Grindhouse (Planet Terror & Death Proof)

A chick with a gun for a leg. What a great idea for a movie.

“Grindhouse,” billed as a double feature, is supposed to be pals Quentin Tarantino and Richard Rodriguez’s homage to pulp cinema of the ‘70s. To be honest, I don’t know much about pulp cinema of the ‘70s, because I wasn’t old enough to get myself to the theater then. But then I’m going to guess that you, oh average moviegoer, don’t know much about pulp cinema of the ‘70s either, so we’re on equal ground. We’ll just have to take the movies for what they are, which, really, is what we’d do anyway, isn’t it?

The problem is this: both movies reminded me of pulp cinema of the ‘90s. And if pulp cinema hasn’t changed that much, then why bother paying homage to it? Is it just an excuse to make a bad movie, because then you can say, “it’s supposed to be bad! It’s bad on purpose! That’s what makes it good!” Yeesh.

Tarantino’s contribution, “Death Proof,” almost functions as its own double feature; about halfway through it basically starts over and covers the same ground again, except much better this time. It’s a story about a guy who kills pretty girls with his car, and the pretty girls who get revenge, and the first half isn’t really about anything. Or maybe it’s about a lap dance. The girls are very beautiful and long legged, and the killer is very charming and charismatic. And then he kills them. This kind of setup could’ve taken place perfectly leisurely in the first 20 minutes, but instead, it takes an hour. Then, we are presented with another set of pretty, long-legged girls. Except that two of these girls are stunt women, and one of them carries a gun. And the dialogue’s better, sharper, funnier. And there is tension even before the psycho killer gets involved, highlighted by a white-knuckles scene in which they play a game called “Ship’s Mast” with a white Ford Galaxy (you know, like the one in “Vanishing Point.”) Then the killer comes after them, the engines roar, the cars collide, and someone gets a taste of his own medicine. By the end of “Death Proof,” you’re a fan of this “Grindhouse” homage to the ‘70s thing, but still wondering – what was that first half about? Why was it even there?

[YouTube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cmFIwda9NE]

Richard Rodriguez’ half, “Planet Terror,” faces a whole different set of problems. Its biggest problem is that it’s a zombie movie. Somebody should’ve called the Spy Kids headquarters and let him know that, actually, several zombie movies have been made lately, and every one of them pays homage to campy horror flicks from the ‘70s. In fact–newsflash– “Dawn of the Dead,” the big daddy of ‘70s campy horror flick, was recently remade. And the remake was actually pretty good. So sorry, Rich, you’re not going to have nostalgia on your side. “Planet Terror” won’t get compared to some warm fuzzy memory of a stinky theater on the East side you went to when you’re 12, it’s going to get compared to that movie that came out last year in surround sound at the multiplex. So how does it compare? Not good.

Not good in just about every conceivable way. “Dawn of the Dead” was campier, and sharper in its social satire. “28 Days Later” was gorier. “Shaun of the Dead” was funnier, by a mile; “Land of the Dead” was more violent with better action. I can say this: “Planet Terror” is, like all of Rodriguez’s movies, more manic than the others. As always, he tries to cram in so many characters, subplots, and storylines that you want to pop a Ritalin into your DVD player. And it has a chick with a gun for a leg, which might be the most ridiculous thing you’ll see in a (zombie) movie this year. But generally, it just blends away into all the others, offering nothing really new or interesting – or even old and interesting. Town gets infected, zombies appear and eat flesh, zombies get blown away by guys (and gals) with big guns. Throw in a dash of government conspiracy and season with redneck/latino/stripper stereotypes, and voila – Zombie Movie. Yawn.

So here’s what it boils down to: Quentin Tarantino made another Tarantino movie, centering on badass characters and sharp, profanity-laden dialogue. Rodriguez made another Rodriguez movie, in which a lot of stereotypical people shoot a lot of guns, and a lot of things blow up, mostly for no convincing reason. Half of Tarantino’s movie is very good; little of Rodriguez’s is at all memorable (except for that chick with a gun for a leg.) Which means that about a quarter of this double feature is really worth your time. Have fun. Don’t get hurt. And watch your language.

Recommended

• For Guy’s Night Out, if such a thing exists.
• for fans of Tarantino/Rodriguez.
• for “so bad it’s good” viewing.
• if you’ve been wondering when Kurt Russell would get back to playing badasses.

Not Recommended

• if the last action film you saw was “The Bourne Ultimatum.”
• if when you hear that a movie’s “stimulating,” you think they mean intellectually.
• if you’re more interested in story and suspense than in visual style and wit.