sorry this is such a long entry but if you’re gonna sit through over 3 hours of ‘grindhouse,’ reading this takes no longer than blow drying your hair… if you’re still doing that sorta thing. ‘grindhouse’ is not a bad movie. but why does quentin tarantino think he can act? he’s like the pick-up artist (who always strikes out) at the neighborhood bar with nothing going for him but a big ego to disguise his small dick, no style, lousy pick-up lines and terrible looks. furthermore, he doesn’t know when to hang it up for good, playing cameo roles. (hitchcock had the wisdom of not overstaying his welcome by making brief silent cameos in his films, and he is probably a lot more amusing to watch than tarantino.) plus, tarantino’s not a very believable looking character actor and can barely say his lines without stuttering or letting spit fly out of his mouth onto the other actors he plays opposite. tarantino is just taking away a role and a paycheck from a starving bit-part actor, needing a big brake to launch a career. who else would cast tarantino in a cameo besides robert rodriguez?
and speaking of rodriguez, will he ever use his high level of skillful mimicking and direct something besides dumb fun, or at least add something new to dumb fun besides a flawless but heartless execution of craftsmanship? in her future roles, it should be a requirement that rose mcgowan only utter one word lines. she definitely has camera presence but she can’t deliever a line (anymore than she can help herself from wearing red lipstick or having a pale complexion) without betraying what a weak actress she is. it also got pretty annoying when all the simulated analog
glitches kept cropping up throughout, which distracted from watching the movie… being playful or emulating the authenticity of a beat up movie print has its limits, guys. i think the trailers and theater messages throughout the movie, plus the posters in the theater lobby, get that point across just 
fine. besides, the car duel in the final half of ‘death proof’ looked absolutely stunning in daylight photography, especially since it was not marred by any glitches and was shot live rather than created with cgi. however, i did enjoy tarantino’s injury-to-the-eye moment during ‘planet terror’ and would have loved it even more if he got impaled in the throat or better yet, in the mouth instead. so, we wouldn’t have to listen to him anymore on the dvd extras of ‘chungking express’ or ‘hero’ bragging about how he discovered those films or name dropping all the films he loves. high five to whoever came up with that scenario for the fate of tarantino’s rapist—that person must have known i would truly appreciate it! and why does tarantino think he is black when he writes dialogue? would the cool black kids in high school let him be part of their inner circle? could he even fit in posing and just get by name dropping all the 1970s stax r&b slow jams (that no one remembers anymore or are too young to remember nowadays anyway) and jive talking? can he even dribble? or even make a free throw? or will he kick ass or get his ass kicked in a fist fight? or can he not live without eating chicken? or does he use activator for jerry curls? or breakdance or rap? (actually, scratch that… i don’t care to hear tarantino rap or see him breakdance either.) btw, as a teenager would you have been intimidated by tarantino if he got in your face yelling with his pussy voice to take your lunch money? not me.
all the women in ‘death proof’ sounded like tarantino trying to be sassy. but rosario dawson, zoe bell and tracie thoms really inhabited their characters and took ownership with their top notch performances of lovely hard-ass (but bitchy) ladies with very similar taste and attitudes as tarantino’s toward pop culture and life. transcending their grindhouse antecendents and elevating them above tarantino stock characterizations—i ate their shit up everytime they were on screen because of how likeable they are. (when tarantino’s camera circles and snakes around them at the diner, it’s as though we are the quiet friend sitting at their table, just listening.) ditto, for
old schoolers kurt russell (right on, snake plissken!), michael biehm, jeff ‘lawnmower man’ fahey (who i never liked until this role) and danny trejo as ‘the wrong mexican to fuck with’ being a joy to watch.tanrantino’s strongest suite happens to also be his biggest weakness and that is the screen/sound time he gives to his dialogue. it’s a nice touch because it’s the quickest way for us to get to know the characters, but it also shows tarantino’s preference for an inert plot. so, it seems like he is padding his running time with long scenes of conversation, consisting of characters rationalizing their attitudes about life and esoteric pop culture references (which one cannot fully appreciate if not familiar with them) because he has nothing for the characters to do. however, ‘jackie brown’ is an excellent example of tarantino reining in his tendencies and fusing his colorful dialogue with an active plot, beautifully working in tandem like a theater’s movie projector and sound system do to screen a movie for us. (probably because elmore leonard’s novel gave him a plot to play off of, which is why ‘jackie brown’ is a top notch film.)
my new screen crush is marley shelton… this the first thing i ever saw her in. i am glad i saw ‘grindhouse’ to discover her; she was worth every cent of what i never paid on my free pass. she’s one fuckin’ hot mama-sita… my hands broke out in a cold sweat and started quivering everytime she was onscreen, plus my leg started wiggling on its own too, once she was running around in high heels and that skimpy sleeveless spaghetti strapped top.
all in all, i did enjoy and liked ‘grindhouse’ but you know i wasn’t going to give tarantino and rodriguez a freebie hall pass without ripping them first. besides my sarcasm is more amusing than my idolatry i have been told.
