ReelReviews #15: Grindhouse (2007)

Standard

APRIL 7-11, 2013 SCREENING: “GRINDHOUSE” MOVIES (2007-Present)
I watched a series of five films over two weeks ago, and then spent another week mulling over how the heck I would review five different films that are meant to be seen as a package deal. I’ve put it off until I reached a solution: write one review that its own five segment mini-reviews, just the movies its analyzing. You see, the basic concept from directors Robert Rodriquez and Quintin Tarantino was that they would each do a cheesy, low-budget, trashy movie that resembled the type of schlock you’d get in the ’60s and ’70s, and package the movies together as a “double feature” to watch back-to-back in a theater, complete with fake trailers and commercials between movies, and intentionally grainy, scratchy film to replicate stuff that was thrown together. After the double feature came out, it inspired three movie silly “grindhouse” type movie spinoffs. Did they succeed in this strange little parody/homage? Well, yes and no.

 

PLANET TERROR (2007)
Planet Terror is basically a “zombie movie”. I use the term in quotes because its made to look like a movie from an era where they probably wouldn’t call it a zombie movie (as the George H. Romero variety hadn’t become the definitive image of a zombie yet) and what’s more, the movie is actually about some kind of extremely grotesque mutated humans, rather than undead corpses eating human flesh. They do eat people, though, and it’s a heck a lot of more fun than people find in a lot of “modern” zombie movies like World War Z. The poster image of the girl with a machine gun for a leg is certainly exploited for all its worth in this movie, and even though they use modern CGI, the concept and execution definitely mimics the feel of a old low-budget garbage movie. There’s lot of extreme over-the-top violence as well, and this film certainly brought a smile to my face because it made me think back to the stupidest set of 70s horror movies I watched, like Laserblast (1978), along with some terrible blaxplotation movies of the same era. Where I think the film fell short were two elements where it simply ignored its own premise: 1) The movie was too long for a “Grindhouse” movie, and certainly as one half of a double feature that you’re supposed to watch back-to-back in one sitting. It should have been between 75-85 mins., tops. Second, although intentionally made it to look like it was shot in the 70s, the movie takes place in “modern times” and uses modern technology and so forth. I found that distracting. They went through so much trouble to give us scratchy looking 16mm film, why the cell phones that reminded us that this movie was not made in the era it pretends to be?
**1/2 out of ****

 

DEATH PROOF (2007)
Death Proof is the second half of the original “Grindhouse” experience, and considered the much weaker film of the two. Some people have even gone as far as to say its Tarantino’s weakest movie. But in many ways, I actually enjoyed it more than the first film. Like Planet Terror, the grainy film and ridiculous opening credits immediately make it look like you’re watching some piece of crap made around 1972 or so, but instead of just being an over-the-top splatter film, this one has something completely lacking in the first: atmosphere Apparently the “in-joke” is that it’s supposed to look like two different movies spliced together (which they actually did for really bad MST3k fodder like “They Saved Hitler’s Brain”), but the fact its obviously Kurt Russell in both halves of the movie – playing the same role – ruins this effect. As for me, I loved the first half the movie (where had a very good, creepy “70s stalker movie” vibe like I was watching The Last House on the Left or something), and I was indifferent/bored by the second half, which had a “70s stunt race car movie” feel. To convey that its “Two different movies” the second half was almost grain-free, and that didn’t work for me at all because you could tell it was shot on modern film equipment. Again, the same flaws from the first film were present, and even more apparent: the running time was too long, and it was obvious taking place in 2007. Nevertheless, I consider this film to be its own little modern cult classic, and the lap-dance scene in the movie’s first half is unforgettable
*** out of ****

 
HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN (2011)
Machete is by far the better known and more popular of the Grindhouse spinoffs, but for me there was only one true heir to the original project, and that’s Hobo with a Shotgun. It was based off one of the “fake trailers” from the original 2007 double-feature, and expanded into its own feature length movie. Ironically, its got a completely different director (the little known Jason Eisener) and a different actor from the 2007 fake trailer (in this case, the far better known Rutgar Hauer), but I felt it was the most faithful to the whole grindhouse experience: It looks incredibly low-budget, trashy, over-the-top, gory, and tongue-in-cheek hilarious In many ways, this was actually more faithful to the concept, and really nailed the feel of a movie from another era. For example, the music soundtrack sounds exactly like some MIDI synthesizer score from the early 80s, making it seem like you’re watching a lost John Carpenter movie. I’d say the only jarring part of the this is because the earlier Grindhouse movies looked like they were attempting to copy films from the late 60s/early 70s, whereas Hobo definitely looks and feels like a mid 80s movie. Despite having no sci-fi elements and having a storyline more along the lines of Death Wish, Hobo With a Shotgun is pretty much the spiritual successor of 1987’s Robocop. If you liked Robocop, you’ll love with (complete with the excessive violence and biting satire). In fact, forget about watching the remake of Robocop and watch this instead, as its far more true to what the original Robocop was aiming for. This may be the best of the “Grindhouse” movies. Be prepared to be grossed out, offended, annoyed, and mesmerized by it all.
*** out of ****

 
MACHETE (2010)
I think Machete is probably the most financially successful of the five Grindhouse movies, but it was one of the least creative, in my opinion. I still liked it, but I had a blast with the first three movies and I felt that was missing here. Despite this being directed by Robert Rodriquez, it is not a Grindhouse movie. It based on one of the fake trailers from one of his Grindhouse movies, and the opening credits even continue the same style, but it quickly becomes a very modern Hollywood movie. The only difference between this and a typical action comedy is that the script here is still obviously a satire of the whole genre. The actors play it straight, but Lindsay Lohan is here for one reason and its not to display her acting talent (ironically, she finally gets naked in the movie but you can’t see anything). Robert de Niro even shows up here, playing a buffoonish right-wing politician. There has been much talk about the movie having a liberal agenda, and I would agree that political conservatives will probably not like the film’s storyline or message, but the film is just too silly and frivolous for me to take offense as any kind of preachy liberal sneer It has some genuinely funny laughs, and its quick paced and quick witted, but nowhere near on the level of the three real Grindhouse movies. The “fake” trailer for Machete is better than the real one, because the real one is just another typical Robert Rodriquez movie like Once Upon a Time in Mexico, or Spy Kids. The best scene may be Lindsay Lohan’s slutty character disguising herself as a nun. Oddly enough, it disgusted me, intrigued me, and had me cracking up at the same time.
** out of ****

 

MACHETE KILLS (2013)
The latest, last, and least of the films spawned by the whole Grindhouse concept. Naturally, it’s a sequel to Machete, but the best part of this movie was yet another “Fake trailer” for what eventually could become the real third movie: “Machete Kills Again… In Space” It cracked me up and every scene in the “trailer” was better than the real scenes in this movie, and made me wish that the still unconfirmed third film was the sequel instead of this movie. The actual film has plenty of action and a brisk pace, but goes nowhere and just isn’t very funny or interesting. Instead of de Niro like the first movie, this time we have Mel Gibson showing up in a “major role”, and it actually made me feel kind of sorry for him because his career has been reduced to doing this pathetic movie. Machete Kills is the opposite of the original intent of Grindhouse: rather than be made to intentionally parody the look of low-budget, crappy films, It’s a big budget, slick film that unintentionally looks very crappy. The best part of the movie may be former child actress Alexa Vega now appearing as a smoking hot, bikini-clad voluptuous adult character, but I got so bored with the movie I think I missed that part. I give it points for trying, but its just throwing a lot of crap at me, and thankfully, nothing is sticking.
* 1/2 out of ****

RetroReviews #27: Enchanted (2007)

Standard

 

c52bad8daee1d014d6d883f9379e13e20ddc46e3

JUNE 6, 2013 SCREENING: ENCHANTED (2007)

Nobody does a better job parodying Disney movies than Disney, and perhaps the finest example of that is the 2007 film Enchanted. I found this film to be extremely entertaining and masterfully made because it does something sharp with a now tired premise. Enchanted is yet another film where a cartoon character leaves their crazy universe behind and enters the “real world” (which usually means New York, and does in this case as well) through an inner-dimensional gateway.

Now that this premise has been done with every famous cartoon character from The Smurfs to Rocky and Bullwinkle, it’s hard to think of a time where a movie ever did it and kept the audience engrossed in the story. That’s where Enchanted comes in. The main character in this film is a composite character of every Disney princess you’ve ever seen, her suitor/rescuer is a composite version of every Disney prince you’ve ever seen, and the villain/main antagonist of the movie is a composite of Disney’s greatest female baddies, like if you put the evil stepmother from Cinderella, the evil queen from Snow White, Maleficent from Sleeping Beauty, Ursula from The Little Mermaid, andCruella de Vil from 101 Dalmatians in a gene splicer together, added steroids, and hit frappe.

The best parodies don’t come up with an obvious one-dimensional copy of the source material, but manage to get the tone and characterization so spot on that their parody version could work in a legitimate version of that story. A fine example is the evil villain in the film Galaxy Quest, General Sarris. The film is a parody of Star Trek, but he actor plays it straight, and he’s such a cruel and vicious evil giant grasshopper-like alien that you could see him working as the villain in a real Star Trek movie. In fact, he’s actually better and more effective than most of the villains from real Star Trek movies. The same is true of the antagonist in Enchanted. She is the evil Queen Narissa, portrayed by Susan Saradon as deadly serious – and she’s extremely effective at being a purely evil, cold-hearted hateful bitch, and is extremely threatening and frightful character for a PG rated film.

One element why Enchanted works better than the countless other “cartoon character comes to the real world” films is that Princess Giselle doesn’t remain in cartoon form when she enters the “real world”. She instead becomes a real flesh-and- blood human being (played by Amy Adams), albeit while retaining all her ridiculous cartoon nature and personality. (Ralph Baski came up with a similar concept for his 1992 adult-orientated film Cool World, but it failed to live up to the potential that it does here). Anyone else from Giselle’s universe who enters the “Real world” over the course of the film also becomes a flesh-and-blood real life being, which can extremely chilling in the case of the evil queen, or extremely funny in case of her cute animal companions (squirrels, etc.) joining her in New York. Once they are in the city and interact with “normal” people, the characters continue to behave and react exactly as they would in their cartoon fantasy, giving us some hilarious moments when they randomly burst into song until someone shuts them up, and so forth.

One of the more remarkable elements is that the original pitch for Enchanted wasn’t something Disney did in-house. Instead, they purchased a script for a more “R-rated” type film that had the same basic structure, and reworked it as a “family friendly” film, while keeping the same biting satire mocking their own brand of films. The first 10 minutes of the movie takes place in the world of the animated Disney princess, and the creators of Enchanted did an amazing job managing to stuff in every standard and over-the-top cliché you can find in their “Walt Disney animated masterpieces”. Once in the real world, they also managed to slyly insert numerous references and in-jokes about Disney movies – for example, no less than four Disney princess voice-over actresses have cameos in this movie as characters in the “real world”.

The film is not without flaws – while the ending with the evil Queen transforming into a dragon and fighting the prince is effective, it’s exactly what the audience would expect and doesn’t work as a parody because its more of a cop out to resolve the story than a homage. The film could have also used an additional 10-15 minutes of running time to flesh out some of its plot points, and it suffers from the politically correct representation of the world in modern Disney films. Still, this is one movie where I have to whole heartily agree with critics and audiences that Enchanted got the praise it deserved. It grossed over $340 million on a $85 million budget, won the 2007 Saturn Award for Best Fantasy Motion Picture, received two nominations at the 65th Golden Globe Awards and three nominations at the 80th Academy Awards. Given all that, I’m surprised the film didn’t receive more “buzz” at the time it was released. It’s not a masterpiece, but as far as the genre its doing and the storyline its trying to tell, this movie is as good as it gets.

*** ½ out of ****