tarantino took his work far too seriously Rodriguez has successfully made a film with an upbeat tongue and cheek feel to it. A true homage to b-movies Rodriguez seems to understand how poor grind house techniques can be used integrally to the film. A hot burning film strip during Cherry Darling’s saucy go-go dancing and lost footage containing important plot information enhance the cinematography and keeps focused to a consistent storyline. Similarly, by dealing with the outbreak of a lethal disease, the military and a reference to Bin Laden Rodriguez has successfully updated the genre into a modern day context with a whiff of political significance. Instead of failing to set up a story he has created an over the top hilarious action horror romp. In the same vein as the Evil dead and Bad Taste this is generally entertaining. Some parts are genuinely gory and scary but always amusing. Whereas most of Death Proof should have stayed on the cutting room floor this does feel like the full film Rodriguez originally intended to make.

But despite the fact it ticks all the boxes as a revisionist exploitation piece Planet Terror is certainly not without its flaws. The film as a whole is not a terribly original concept and the over the top action scenes do become rather tiresome towards the end.

TO SUM UP:
Overall there is a feel to these films which is ostensibly fake. An attempt to bring back a genre that nobody really wanted it all seemed fairly pointless really.