thomas4cinema

As apparently there is hardly any chance of getting the full Grindhouse experience now that it busted out of cinemas and the first generation of related DVDs is being published seperately, what the hell, start with one of them and see where to find the other and the trailers later. So Death Proof came along my way first, and even if I had preferred Planet Terror to be the first one, I took it and I watched it and I enjoyed it. Until it was halfway through.

The very strange thing about this project is that apparently the producers / initiators, whoever, in any case: Tarantino knows about the benefit of brevity and the economics of narration. That’s why they made two short features and strung them together, wasn’t it? Now once you start from that idea, and remember the ups and downs of the “Four Rooms” piece back yonder, and when – while you have all this in you mind – you approach a point in your script where the story was fun and cool, the chicks were hot and dead, and there is nothing else to be told… why don’t you just bloody stop there and then, call it a day, put it into the same shoe box as the Planet Terror script and see whether you can make some nice 2:20 / 2:30 thing out of it – short feature, trailers, long feature? More marketable, more fun, less irritating, less depressing. Why the hell do we have to live through a second run of the same story in “Death Prood”, that is not even written as well as the first time around? If you have to use both, turn them around! The second one is boring and uninspiring, did noone ever tell him that?

Anyway: that flick shows that Mr Tarantino is in for some renewal of carreer plan, because I do not believe that the Weinsteins will let him get away with referring to the good old times forever. It costs too much money and reputation.

by the way: Salon.com writes why “Inglorious Bastards” will not have Stallone, Willis and Schwarzenegger in it… also see at Variety.com.