ViewGuide

Created Oct 10, 2014 07:03PM PST • Edited Oct 10, 2014 07:05PM PST

1. Quality

2. Summary

   Good 3.0

   Death Proof starts off slow and then…well when it picks up, boy does it pick up. But in all honesty this is probably the most indulgent Quentin Tarantino has ever been as a filmmaker. When people speak of directors, they like to highlight their ups and downs as well as their stylistic fluorishes. not only that, but they also spotlight a director at his most self indulgent. for James Cameron, that moment was likely Avatar (avatar 2 in 2016 will eclipse that), for Peter Jackson i’d argue it was King Kong (did it need to be 3 hours long?), for Michael Bay it … i don’t know, Pain and Gain (which i like because it Is so Bay). Tarantino’s is Death Proof. Its so full of references to movies gone by (every second can be seen elsewhere) and chock full of ideas combbled together to make a “cohesive but not because grindhouse doesnt need to be” narrative that you could practically feel the “yes men” patting him on the back and saying “brilliant”. That being said, when this came out in 2007 with Robert Rodriguez’ “planet Terror”, i preferred this oddball story of a man killing women with a stunt car to the more structurally sound zombie flick. I enjoyed the absence of narrative strength because somehow it didnt take you out of the story. It was simple fun; silly even. Plus the ladies were easy on the eyes, the soundtrack was wonderful, and Kurt russell was badass as Stuntman Mike. Part of a minority at the time, i preferred Death Proof to Planet Terror and even considered it one of Tarantino’s best ventures, mostly due to the bravery of stepping outside of the typical borders of moviedom. PHEW! Nostalgia is both a gift and a curse. The movie you LOVED can be BAD years later. Upon a revisit to the movie I still found it good but much preferred the first part to the second (it essentially is designed to look like 2 films featuring similar elements sewn together. A strategy used to make many a schlock in the bygone era) and even found it a bit much during the second part simply because i preferred the first half. Which brings me to come to the conclusion that Death Proof is half of a great movie and half of a decent movie; which half you prefer is up to your tastes but the film is divisive within its own running time.

4. Acting

   Really Great 4.5

   Performances across the board are wonderful. Some of them almost devolve (or evolve depending upon how you perceive the intentions of the filmmaker) into overacting, but never so much that it detracts from the film as a whole. With a cast like Rosario Dawson, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Rose McGowan, Zoe Bell, Vanessa Ferlito, and of COURSE Kurt Russell, anything less than good performances would be something of a shocker. Even the moments when the acting does delve into laughable, it is at least helped by the standard whip smart dialogue and the unconventional pacing. Special kudos to Kurt russell, as his stuntman Mike is amazing and the movie quite possibly wouldn’t work without the performance. The methods to where he is menacing with a devilish grin and flash of the eyes and yet warming at the same time…its obvious that hes up to no good and like Kaa from The Jungle Book, you cant help but be pulled in by the charms and hypnosis. One of his many great performances and possibly one of his best. Id love to see him work with Tarantino again.

5. Male Stars Really Great 4.5

6. Female Stars Really Great 4.5

7. Female Costars Really Great 4.5

8. Male Costars Really Great 4.5

10. Film

    Very Good 3.5

    Tarantino’s direction and writing are always up to the quality weve come to expect, but this movie is different in many ways that both work and dont work. the pacing (especially the jarring halfway point where it jumps rails to an entirely different story), the stylized “gritty” edits, the (to some) laborious nature of the first 45 minutes leading up to the first major action of the movie, the relentless bullheadedness on Tarantino’s part to refuse pulling the camera away during that lengthy chase scene (which is brilliantly done but on repeat viewings can be tiresome to some), and the worst part…

    the fetishes. Feet, close-ups, slow pans and entire scenes of dialogue that fill the room to just let the actors go. In most films this is the greatest strength of quentin’s style, but the clashing of styles to create this “homage” is possibly the only thing that takes you out of the immersion (aside from that halfway marker. yikes!). the first part had more of the Tarantino “free” style of just letting actors go, and while it is my favorite half…it is also the least likea grindhouse film in that it feels so Tarantino that without the edits you’d never get the feeling of being taken to another generation of filmmaking. the second part features the same fetishes but pulls away to become a classic dirty 70’s car movie. Almost makes you feel as if he didn’t want to give in completely to the style he was attempting to pay tribute to because he couldn’t resist reminding people that it was in fact a "Quentin Tarantino movie.’

11. Direction Very Good 3.5

12. Play Very Good 3.5

13. Music Very Good 3.5

14. Visuals Very Good 3.5
15. Content

16. Edge

    Sordid 3.3

    This may be the tamest of the filmmakers movies, in that despite the overt sexual speak, implications, a WONDERFUL lapdance (and the song of choice. yowza!), the language, and the violence (which is brutal in a different way than expected. Real and yet coiffed to a perfection that felt disingenuine yet within its realm), and yet the language is toned back as far as cursing is concerned (first half anyway), the sexual intonation is more spoken and insinuated than digested (i refuse to take that word back despite it being a terrible description of sex in film. bahaha!), and the violence is styled to fit the film rather than be a 100% realistic depiction of how harsh the world is. to say a Quentin Tarantino is tame is like saying a Fast and Furious movie is quiet, but this truly is.

17. Sex Erotic 3.0

18. Violence Brutal 3.5

19. Rudeness Profane 3.5

21. Reality

    Surreal 2.5

    Ha. ok. The first 45 minutes are a realistic albeit movie hyper-realistic depiction of girls on a road trip and stopping in a bar and having fun. Meet guys, enjoy drinks, etc. The moment where things turn they become a lot less realistic; it stays grounded but not entirely. The second half plays that same sleight of hand: girls have fun and road trip. Hang out, drive, laugh and joke, etc. And that moment when it turns it becomes a lot less realistic and plays with convention just enough to keep the “oh bullshit!” factor from creeping up. silly in places? oh yeah. but with the feeling that is POSSIBLE. Thats a tough line to tread, notably with one thats wearing its references on its sleeves as recklessly as this film.

22. Circumstantial Surreal 3.0

23. Biological Surreal 2.6

24. Physical Glib 2.0