Grindhouse
During filming, Josh Brolin asked Robert Rodriguez for a video camera so he could shoot his audition tape for No Country for Old Men (2007). He ended up having his audition shot with the million dollar digital camera they were using for the picture, directed by Quentin Tarantino, and with Marley Shelton reading the part of his wife in the scene. The tape was then scored and edited by Rodriguez before being sent to Joel Coen and Ethan Coen. Their first response on viewing the tape was to ask who lit the set.,Because 'Grindhouse' is a homage to the old low budget films of the 70's and 80's, there are many deliberate errors by the filmmakers to give an authentic Grindhouse feel.,Stuntman Mike: Do I frighten you?
[Arlene nods]
Stuntman Mike: Is it my scar?
Arlene: It's your car.
Stuntman Mike: Yeah, I know. I'm sorry. It's my mom's car.,Just below the listing for Quentin's personal chef is the following credit: "Personal Chef for Mr. Rodriguez - Robert Rodriguez",Tarantino's segment, Death Proof, was lengthened for showing at the Cannes Movie Festival. Most of the film's scratches (used in Grindhouse) were also cut out.,Edited into Planet Terror (2007),Grindhouse (Main Title)
Written by Robert Rodriguez,I'm commenting on the double feature version of this rather than the separate films. I do have quite separate impressions of these but I do believe that the original intent was that they be seen together, and with all the interstitial matter.

When you approach films from certain filmmakers, you do it on a basis of trust. Its a matter of how willing you are to allow yourself to be.

Rodriguez has never betrayed my trust, so each time I encounter him, I am willing to play the game by his rules. That allows me to take more chances about the balances he chooses to make. Its a matter of yielding in the collaboration, so when he makes a cinematic joke or comment, I don't fight it. Trust.

In this case, its sharpened by this phenomenon I notice a lot: he's directing a lover. It is obvious of course, but even if it weren't, it drives him to make ever stronger chances, on the edge of his emotional horizon.

I think these two factors would make me like what he has done here regardless of all other factors. I do see the interior nature of the cinematic world. I do settle into the thick web of narrative threads. I do cheer when his love kicks ass.

But the opposite is the case with Quentin. I cannot trust him. It isn't just because he's made some bad films. Its because he sets himself aside. He doesn't include the viewer: he preaches. All of the cinematic effects are delivered as monologues not as a collaboration. So we are never in on the joke, never in on extending the nature of the world.

So I truly disliked his film. Sure, there's an empowerment story, and a sort of male's view of female bonding. But its all from the outside: the current of fate, the access to the group, the folding of all the principle characters being in the movie business. The actual camera-work of the stunts is from a discrete viewer, where Rodriguez puts the camera jumping around in the midst of the action and the emotional space.

Both films play with the joke of what constitutes good and evil. But they themselves represent this as well.

I will give Rodriguez a 3 and Tarantino a 1, but having Tarantino to have to go through increases the value of Rodriguez' effort. Bless him. I hope he does well with this woman.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.,