This person, OTIS BOONE is incorrect and obviously has no decent level of education under his belt. Why do people who know nothing about anything always say what is on their little minds.

Parni Wolf, New York, USA CALIFORNIA

I was lucky enough to watch the grindhouse double bill while on holiday in U.S and was looking forward to seeing it again in the U.K. Me and my wife thought it was an excellent double bill.

Peter Woods, Leicester, U.K

300 was pure spectacle with breathtaking battle scenes and glorious cinematography. Despite what you may think of the brainspace of the avaerage cinemagoer, the fact remains that they want to go and see something entertaining. 300 has shown the rest of the world where cinema is going. Just because they don't want tedious exposition, unconvincing relationships and unlikeable characters doesn't make them dumb.

faliklunj, prague, zizkov

Is there a chance that yet again it will be the Brits that will save this movie? Wasn't us that "got" Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction and made them huge. The problem with both Tarantino and Rodriguez is that underneath all the violence and homage to genres, there is a hell of a lot of intelligence that underlies the movies that they make. Would we know that the film we are watching is a film in two parts? Of course we would. Is it that its the intelligent part of these two movies that our cousins are missing.....?

Paul Carter, Milton Keynes, England

"Also, Octavis: You Brits have no place to talk about "corrupt foreign power . . . trying to crush a smaller independent civilisation." Just take a look at your recent history. IE: Northern Ireland, Pakistan/India, just about the the whole continent of Africa, etc., etc., etc. For all of America's faults we have never destroyed or tried to destroy other civilizations through colonization. We just end up cleaning up Europe's messes.

Chris Page, Letchworth Garden City, Hertfordshire

The biggest problem with Grindhouse was that nobody knew it was coming out. I believe Tarantino is the most talented filmmaker going, and am a huge movie fan in general, and I didn't know the movie was coming out until the day before. I don't have TV, but am online quite a bit and didn't hear anything about it. Most of the people I work with would ask "When does that come out?" when I would tell them to see it, even as recently as a week ago. The marketing was absolute rubbish... I loved the film, however.

Robb Witmer, Boulder, CO

This is a SUMMER film experience. An Easter weekend release was stupid. I want to see it with my adult kids when we all have time to kill - which would not be during the school year whn they are away at college!

S Thompson, Minneapolis,

Having seen Grindhouse, a trimmed version and a better TITLE the public could relate to would have helped at the BO- such as "Back to Back- Double Feature" or "Double Barrel" ?? Grindhouse as a term was too obscure to
generate interest. But you have to admire what these guys were trying to do! Planet Terror succeeded, it was good fun and kept your interest. Robert aimed for over the top and got there. Trailers were great fun too. But then too much drop off and slack time in Tarantino's part, Kurt was just
GREAT but didn't get enough screen time! Too much time on both sets of women, annoying dialogue that led to absolutely nothing. Tarantino fans can tout Deathproof but
with even dedicated AUDIENCES it failed to hold their INTEREST. More Stuntman Mike and car scenes would have saved it. Just depressing that people would rather see Are We Done Yet or Perfect Stranger etc .... YUCK

Kris, Houston , TX

I just saw "Grindhouse" this afternoon. I think the biggest problem with the film is the discontinuity between Tarantino and Rodriguez's styles. They may be best friends, but they are really very different kinds of filmmakers. "Planet Terror" is a essentially a spoof. Funny in parts, but ultimately shallow. "Death Proof" has plenty of jokes in it, but it is still a solid piece of filmmaking in its own right. Notice that most of the fake scratches and glitches on the film go away in the second half of "Death Proof". Tarantino knows he has a good film, and he can't bring himself to tamper with the image for the sake of a joke. It will be interesting to see what he does with a WWII film. Virtually his entire aesthetic is based on references to post WWII pop culture. I'm curious to see if he can maintain an entire feature without being able to reference a single rock and roll song or 70's TV show.

Darin , Denver, Colorado, USA

I saw Grindhouse this week and was wildly entertained. So was the audience. I think I'll see it again.

The worst critics are those stupid enough to fall into the trap which says, "Big box office equals success; low box office equals failure." These are not critics at all, but lowgrade pop culture newspaper writers, hired to fill space in between advertisements.

By box office standards, some of the greatest films ever are failures.

I do hope Tartantino branches out beyond violence and gore, and maybe one day he will. But what he is making is helping our generation appreciate thousands of unknown films from past decades, and therefore the art of filmmaking itself. Quentin's films are great popcorn experiences + master classes in film and art history.

Paul, Kew Gardens, NYC USA

'Cuts out a duct taped man's eyes' Once again another comment by someone who clearly hasn't seen the film yet is 'appalled and disgusted' by the level of violence used.

Tarantino's films are humorous and intelligent. It is all hype. Reservoir Dogs - apparently one of the most violent films in cinema history - involves a handful of killings, most of which are shocking and affecting. Trash such as 300 which feauture thouands of mindless slayings are the real desensitisers.

The majority of people are unfortunately just too stupid to appreciate pretty much anything worthwhile. Those who enjoy them should keep them quietly to themselves and leave the public happily lapping up Wild Hogs and Pirates of the Carribean.

Patrick, Manchester, UK

Maybe we're sick of Tarentino's love of gore and violence for violence's sake. Since I saw the scene fro Resevoir Dogs, where the camera cuts away as someone is dancing to Gerry Rafferty and cutting out a duct taped man's eyes, well....he ain't helping our society one bit with crap like that. I've seen enough.

Brian, Denver,

I'm not necessarily a fan of cheesy B-movies, and I still thoroughly enjoyed all that Grindhouse had to offer. Both films were really good and I would see them again in an instant. Sure, it could have been shorter, but I am tremendously disappointed in the public non-response to this film. I can't believe how few people knew about it, I can't tell you how many people I had to explain the premise of this film to. Being an American, I have witnessed the increasing popularity of crappy, crappy films like Norbit, Wild Hogs, and Ghost Rider. I am worried for the future of cinema.

Sean, New York City,

Aw come on folks ! IT WAS A MOVIE !!!. It pokes fun at the "old" movies from the 1970's. Alot of the movies seen at the drive-in's in the '70's were of this type and even more silly (i.e. The Born Losers, Planet of the Apes, etc.) Everybody who watches Quinten's movies know about the dark humor that he displays in them.

James Wright, Atlanta, Ga. USA

The last Tarantino movie I saw was kill bill, which was little more than one scene after another of continuous bloodletting. Now when i see Tarantino's name attached to something, I studiously avoid it.

Dray, Triad, NC

Kevin Maher thinks 300 is "moronic". I liked it and you will also.

ed, nyc, NY USA

I agree with the thought that Mr. Tarantino must revert back to the character driven films such as Dogs and Pulp, the latter being one of the best films I have ever seen. I believe his last few efforts have been overly fraught with violence. Further, I believe he did this attempting to reach those who enjoy the wrestling and ultimate fighting aspects of our culture. While his focus on characters and plot become secondary.

Dick, Compton, USA

Grindhouse was and is a great movie, and homage to B movies. Rose McGowan with the machine gun leg, Kurt Russell using a Chevy to murder women, two stuntwomen fighting back and severely beating him - all indicates an over-the-top movie. People who don't like it that are not appalled by violence tended to overthink the movie. Its not meant to inspire you, its not meant to make you think, nor is it meant to be an Academy Award winner. It is meant to blow stuff up, fire lots of guns, and pay tribute to the B movies (Shaft, Foxy Brown, Plan 9 from Outer Space, et.al).

Tell you what though, I can't wait for the DVD release of Machete (if you hadn't heard, Rodriguez is going to film that while filming Sin City 2).

Otis Boone II, Sacramento, California/USA

Seeing the movies (Grindhouse) on 42nd Street last night, I couldn't help but notice that for a Wednesday night, the theatre was almost full and everyone laughed appropriately and got grossed out at the right moments. The movie is most definitely not a cinematic failure. It was a coup de gras for auteur filmmaking. But it is a box office loser, which is what audiences like have come to expect of their favorites, especially the foreign and indie films that always seem doomed to disappear after a few weeks. We have to race out to see them before they're gone. What the larger crowds want today is milquetoast and hollywood obliges these folks well enough with Will Smith movies and anything starring a dog. I for one am glad that the films I never see make great returns as long as the studios are willing to take risks on films because their pockets are overstuffed, with films like Grindhouse, for those of us who do care,

Michael Gaudet, Brooklyn,

Grindhouse suffered from a double whammy...it was a badly done parody about badly produced films. It wasn't an homage, it was a train wreck. The Rodriguez directed portion at least had some form of plotting. the QT part of the film was just an excuse for him to hang around in Austin and party with some hot chicks. All in all it was over blown, over hyped, over budgeted and won't do well overseas or on video. Yep...proud to say I walked out in the middle of the lame girl talk in the middle of Deathproof.
Dave/Charlotte USA

dave, Charlotte, nc

I just love the comment about how they needed to "educate" moviegoers in the South and Midwest. What a typically elitist Hollywood comment!! How offensive - I hope that readers who are from those regions caught that one.

Here's an idea: let's "educate" these idiots in Hollywood as to what the real world is like. Then perhaps they might make some decent movies that don't have titles which end in a Roman numeral.

Gee, who's smarter: the Southerner who doesn't pay $10 to see Tarantino's gratuitous blood and gore movie OR the Hollywood guys who spent $100 million to make this piece of trash?

Yet, it's not Hollywood's fault. It's the stupidity of the moviegoer. If I treated my clients with such disdain, I wouldn't have any. Maybe the same thing should happen to the Weinsteins.

Bob, Malvern, PA, USA

Hollywood isn't panicking. It's saying to itself, "Serves the Weinsteins right for blowing $100 million on a three-hour, self-congratulatory cult film." It would have been a surprise if this movie had been successful.

Jogsdg, Carson City, NV

The 1st moment I saw a gun attached to an amputated stump of a woman's leg, I had marked this movie: "Can't wait to miss it."
Some premises are just beyond ridiculous.
To keep with the poor quality of the films, this should be released in VHS only... to further generate a complete lack of interest from the American movie audience.

wfraize, ocala, FL

The movie is fine, it's the marketing that bombed. They hyped the "woman with a gun leg" and forgot to let the general public know they weren't serious. It looked like a terrible cliche action film from the trailer, but not enough so to let on that it was a parody of sorts.

Calton, Boston, MA

Maybe I'm missing the point, but isn't "celebrating" grindhouse-style movies somewhat like buying a restored AMC Pacer because you had one back in 1979?

Sorry, but three-hour in-jokes are no replacement for characters (even flawed ones) that you can care about, in compelling storylines that resonate with the audience.

Until Hollywood understands exactly why 300 resonates with the "dumb" American public, the endless procession of crap will continue.

Woodrow P. Texas, Austin, TX

People can handle seeing violence in "300" because it was a real story. People are getting sick of gratuitous violence. You look at the violence in our culture in the United States today and look at the darn movies they put out. Stupid, senseless, no plot. Hollywood has gone to the dogs as far as I am concerned. There is no class there anymore.

Nancy, Madison, WI

Elmore Leonard is the genius, not Tarrantino. With his gift for creating idiot characters, Chandleresque dialogue and crazy plots it would be hard to make a bad film out of his stuff. It's irritating that Tarrantino gets so much credit.

Nigel, London,

Of course it made little money in the theaters:
1) Grindhouse was made for an extremely small niche market - folks who like 70s slasher pics. Like me & & son, & probably 14 other people in this state. This should be considered as a loving tribute to a genre.

2) Yeah, the movie is too long. I'm going to wait until it comes out on DVD & buy it (I bet DVD sales are awesome). We will have a Grindhouse party and probably costumes & lots of fun.

Not everybody has the same sense of "cool" as QT & RR. Sometimes it clicks, & sometimes it doesn't.

Dale, Austin, TX

300 was, in fact, anything but a moronic movie. Althouth it took liberties with history, it was accurate in that the defeat of the Persians did initiate the beginnings of western civilization. Had the Greece been defeated -- and she might well have been defeated had it not been for the Spartan's efforts -- we would not have had Plato or Aristotle.
Grindhouse -- and its ilk -- are the moronic movies, fostering nothing but mindless violence and hopelessness. Movie attendees voted with their feet.

Jim, Livermore, CA

The Weinsteins wouldn't allow the movie, Grindhouse, to be shown at actual grindhouses (old independent theatres, of the movie's namesake), or at the Grindhouse Film Festival. Instead, they struck an exclusive deal with Regal Cinemas (about as mainstream as they get) for distribution.

Are we suprised that the movie has alienated the most die-hard of grindhouse mmovie fans? Are we suprised that it then flopped at the mainstream box office? I'm sure it will do fine on DVD, but this was a majorly bad marketing decision to exclude the above mentioned built-in audiences.

Quaker, Atlanta, Georgia

Perhaps people simply don't think watching a woman with a manchine gun for a leg is something they want to pay money to do. Perhaps the dumb audiences are people who think a hypersexed and hyperviloent tribute to 70's b-movies is brilliant idea.

Ranger, The D,

I have no idea how movie critics continue to have jobs. Industry pundits keep lambasting 300 and scratching their heads at why it made so much money when it really did have nothing to it.

Here's a clue: the Frank Miller fan base is fanatical. They will verbally champion any work that is true to his source material. They will see the movie multiple times. They will champion any movie that uses his material as inspiration (Batman Begins).

Quentin doesn't command that type of fanaticism. Yeah, his fans will almost all buy the DVD, and so will many film buffs because they feel compelled to.

Frankly, the industry doesn't understand the new consumer base anymore.

Irashumase, Atlanta,

Saw the films in a packed cinema in Louisville Kentucky last week, laughed all the way through Planet Terror. Both excellent movies.
I have heard several comments from others who saw it that they thought the films were poor quality and one even suggested asking for his money back having misunderstood the 'missing reel' segments.
As a previous doubter of Tarantino's talents, I thought Death Proof was excellent.

Allan, Louisville, America, Kentucky

I loved these movies. I'm not a fan of gore, but especially in the first segment, it was so over the top that I was able to relax and enjoy the story.

I enjoyed the way that both Tarantino and Rodriguez developed their characters through the framework of the B movie. (And unlike most of the commentors, I preferred Deathproof.) Even though the first group of girls in "Deathproof" were only a set up, I still felt nervous about what was going to happen to them. There are many more examples, but I don't want to spoil anything. Needless to say, my group was cheering and booing and having a generally good time along with everyone else in the theater.

In a way, this movie was a relief. Due to the high price of theater tickets, we like to enjoy our movies in silence, each draining every second they can out of the movie. But movies like Grindhouse, aren't meant for that. 'B' movies are a communal experience, as much about the reaction of those around you as about the movie itself.

Juliet, Riverside, CA

people should quite whining about Grindhouse being a crappy movie. In my opinion it was something different from the ordinary. Those that have seen it and complain that it was a crappy movie are dumb for even going tosee it if they thought it was crappy stupidity on their part.

slevin, whiting, IN

People enjoyed 300 because they are simply exhausted with the negative, anti-western/anti-American messages constantly coming out of Hollywood. Imagine leaving a moviehouse not feeling guilty and ashamed of your heritage and history: of who you are and where you live. No...no...no...Blood Diamond and Babel and Crash and just how awful and exploitative everything and everyone is. That so many snarky reviewers easily dismiss 300 as moronic and uninspired shows that reviewers are increasingly politicizing their reviews and out of touch with main stream mass market audiences. Also, that they probably couldn't hang in a fist fight to protect their woman very well. Yeah - the old wuss argument. But if the shoe fits....Movies like 300 make the money "artists" and studio houses need to create their unwatched/unwatchable films like the Good Shepherd and Bobby. People didn't want to watch Grindhouse. Don't blame them for "not getting it." Blame the team for not giving the people what they want.

Joseph Iruku, Boston, Massachusetts

hey brian of houston, if you knew anything about the way a deranged mind works, youd know the killer at VT thought of himself as a virtuous character fighting against the sinful masses, a lot more like 300 isnt it?

eli, berkeley, CA

Look back at all the Weinstein's success with Miramax and you have to consider what enormous benefits their films enjoyed with Disney's incredibly powerful and highly effective Buena Vista marketing machine behind them.
Don't underestimate the power of the dark side of marketing.

Alistair, eastcote, middx, UK

americans don't like to think

mike, st augustine, fl

People will sit through a 3 hour movie (Titanic, Bravehart just to name two) if it has an actual plot. Gore for the sake of gore doesn't work. It's not about marketing, its about putting out a quality product. "Educate the South and Midwest"? That line pretty much sums up the problem with Hollywood. Garbage is garbage, no matter how much you try to "educate" someone otherwise.

jerry, philadelphia, pa

I agree with EPM; I had no idea what "Grindhouse" was, was not aware of the genre, and did not get the joke. I didn't even pretend to know, as many always do just to seem sophisticated. Maybe that was the joke? A joke in a joke? Maybe Quentin should try some Shakespeare?

I think the last paragraph of the coulmn is right on the money.

Jack L., Ferndale, MI

Frank in Manchester...

Don't you think you're getting a little reactionary? For goodness sake, they're silly movies, not historical records. I should correct myself - these really aren't even "films"; they're comic books. The Spartan culture has been dead and buried for over 2000 years, yet you speak of it as if it was yesterday and we in the West should be ashamed. Please, get a grip. And since you took a moment to criticize the Greek states (and thereby the West by proxy) as a "society built on slavery", you should probably go back and retake some history classes - just about every civilization in history from the Babylonians to the Romans to Mother Britain herself, was built on slavery. Sheesh...

Jim, Milton, FL, USA

Grindhouse is a great film. The TV ads were a bit lame..that and the films length made people stay away.

sean, new york,

'nat' has a 'g' as in gnat.

mel, London,

The concept of this project was ambitious and if any two directors were going to pull this off it was Rodriguez and Tarantino. I enjoyed most of it. Planet Terror was very fun. However the part that I was most looking forward to, Death Proof was way too talky.I know Tarantno flicks have a lot of dialogue but there was way too much in this one. The middle 25-30 minutes of the Death Proof segment was filled with boring macho-chick yapping. I'm a Kurt Russell fan and there wasn't enough of his character, too much of the dopey stunt chicks.

Kevin, Racine, WI.

A girl with a machine gun leg, come on .......

Allen, Las Vegas, Nevada,

I found the filmmaker's indulgence infuriating. They're making fun of grindhouse films without following the rules of the grindhouse. Firstly, a grindhouse film shouldn't EVER cost $60 million to make. And grindhouse films don't have rambling, boring dialog (at one time Tarantino's dialog was fresh and surprising, now it simply falls flat) that goes on and on and on and on. People were yelling at the screen, furious, during Death Proof. Several walked out -- knowing that it was a double feature, just not caring. And I'm sorry -- but Rodriguez's film was just plain awful. The hubris these two have for unloading this crap on everyone. That's what I left the theater thinking about.

Roger, Los Angeles, CA

I'm not really intending on seeing the movie. I loved Kill Bill and Pulp Fiction, but this looks like some serious dross...

And as far as 300 being a "dumb, audience-friendly" movie? I think not: it's got both amazing cinematography, acting and story. What's not to like?

Ben, London,

Joan in Boston says the Spartans in '300' are "noble, self-sacrificing, honest, courageous, patriotic and family-loving; all of the things Americans would love to see in THIS country", which has to be one of the funniest things I've read all year.

The Spartans were militaristic pederasts who put children into army camps aged seven, leaving them to die on hillsides if they turned out to be thinkers rather than killers. If moviegoers like Joan are genuinely suckered by Hollywood's nonsense version of the truth, believing that Spartan society is something to which Americans should aspire, we should all be very afraid.

After all, both have quite a history of oppressing Persians...

ThwartedEfforts, London, England

I stopped going to the cinemas long ago. I refuse to waste my money on the overcrowded theaters filled with hoodlums to see trashy movies. I can ge them delivered to my door for a few bucks. Why woudl I waste my time on sitting in some theatre to see shit when i can watch it in my living room?

Hollywood execs will always call the audience "dumb and uneducated" unless e are forking over our money in buckets to them without any questions.

Maybe it is time to get the government more involved in Hollywood's product. The government controls every other industry, so why not films like this waste of money "Gridhouse"?

Pete, Atlanta, USA, GA

Of course dumbed down movies like 300 are big hits...what are people watching on TV...the dumbest type of entertainment ever invented...Reality Shows...Grindhouse was a fun night at the movies and brought back a lot of memories of Saturday afternoon TV and later Saturday Night at the drive-in

John, New York,

Ummm...whatever happened to film being art that is appreciated, as opposed to just 'movies' that make our brains jelly?

Ian, New York, NY,

In this discussion people often forget that, as much of a cool buzz it was when Resevoir Dogs hit, or Pulp Fiction, Tarantino himself can never go back there again. He can't be new again... and his newness on the scene is part of what made those films so interesting. Jackie Brown was a good direction for him, but after that he lost his way.

I say, if you're the King of Pulp, give me pulp. Just take it to another (deeper) level, because you don't want to retreat what you've already done. Why not be a movie version of Elmore Leonard? Drop the referential crap, it's lifeless and dull.

SRfromFL, Jax Beach, FL

I loved Grindhouse, especially the first half and the faux ads in the "itermission". It didn't feel that long to me and I have the attention span of a nat. I think people just didn't "get" it. I've heard they may split it in two and re-release it as two individual movies, so watch this space...

Scottie, New York (Brit expat), New York

I was thrilled with the entire package from the opening trailer for "Machette" to the end credits. This film has a huge heart and it's unfortunate that our attention spans have gotten so pathetic that we can't appreciate the full meal this film provides.
Cutting it into pieces is the wrong move here.

Chris Lundgren, Seattle, WA

What Tarantino and Rodriguez are finding out is that there was a reason people didn't go see that kind of crap back in the 70's and they're not going to see it now - duh. Maybe these four will continue down the path to nowhere saving us all the extra time and money we would waste going to any of their future crap.

Vincent Vega, Hillsboro, OR

The Tarantino portion , "Death Proof" was like pulling teeth. 15 minutes of action and an hour of inane, useless dialog from characters no one cares about.

Mark, Costa Mesa,, CA

I saw it and I would recommend it, except for the obnoxious guy that snuck in some booze and was getting drunker and rowdier as the film progressed - oh, wait, that was my brother.

Greg, San Diego, CA

There is a reason that the very movies they are trying to parody were playing at the "grindhouse" theaters. THEY ARE TERRIBLE MOVIES!! Only the self righteous Tarantino would think that he could make this type of movie, and have it be successful. Hopefully the tanking will knock him off his horse and get him back to making original movies.

Tate, Dallas,

A flop is needed, and great to hear about. The movies sucked. I can't remember feeling as low as I did when I walked outta the theatre, the feeling of having been bent over and repeatedly violated and having all the energy sucked out of you from the absolute artistic depravity. All Grindhouse will do is encourage violence on par with what happened at VA Tech this week. This must make you proud, Quentin and Roberto.

Chaz, Boulder, CO,

I saw the trailer on TV. The chick with a gun for a peg-leg flat grossed me out, and struck me as patently ridiculous. It reminded me of something you'd see from Troma, like a two-headed psychopath, or such. Not at all something I'd want to pay good money for. Why spend big bucks to simulate a bad 70's movie when you can get authentic bad movies for cheap? It's like going to a fancy restaurant to get a convincing imitation of Jack-in-the-Box tacos. If they do a good job it will be authentic crap.

Theron, Arnold, CA

Hollywood simply lost the ability, with few exceptions, to make movies people want to see, and the actors performing in them are almost universally unlikable overblown hacks, the producers are uniformly hard leftists and therefore out of touch with the rest of the country, if not the world. Tickets are overpriced too. So why bother?- there's plenty of other things to spend money on. One of these days a studio will discover that insulting your audience isn't the best way to sell films, and will make a fortune. Don't hold your breath, though - these guys are stubbornly stupid, and utterly unable to comprehend the depth of their ignorence of modern audiences.

B. Samuel Davis, Secaucus, United States

There is one reason that Hollywood will never get why "300" and "Ghostrider" did better than "Grindhouse": HEROES. And NOT heroes that are "heroic" because they help their enemies, but heroes who fight for themselves and for the good without apologizing. Hollywood just doesn't get it -- they call that "moronic." Well, if banking a billion dollars is moronic, let Hollywood continue to be brilliant until it learns the lesson.

C. Fahy, Encinitas, CA

How many so-called-clever QT odes to murder do we really need? The message is clear: You had your moment, now just go away.

Ted, Atlanta, GA

I saw the movie in the theater and loved it, the audience was laughing and clapping all the way through. But there were some people who got up to leave between the two and had to have other members of the audience tell them it wasn't over.

Additionally, I liked the first movie better, the Rodriguez film with Rose McGowan. The Tarantino one was fine, but in all honesty I think Tarentino was too in love with his characters and thought they were more interesting than they actually were.

cambel, Washington, DC

Wait, why aren't we talking about UK directors? Everything my kingdom does is the best, even if we steal everything in our culture from the colony that defeated us! I'm so confused - Capt. Slow, hold me!

Jeremy Clarkson, Cotswolds, UK

DID QUENTON TAKE A PAGE OUT OF SHALYMAN'S NOTEBOOK?
I am a huge Quenton Tarrantino fan and gleefully let him place me as a fly on the wall to observe great and memorable characters like Marcelus Wallace, Beatrix Kiddo,Odel Robie, Mr. White, Vincent Vega and Jackie Brown. I am also a big Kurt Russel ("Call me Snake") fan but Grindhouse (especially Death Proof) was a terrible disappointment. Where is the snappy intellegent dialog that was so prevelant in Pulp Fiction, Reservior Dogs, Jackie Brown and both Kill Bills? Why doesn't the story give enough background of the Stuntman Mike character for us to decide if we like him or hate him? Tarrantino has given us so much more in the past that I guess I've just gotten spoiled by his genius. I was as disappointed in this flick as I was when I sat down with great anticipation for M. Night Shaylaman's "The Village".
Personally, I can only hope that Tarrantino's next film is not another "Lady in the Lake".

John Frilando, Lindenhurst, NY/USA

I thought the Robert Rodriguez portion of the event was the worst waste of money and time I have ever endured. Frankly I wanted to leave the theater after that moronizing attempt, but kept my seat hooping that Terantino would bring something redeeming to the evening. It would be difficult to heap enough extreme negativity on the Rodriguez film. Absolute crap. Nothing positive. Nothing. Death Proof was better. Great Cars at least. I can't say I thought the film was good, even in terms of its "b" movie tribute. But it was better than the complete waste of time and money that was the Rodriguez film, and so comes out of the aggregate looking reasonable.

In general. Don't bother. Don't bother seeing it period. Not in the theater, not on DVD ... not for $0.50 on the "last Chance" channel at 3:00AM on Saturday morning when battling insomnia. Never. Absolutely, and without a shodow of a doubt the worst movie I've seen in 10-years.

Austin in Colorado, Denver, Colorado

It's really not that difficult to understand why Grindhouse flopped - one of the characters had a machine gun for a leg!! SERIOUSLY! I like Tarantino's films, but give me a break... When I saw the preview for this movie the first time, the theatre filled with laughter. Another time a friend of mine was laughing so loud and for so long that people actually told him to shut up.

rediculous

s. howell, Tampa, FL

It's a pretty strong statement to call 300 moronic when compared to Kill Bill - it is probably the most moronic movie I've ever turned off after 20 mins. The fact that Tarantino was involved is the reason I did not see it. His other stuff is cheesy trash, why would this be any better?

Jake, Houston, Texas

Quentin Tarantino sucks. He always has. People just aren't afraid of being thought of as "out of style" for saying it and behaving accordingly, anymore. Hollywood is going to have to come up with something more than gratuitous sex and violence laced with "intellectually inside" wit. Yawn....

It's on the same level as reality TV. No real thought is required on the part the writers, directors or the audience. Why pay good money for boring, repetitious drivel. Thank you, no.

Tim Thomas, Houston, TX

Rodriguez nailed it, and was true to the proposed concept, with Planet Terror, in spite of Tarantino's appearance in the movie. Death Proof is a tedious rehashing of dialogue you've heard in Tarantino's prior movies. Do yourself a favor, go see Grindhouse, just leave before Death Proof starts. And will somebody please tell Quinten to stay on this side of the camera?

Rick, Cincinnati,

I think the problem is that the target audience, a group whelped on CGI and the second Star Wars trilogy, has no frame of reference for 'Grindhouse.' I've seen GH (way too) many times (and stayed all 3+ hours each time) and the ones that really enjoy it are the 40+ crowd. I grew up with drive-ins and "grindhouses" and I must say, that if "Deathproof" had been released then, it would be the classic that was remembered from that era.

Let the Weinsteins fool around and recut GH. I understand it's all about the money in the end. But the only DVD of GH that will be in my collection is the theatrical double bill. Rodriguez ruined 'Sin City' when he recut it; And GH will be ruined if it's spit up.

Squire, Kansas City, MO

I suggest 300 was an anomaly. I suspect alot of 300 audience went to see it for the histotical battle epic good-guys fighting for honor and country got more than they bargined for. I say 300's success is misleading. If people truly knew what they were getting into, 300 wouldn't have done so well. And regarding Grindhouse? The marketing folks made sure we knew exactly what we were getting into when we went to see it, and viewers gave it a pass in droves.

Darryl, Omaha, USA

I loved Grindhouse, thought is was a little long and could have used some editing during the second film, but it was a lot of fun. I wish it would have done better, they seem to have worked very hard them for us.

Steve, Dallas, TX

this was just a dumb concept and weinstein gets their rewards for financing it. Tarantino and Rodrigues will be fine. I am a fan, but I walked out of Grindhouse after half an hour (didn't ask for a refund, figured 7.50 to help out harvey was ok). Take a genre of film that was run in trashy movie theaters that were on the verge of going under (and did) and expect it to work just because it is tarantino? Bah. They didn't make money then for the same reason they don't now. Natural Born Killers was violent and gross but powerful. Pulp Fiction and Res Dogs likewise. Grindhouse (what I could sit through) was just violent and gross and utterly stupid. By design or by accident, totally stupid, mindless gore. It was gross and yet broing at the same time. Harvey call me next time you try this kind of thing, I will save you 100 million dollars. If you try to make a lame movie you will probably get a lame turnout. It will do well on DVD though, I will rent it when I can ffwd thru the retardation.

Roger, Grants Pass, Oregon

I wasn't turned off by the length. I wasn't turned off by the 70s filmmaking. I was turned off from the first commercial that I saw which indicated that this movie was about Uber-Violence as a decadent treat. And as a father of two small children, I chose to say "I will not support that movie for the violence both IN THE COMMERCIAL and for the violence they promise in the movie."

Jeff, Rockaway, NJ

I saw Grindhouse on opening night, in a suburban Virginia theater that seats 400. There were barely 20 people there, and at least a 5 or 6 left after the first feature. I'm not sure if they didn't realize there was a second movie, or if they just hated it, or both. And I was forced to go alone when all my friends balked at the 3-hour-plus running time. Me? I have to confess that I enjoyed myself immensely, and had a blast looking out for references and homages to the original 70s (and 60s) films and genres that inspired this. I loved the affectionate recreation of that cheap 70s feel. And the use of the "missing reel" in both films to avoid explaining a notable plot point was funny and clever. I DO think it should have been significantly shorter. I have no opinion on the marketing failures. I saw an ad, read a good review, then went to the movie, simple as that. (FYI, Tarantino's Jackie Brown is one of my favorite movies, though I don't care so much for Reservoir Dogs or Kill Bill.)

Jake, Washington, DC

Let me start by saying that I am a BIG Tarantino fan (surprisingly, no one here mentions Jackie Brown, perhaps QT's best made, most intelligent film). The fundamental problem with Grindhouse, however, is simple -- it is either a send-up or "homage" (depending on your point of view) of a genre that had its heyday more than 30 years ago. Given that the mass audiences needed to recoup the huge cost are the Friday/Saturday night high school/college crowd, who weren't even alive at that time, Tarantino-Rodriguez had just as good a chance at success sending-up (or "homaging") silent Lon Chaney horror flix of the twenties. A somewhat silly, three-plus hour gore fest of an inside joke, which only makes sense to those of us old farts who now are much more selective as to when and why we go to a Cineplex (as opposed to sitting at home watching on the DVD with surround sound and no morons kicking the backs of our chairs) is not exactly a recipe for box-office success.

Butch, New York, NY, USA

These directors copied low-budget, that few watched, movies with a big budget. People didnt flock to these types of movies when they first came out. What makes them think audiences would flock now? There name? It takes more than that.
If they want to make money make 'truly' family-friendly movies cheaply and you'll make a boat load.

Ryan, Minneapolis, MN

I can only concur with what another viewer wrote of Tarantino, "His movies Suck". The only thing his movies will be remembered for will be for being different. But different doesn't mean good and each new movie he makes is the same old different. His shtick is getting old. His teenage fascination with sex, violence and pseudo-intellectual banter is actually pretty sad for a grown man. Anyone who thinks this crap is high art should try a cold shower.

brian, Boston,

Both the tone of this article and the content of the responses are very revailing. The article states "When that movie has been directed by two of the hottest hitters in town, produced by the best in the business, filled with sex, violence and stars, and yet it still flops, then the entire industry panics." Why are they panicking? Why would Tarantinos career end? Tarantino is what he is. There has never been another $100000000 B movie before. I do not know why its limited appeal is so surprising to the film makers when this concept is so obvious to the market itself. "Film Geeks" love it. Artsy people love it. Nobody else does. This should have been obvious from the beginning. The movie flopped not because of poor marketing or poor execution, but because it was a "B" movie which cost $100million. To spell it out clearly, its costs were disproportionate to the size of its market so whover greenlighted the budget and predicted an acceptable ROI is the only one who is at fault

Gabe, Baltimore , Maryland USA

I sort of thought the point of an exploitation film was that one doesn't have to be "educated" by a PR department to a) want to see it, or b) comprehend it. But I guess a retro- exploitation film is in another category. Hmm. I see.

I screened David Lynch's Inland Empire last weekend at a gonzoplex out here in the boonies. There hasn't been much PR "education" for this flick, which is probably why most of the rubes and hayseeds in the theatre, me among them, erupted in spontaneous applause when the credits rolled.

Lynch has the goods on Hollywood.

joel, albany, USA/New York

Did it ever occur to anybody that the timing of this movie is at fault? These directors and producers are completly ignorant and insensitive to Christian values.... we can take gore... but not on Easter weekend. This was also evidenced in the flop movie,"Reaping" which also decided to open on Easter weekend, insulting Christians worldwide. Why don't these directors really be corageous, and open a movie insulting the, Prophet Mohammed, the weekend of, "Rahmadan!"

Alice Perry, Bethlehem, PA

Just wait until the movie is on DVD and turns a big profit. Tarantino will prevail. We'll see who has the last laugh, I bet it will be Quentin Tarantino.

Bill , Nashua, USA

It's lame when people will judge artistic merit on one's political outlook, sounds a bit like a facist attitude towards art. Last time I checked we were supposed to be the bastion of freedom, not the bastard. Grow up.

Personally, I found the movie, although a bit long, to be extremely entertaining, and well worth the money I paid to see the film (which now costs $9.00 in the US). The imaginary trailers were creative, and kept the spirit of B movie horror flicks reminiscent of the drive in era. Eli Roth as well as Rob Zombie were great contributors to these segways. The only major problem i saw with the Second feature was the bloated dialogue segments from the charaters, which was so bimboesque, at times it came close to torture. Quentin won't let you down, because you endure this pain for a reason, and to finally see the antagonist squirm was well worth the wait. Brutality at it's best. Kudos to both filmmakers for having the vision and the guts to produce and release this film.

Viktor Von, Chicago, IL

Well, people I think have underestimated that we live in a visual society obsessed with beauty, and when you come down to it the quality of the film doesn't look great.

Regardless of whether or not 300 was a dumb movie, the cinematography is beautiful. That may have something to do with it. I can appreciate the homage Tarantino created, but to me, a girl with a machine gun for a leg isn't that interesting.

Erik, LA, California,

How can anyone be surpised that an homage to B-rated films would play to sparse houses? So did the originals!

Thomas, medfield, USA / MA

I'm in my 20s, and I have no recolleciton of these 70s movies this movie is supposed to be a tribute to. To me its just a terribly bad looking movie with sub par plot thats too long. Who is this movie aimed at?

My generation got its fill of B movies with Mystery Science Theater. And they did it better.

Brad, Boston, MA

First off, how exactly is the movie '300' dumb and mindless? And what exactly makes 'Grindhouse' so smart? I saw '300' and it was an awesome movie!Seriously, movies do well when they're good, and they don't do so well when they're bad. Sounds to me like 'Grindhouse' was just a bad movie.

Joseph Russell, Huntsville, USA

Seems like us Southerners and Midwesterners out here in fly-over country are too stupid to understand Tarantino's brilliance and subtle referneces. Maybe if we didn't have to go to work and support our families, we could spend more time watching obscure B-movies and praying at the altar of Hollywood. Why did "300" do so well? Because it was entertaining. That's it. Why did Grindhouse not do so well? It was not. I'd rather sit home and watch a baseball game on TV... for free...
The problem is that Hollywood doesn't understand why people aren't going to the theaters: 1. People are obnoxious. 2. I have air conditioning at my house, unlike the old days, when the theater was often the only air conditioned building in town. 3. 4 Tickets, popcorn, drinks, and another dissapointing movie- $40, Video Rental: $5. 4. I have a 62" Hi-Def TV with a pause button.
Now we have a summer of #3's and #4's to look forward to. Bottom line: the movies aren't very good and Hollywood is simply out of ideas

Jackson, Dallas, Texas

If they had made Grindhouse for 10 mil, then they would have shown how creative they could be and stay within the confines of the genre. Spending 100 mil for a cheap flick does not get it. If they made a perfect version, it would play to houses like the originals, ie 14 kids a show.
300 was great, no need to over spend. Just have a good director and story. Viola.

Sirlanse, tampa, fl

The second half was entertaining. Liked Kurt Russell in that role. The first half was impossible to watch....baaaaaaaad horror film, Rodriguez should hang out with Rob Zombie and learn a little. I thought the '70's homage was a little cheesy...especially in the special effects era. Overall, the combination of these two directors could have produced better results.

Heather, rancho palos verdes,

Robert-you can ridiculously try to insult anyone who likes a film you didn't(300) and then try to somehow pass off YOUR OPINION as fact, but it falls flat.
Face it, no one outside antisocial losers "cared" about grindhouse. Hence-flop!
Believe it or not, over self-referential plots, characters who drone on and on and sleeze is NOT sophistication or high art. The original grindhouse films were crap no one outside of weirdos saw to begin with. The story of 300 has been around for a few thousand years. For a reason.

carl, weathers, LA, CA

Maybe people are just tired of smug, self-referential slabs of kitschy adolescent uber-irony peopled by grotesques, ciphers and caricatures (far easier than three-dimensional characters to create, I'd think) posing as groundbreaking, thought-provoking film-making? The problem is that that's all Tarantino, without good writers, seems to do.

Ruth, Glasgow, Scotland

The movies are as bad as the box office results indicate.

Tom Gray, Mansfield et Pontefract, Quebec / Canada

Pulp Fiction was novel, defining a genre and relaunching several of my favorite actor's career's, By Kill Bill , the violence bencame transparently gratuitous and tedious - I walked out of KB1 and didn't bother with KB2. I'll probably never watch another Tarrantino flick. He's had his 15 minutes, maybe he can see about getting a spot on Hollywood Squares?

Sherman McCoy, Portland, maine

If these Hollywood types would devote their time to the movie business rather than spending most of their time telling Americans how to live, vote and fight a war, they may produce profits for their employers & shareholders for what they are being paid to do.

Joe Valentine, Newport Beach, California

Their biggest mistake was releasing this film during Holy Week: Ash Wednesday, Good Friday, and Easter. So many millions of Americans were focused on the good things in their life they made a conscious decision to avoid Hollywood's continuing attempt at coarsening the culture. Release this trash during Haloween so it can compete with the rest of its ilk.

Joe, Salt Lake City, UT

Tarantino and Rodriguez are not ripping off anyhting. They are simply inspired by something that they enjoy and have a passion for. Many are quick to criticize and point fingers. But how many of you have a passion for anything? Music, Literature, Film? Are you doing anything to better or perpetuate that art? Those of you that just consume all day need to get some perspective and then write your little commentaries. These directors were not out to make a film you would love. They were out to make a film they would love. And I'm positive they succeeded. Good for you (The Do-ers) and Thank You! Thank you! Thank You!

Steven Hayes, Provo, Utah USA

Death Proof - so dumb it made my teeth hurt.

Why didn't the driver of the Dodge with the chick on the hood just stop?

dinger, rockport, tx, us

If Grindhouse was as good as some people are saying, then millions of people would have gone to see it. They will pay the $10 instead of waiting 3-6 months to see the Director's cut.

IMHO Tarantino is the most overrated director currently in Hollywood.

Josh, Findlay, OH

Give me a break. One flop wont kill QT's career here.

Flogger, New York, NY

I haven't seen the movie yet but..$100 million to produce a 3 hour and 12 minute homage to the cheapest drive-in drek of the 70's? Are they out of their collective minds?
I grew up with those flicks and even then it was hard to sit through them, unless you were high, in which case you could watch pretty much anything.

Ken, Miami, Fla.

Quentin Tarantino is simply this decade's David Lynch. He is not laughing with the audience, he us laughing AT them; that they would be stupid enough to pay good money to see the increasingly worthless "parodies" he finds so fabulous. Like Lynch, Tarantino has become the emperor's new clothes of film making. There IS no THERE there.

Traci, Baltimore, MD, USA

I liked it. It was refreshing to see something different for a change. I am surprised to learn they spent 30 million marketing it however. I have seen exactly one promotion for it, and that was around Christmas during the previews for another movie. I guess 30 million doesn't buy as much as it used to.

If theater owners were wise, they would cross-promote/show previews of films that are currently playing in their theaters instead of heavily promoting films that are 3-6 months away.

Kev, Greenville, NC

The reason 300 did well was because it inspired the male population, pumped them up, made them feel good, feel heroic, feel like MEN. In a world where it's a crime to be masculine, guys thirst for examples of heroism, ideals, strength, valor, and honor. All the things the modern "intellectuals" deam borish and stupid because they're educated beyond their own minds.

Grindhouse didn't do well because it indeed looked gruesome and idiotic, as "creative" and "edgy" as it might be. No one cares that you think you're a bunch of geniuses out there in Hollywood. We pay your salary, remember that.

Anthony Fransella, Orlando, FL

my friends and I walked out after "300" a couple weeks ago in angry, disappointing silence. No words. We just walked out after viewing "Grindhouse" last night laughing it up and rehashing different parts of the film(s) like little kids. I was certainly not a fan of the "Kill Bill" series- but "Grindhouse" has brought me back. Excellent job by Tarantino and Rodrigez- absolutely hilarious stuff that made me wish I was born in an earlier time so I could have seen what they are alluding to!

ben, dayton, OH

Nobody except the wannabe critics would be enthralled by a three and a half hour movie that supposedly pays homage to pulp movies. Only extreme fans of the limited genre would watch movies like this, and that also only for a feeling of nostalgia. There's a reason B-grade movies from the 70's arent famous today, and that's the same reason Grindhouse was bound to flop. Because they suck!
The reason other movies by the duo worked was because they were slick, stylish and had good screenplay. If they want to pay homage however, they at least shouldn’t expect the moviegoing audience to pander to their whims.
On a final note, most movies made in Hollywod nowadays are populist flicks. Once in a while some come along that are well written, and since almost everything else is now standard, get well known. 300, to say the least, was entertaining. And not just to dumb jocks who like blood. It was quite stylish, had reasonably good dialogues and special effects that were fun to watch.

Rohit, Singapore,

In my personal Opinion this movie was released at totally the wrong weekend. Easter weekend is not the time of year to release of movie of this subject matter.

I loved this movie, it was a fantastic fun ride full of everything I expected and some of what I didn't.

But I think people are avoiding it because they saw low opening numbers on Easter and think that translates more than any critical review into something they think they should avoid.

As an editor myself I loved everything about the movie and the effects... but I can see how others wouldn't.

James Wickham, Acworth, GA

I'll echo what many have said about Tarantino, and add my own thoughts. Essentially, this guy has lived off of "Pulp Fiction" since it was released. He hasn't done anything remotely as good since then. I think after "Kill Bill," people realized that the emperor has no clothes. Certainly I wasn't going to see this, no matter how positive the reviews were...and they were very positive. If Tarantino wants to make "inside" and self-referential films, give him Woody Allen-type budgets and let him go to his heart's content.

Marc, trenton, NJ/USA

What kind of movie did Cho Seung-Hui like? Apparently "Old Boy" http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1261563,00.html

But about Tarantino, the problem with Tarantino is that he likes to show people what he's seen, NOT what he makes himself. How many other movies has he gotten his name on, ie. "Quentin Tarantino presents..."?

Personally I've got "Pulp Fiction", "Jackie Brown" and "Kill Bill" on DVD, and honestly, I don't care for any of them. His movies are just too ignorant and pointless violent flicks. It's no wonder why Grindhouse isn't doing well. The days of '70s B-movies are over, and for a good reason. These kinds of movies don't do good these days even with DTV. So, it's no surprise really that Grindhouse has flopped. And if it's cut to make theaters, all the more reason people stayed away. That's one reason why I didn't go see LOTR-ROTK at the theaters because we all knew an extended cut was coming.

Dave, Harrisburg, Illinois, USA

“We didn’t educate the South and the Midwest." This quote is exactly why I don't watch Weinstein produced movies anymore. I guess people outside of LA or NYC are too stupid to "understand" this type of film. I have Desperado and Pulp Fiction in my movie collection because they truly are great movies. Even if Grindhouse ends up being something worthwhile, I wouldn't want to support the elite "thinking" of the Weinstein brothers. I honestly don't know much about b-movies, so I probably wouldn't understand the subtle referrences in the movie. The truth is, I will not give this movie a chance because of the Weinstein brothers. Too bad for Tarantino and Rodriguez.

Eddie, Phoenix, AZ/USA

to john in mass.----it`s the "Zapruder" film..........sheesh

hugh, ocean city, md

I have seen two Tarantino films and thought they both stunk. I'll never see another, especially such a moronic looking one (or two or three or whatever) as Grindhouse.

Also, Octavis: You Brits have no place to talk about "corrupt foreign power . . . trying to crush a smaller independent civilisation." Just take a look at your recent history. IE: Northern Ireland, Pakistan/India, just about the the whole continent of Africa, etc., etc., etc. For all of America's faults we have never destroyed or tried to destroy other civilizations through colonization. We just end up cleaning up Europe's messes.

Chris, Speedway, Indiana

People who think Q is washed up: you're morons. You don't get it, you never will, and that's cool. Go watch Pirates 3 and stuff your face with carbs.

People who thought Death Proof wasn't as good as Planet Terror: it was compelling, as are all of Q's movies. He's a master of dialogue, and his action is just window dressing. I liked both though.

jeff, alexandria, va

i thought grindhouse was fantastic, but tarantino's portion (Death Proof) was certainly the leg with a bad knee.
i barely saw any promotion for it in chicago.
'300', on the other hand, was plastered on every surface from kankakee to rockford, and it was piece of crap.
if 'ghost rider' and '300' are the future of movies, i'm staying home.

spencer, chicago, illinois

People are simply tired of the garbage curned out by Hollywood to make a buck. So they are staying away from the movies and doing other things to amuse themselves. Vote with your feet people. Until the morons in Hollywood start producing decent entertainment, refuse to spend your money on their garbage.

Patrick Curry, Irvine, CA

Grindhouse might not be the best movie that either Tarantino or Rodriguez ever made. It is entertaining though. I have seen it 3 times in 3 different theaters and at the end of Deathproof the audience cheered everytime. How many movies can you say ellicits that type of response from an audience? not many

mimp, river , wa

Tarentino is an exploitive capitalist who rips off concepts from various films and genres, and adds a hefty dose of violence. I for one will be happy to see this charlatan fade into obscurity.

joshua, sonoma, USA/CA

I think it can be summed up by saying, "Why the hell did it cost $100 Million dollars to do an recreate films that had budgets $1 million or less, most of the time, far less. They were done in 16mm,
(still available) the production values were awful (no money) and they were shot in a matter of days (no money) they had terrible scripts and actors (no talent) and my generation (40-60 yrs old) went see them because they were the only ones being shown at the drive-ins and on Saturday afternoons. The present generation has no built in affection for bad films. I thought it was funny because I suffered through many of them. The kids today have no nostalgia about them. Two things would have made it a success. By producing them with actual crappy budgets and keeping Tarentino behind the camera where he belongs. Quentin, please face it ,your no a good actor and your even worse at being a bad actor, give it up, please!!!

Tom Armstrong, Scottsdale, Arizona

The problem was terrible word of mouth from the first weekend. The Rodriguez feature was fantastic, exactly what I expected to see judging from the trailers. The look, the story and the acting all worked together perfectly. Tarantino's second half was boring, plain and simple. It didn't maintain the grindhouse esthetic beyond the first few minutes and had dull characters and endless, pointless dialogue.

Joe Melnick, Charlottesville, USA

Roger Avary (Avery) is the writing brains behind all of Tarantino's biggest and most respected films...from Reservoir Dogs, to Pulp Fiction, and of course, True Romance...the latter of which was written by Avary and Tarantino, benefited from the expert direction by Tony Scott...and is the best of the lot of films.

Tarantino desperately needs Avary as his muse--a damning fact which should be obvious to everyone, including him (Tarantino), and the roundly hated Weinstein Brothers. Robert Rodriguez, who has been playing that role of late...is simply an overrated camera man...not a real director, or writer. He is nothing more than a Rich Man's Uwe Boil...and for his part, Tarantino has become a Rich Man's Ed Wood!!! How ironic (???), since Uwe Boil is the inheritor of the trash cinema that was the 70's era Grind House films--and Ed Wood is the forerunner of this trash, & the one who invented it, 15 to 20 years before such garbage became so tragically, and popularly infamous in the 70's.

Metal Water, Northern California, US/CA

300 dumb? Grindhouse smart? Ridiculous. Tarantino's Death Proof debacle in Grindhouse was the dumbest stretch of film I've seen in years. Offensively stupid. Bad actresses whining bad dialogue, the most unforgivably worst dialogue I have sat through maybe ever. I wish I had walked out, like many other people were.

RG, Calgary,

The Richard Rodriguez portion of the film was much too long, and the Tarantino portion could have used a bit of cutting, though not so much as the Rodriguez portion. Tarantino's dialogue, a high point of Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and the Kill Bills, is a weak point in Deathproof, particularly in the group scenes of women (query whether Tarantino can write as well for women characters as he can for male characters). I loved all these guys earlier films, as well as many of the grindhouse originals in their day, but Grindhouse is a self-indulgent, tedious mess.

dean wermer, los angeles, california

This movie was awsome, on so many levels. I think it's a shame that this movie did so poorly, and I'm sort of shocked that more people didn't see it. I think if the company had done a better job of advertising it, it would have been a hit. In discussing the movie with others, I was puzzled why so many people had never heard of it. I spend a lot of time on the internet, and a lot of time "investigating" so to speak the latest movies coming out. So what seemed like a sure hit to me, turned out to be a "what's Grindhouse?" bomb. The marketing people did some stuff right, but obviously missed some pretty important things too. It sucks that this great movie bombed, and some horrid piece of garbage like the upcoming Fantasitic 4 (2) is gonna probably make a trillion bucks.

Jason, Dekalb, IL

Tarantino & Rodriguez are awesome filmmakers, and these films are no exception to their quality standards. Perhaps a little higher star quality woul dhave made the movies more popular in the theater, but that would have violated the premise of the movie - it had to be "B" in every respect.

I loved it, but I'm one of the people in their target audience. I think that the studio got sold a bill of goods - they probably should have done the whole thing using a Rodriguez budget instead of a Tarantino budget if they seriously wanted to score huge profits.

Danke, Gatesville, OH

When I first saw ads for Deathproof, I thought it might be a fun mindless movie to watch. But not if it's part of a 3.5 hour long double-feature! I have no idea what Tarantino and Rodriguez were thinking. Few people are so hugely into movies that they're willing to devote 3.5 hours of their lives to watch a dumb action flick.

In essence, they made a movie for themselves - for weirdo geeky film buffs - and those are the only people who wanted to watch it.

That said, there is nothing wrong with a movie meant for a niche audience. But you shouldn't spend $100 million to make one.

Gniewko, New York, USA

In response to Joan, there was no character development in 300, nobody cared about any of the people on screen, and when they were cut down, the director had to resort to a Jesus pose to try and inject any worth to the picture at all. 300 was a terrible film, with no story or plot and no memorable characters. Grindhouse, on the other hand, had memorable characters, decent development, complete plots, and it was damn funny. If you cannot recognize Grindhouse as the satire it is meant to be, then I can see why you would enjoy 300.

Robert, Dingle, Illinois

"300" dumb? I think men sacrificing their lives for their country is a timely story. A great film that makes "Grindhouse" look like it was made by two
deranged teenagers. It is garbage with a stupid script.
A waste of $100,000,000.

Bill Robinson, Franklin,

Grindhouse was a fantastic movie experience. The 3 hours flew by. I'll admit that I began to lose faith in the middle of Deathproof but the end brought me back! If there is one problem with the movies it's Tarantino as an actor.
Many of the other commentors have touched on the problem with the success of Grindhouse. No one knows what a "grindhouse" is anymore. Honestly, I had never heard the word before this movie was being advertised. Also, it was advertised as an homage to B-movies. Ask the typical 15 to 30 year old male what a B-movie is and they'll tell you "it's a movie that sucks - bad."
I believe that ultimately poor marketing and advertising are the reasons that Grindhouse is failing in the box office. None of the ads spoke to what the movies were about in regard to actual plot. After seeing the movie I know how irrelevant the plot is to the entertainment value of Grindhouse however plot based ads would have put butts in seats. However, I expect the DVD will have huge sales.

Ray, Philadelphia, PA

I rarely go to the movies anymore,. I find Hollywood to be quite full of itself and extremely unoriginal these days. Making a movie that pays homage to movies that weren't that good to begin with is a stellar example if this...just call it the land of remakes and sequels.

I agree with Dave in Minneapolis - I have had it with the gratuitous violence, blood and guts, and foul language in most movies these days. I see way to much of it on the nightly news! Smart independent/original movies are made all the time that contain very little of the above!

Regina, Alexandria, VA

Why would you spend $100 million on 2 B movies. The reason people went to see B movies in the past is that they could get their money's worth for a couple of OK movies. Now with the prices of movie tickets rising in the US, nobody wants to see junk movies. Everybody knew they were going to make crap movies because that's what directors like them do. They make a couple of good movies that everyone loves and then stray away from the things that got them to the popularity and status as a film director. The second that I saw the preview for this, I knew it was going to be a flop. Nobody wants to pay to see a crap movie, let alone 2 of them and waste 3+ hours doing it.

David, Meadville, PA, USA

Dave, NY, you have got to be kidding me with your comment.
How could you possibly consider Grindhouse to be worse than 300.
"Story" and "character" ?. "Heroism"?
300 was a film about a culture that killed newborn babies if they had any visible flaws and routinely sent 7 year old boys to be beaten into bloody manhood. It's one of the most morally reprehensible films that have ever been made. To give the Spartan state some kind of moral superiority in their war against the persians when it was a society built on slavery like all the other greek states implies the gullibility and crassness that we have come to expect of Americans at their worst.

Frank, Manchester, UK

Hollywood will never understand that we "dumb Americans" in "flyover country" just want to be entertained. That's it. We don't want to have to be forced to analyze or think about what we're watching. Movies are about escaping reality for a couple of hours. That's the trouble with many of the pundits and reviewers. They're always over thinking the "meaning" of the film. To them it's work. To us it's entertainment and that's what it's suppose to be. Let your brain rest and just enjoy what you're watching for what it is. The 300 had a story based on history with a positive message in the end, a unique look to it that had never been done before and brilliantly sarcastic dialog interspersed throughout. Grindhouse was just overdone stupid trash.

Heather, San Antonio, TX

I thought the movie was sick! I loved all 3 + hours. They should have cut the pointless trailors in the middle to cut back the total time of the film. In this ADD driven country, dont market a 3 + hour movie to a demographic that has trouble getting through a commercial. Tha was absoultley the greatest deterent, A lot of mi amigo's, Tarentino fans, decided not to go, because who wants to sit there that long? Im sure they will make it up in DVD sales...

Sal LaMonica 23, Delray Beach, FL

Maybe the public is tired of macabre, dark, movies. Who says to intellectual it has to be creepy and gross? I won't pay to see it. Others must have some scruples, too.

J, Frisco, TX

Perhaps the reason '300' is a successful movie is because it tells a story about heros fighting great odds for their beliefs. Perhaps Tarantino is becoming a joke is because he is all about sleazy people doing terrible things to innocent people. I wonder what kind of movies the deranged killer at Virginia Tech liked?

brian, houston, USA

A big budget 'B' movie, paying homage to 'B-' movies of the seventies...? Gee, wonder why it failed? Mainstream America is not going to pay $10+ for a 3+ Hour 'B' Movie. That's why we now have "Direct to Video".

Personally, I like B movies. Bad acting, gore, violence, nudity, stupid plots, bad writing, that's what makes a "good" 'B' movie. And I am old enough to have seen some really bad and good ones in the seventies.

But I haven't seen Grindhouse... When I read the buzz about the editing needed to get it to an 'R' rating from an NC17 or 'X', I decided to wait for the DVD Directors Cut. I wonder how many 'B' movie fans are doing the same....?

Kevin, Dayton, OH

Grindhouse is not a failure as a film, but a failure in marketing. Its fanbase knows the boxoffice film is cut to the bone and are eagerly awaiting the full-length DVD. So why pay eight bucks to see it now? The curious are put off by its length and its really too long for a date movie. Also, remember this genre was low budget and never had to gross a hundred million to turn a profit.

Smauglair, Crane, Texas,

How soon will Hollywood show this talentless, has-been, one hit wonder the door. His films are violent to the point naseau.... my son and his girlfriend went to see his latest offering only last week, there were only 7 people in the cinema as the first film started, after 35 minutes they were the last to leave and it continued to play presumably unwatched for the rest of the evening.

H V Smith, Long Valley, NJ/USA

time for a remake of international velvet

sol, LATROBE, usa

Dave in NY is right on the mark. There is no more ludicrous sight than Hollywood contemplating its own navel and trying to jam its self-referential, jokey insights down the public's throats. In the end, it is the public that decides what it wants to see. And although a vivid ad campaign can get people in for the first few nights, it is word-of-mouth that keeps people coming in. We are hearily sick of low-class, vulgar, violent, nasty tripe like Grindhouse. But keep trying, by all means. With luck, the Weinsteins and Taratinos will go broke. One can hope.

M. A. George, Carnegie, PA

In my personal opinion, Grindhouse was pure cinematic genius. That said, I recognize that the films will not appeal to everyone. I loved Rodriguez's ridiculous gunfights and campy plots in "Planet Terror" and the way Tarantino infuses common-man characters with too inteligent dialogue has always appealed to me. These films were not intended to be A Beautiful Mind or American Beauty. There is no great message within the frames. They simply are what they are: blood, gore, action, violence, sex and humor. I'd like to think there is still room in the world for those things.

Rich, Wilmington, NC

I liked the 1st half movie by Rodriguez, but the beginning of the 2nd movie, Tarrantino's, was so slow and boring, and I disliked the girls so much, that I got up and walked out. Contrary to the reviewer, I did not leave because I did not know it was a double-feature. I left out of boredom.

Mac, Houston, Texas

When two very successful artists, in any field, collaborate there is always a sense that one was trying to out perform the other within the narrow scope of the work. That is, in my opinion, one of the contributing factors to the failure of this film. Another thing that struck me about this film is that in trying to remain true to the root and form of their success, both Tarantino and Rodriquez have stifled the progression of their creative impulses and abilities.

Conor. , Dublin, Ireland

This film is great not only for its humor but also the soundtrack (the songs are so good especially the cover of ‘Baby it’s You’ by Smith and an obscure British Invasion group’s song called ‘Hold Tight’). Tarantino can pick songs like no other, and he meshes the soundtrack so well to the film that I can’t imagine anyone doing a better job. The portion of the film “Planet Terror” had nothing to do with Tarantino as that was the installment done by Robert Rodriguez, (which was also brilliant and hilarious). Along with the fake movie trailers which were even funnier than the films themselves, you have yourself enough entertainment to make you sit your butt down for three and a half hours. People don’t like change or anything unique it seems. They don’t understand that these two films were meant to pay homage to an era and a slice of popular culture. When all’s said and done, it may have more to do with people’s lack of perspective and lack of appreciation for true art.

Somedudeskee , San Francisco , CA

With this crazy guy killing 32 people in Virginia by possibly copying a violent movie, who says we need more of Quentin type movie. I just don't gert people's obsession with gory films. I wish these directors would read real people's survival history like Sikh or Jewish or Amish or Armenian history or other people's history who were persecuted because they looked different than to be obsessed with directing bloody movies.

Manjit Singh, Martinez, U.S.A.

The seeds of this are clear in recent films and even as far back as Jackie Brown. Kill Bill was too long and self indulgent. I never understood what all the fuss was about with Sin City. Whilst a tour de force visually god it was boring. The same was true for some of the Kill Bill sequences. Both directors have been over indulged and not enough is being left on the cutting room floor.

Paul Owen, Birmingham, UK

Dear Weinstein Brothers,
This movie will stand the test of time. Both movies are absolutely terrific. We have seen the movies more than once.
Stand firm, for you will be vindicated.
The men in our family loved the first movie. The girls in our family actually applauded the second film. Please accept our apology on behalf of the Midwest. Slow to warmup, but they'll get there.
Congratulations

Cyn, West Des Moines,

"...didn't educate the South and the Midwest"...? And released on Easter weekend?? Hmmm, not sure that it was the South and the Midwest that needed educating on that one... Yes, I did go to church on Easter, and yes I am going to see the movie. Educate yourselves, fellahs.

alice, Atlanta, GA US

i always find it bizzare when people post a comment like 'who cares?'. fancy taking the trouble to send a message to advertise your apathy!

philip marshall, lincoln, england

Tarantino just isn't as good as people like to think.

Alfred C. Martino, Jersey City, USA

On watching the trailer, I've decided there is no way I'll drag myself into cinema theater to watch such bluff. I genuely admire Tarantion's previous films, especially Pulp Fiction, but Grindhouse just seems to have none of Tarantion's trademark features - no dialogue, no wit, no tricks with the plot - just a senseless mess. I have not got a clue why is it so, just hope that he'll return back to basics and the next film will be fine. Tartantion needs to get back to himself.

Pam, St.Petersburg,

Well he can always make movies with his sweetie Michael Moore. I quit watching Quentin's movies after he was practically spooning with Moore at Cannes in 2004.

E.M. Scallion, Henderson, Nevada

The movie was EXCELLENT. I can understand wanting to wait for the DVD, though. And for whoever said 'Deathproof' was boring obviously has little taste in good cinema. It is one of the best car-chase films EVER made...

Kirbonicus, Cincinnati, OH

I liked the movie. Just because most American's didn't go doesn't make it a bad movie or Tarantino's career over. It was only a few years ago that we were given Kill Bill one of the best movies in quite awhile.

I think people missed the point of Grindhouse. It was exactly what it was supposed to be. A "B" level film meant to bring back the old style of bad movies, bad actors and bad theaters. If you can't enjoy the faux trailers and the old look of the film then maybe you should stick to Shrek 3.

Eric, Ayden, NC

Perhaps people simply don't think watching a woman with a manchine gun for a leg is something they want to pay money to do. Perhaps the dumb audiences are people who think a hypersexed and hyperviloent tribute to 70's b-movies is brilliant idea.

Ranger, The D,

I never got the opportunity to attend grindhouse films, but got sucked into the genre in high school. I saw Grindhouse (without my wife - not her type of movie) just the other day - it was fantastic! i think movies like this are made for a specific audience, just like the original grindhouse movies, so not having a huge box office should be expected. And for people that left half-way through, or complained about film grain/scratches, or bad dialogue - research a movie before you go! That was all intentional to recreate the grindhouse environment! I'm so tired of stupid people not understanding well-made movies. Also - I saw 300 and thought it was great, too! I don't necessarily think there are bad movies being made, it's that the people going are too lazy to actually think about what they are seeing.

Mike, Washington, DC

they shoulda inserted a REAL intermission bet. films...u know, where u can actually get-up, go to the restroom & get a drink, stretch ur legs, then sit back down 4 the 2d feature.

a REAL intermission in itself woulda been homage to double features not to mention juiced-up the concession $ 4 the owner.

Orrin , Akron, Ohio

I saw it opening day with my wife and we loved both movies.
But we do live in Florida so the majority of the idiots that live here were watching that god awful Ice Cube movie.

Fallout911, Miami, Florida

I have to admit, this is the first time I've read anyone call any of Rodriguez's movies 'intelligent.' If people want to see the usual slash and gore that he spits out, there are now directors who do it better, with more gore, action, and a bit more intelligence.

Rob Sanson, Durham, USA

Tarantino was and will always remain a video store clerk. His movies are horrible. Glad to hear that he fell flat on his face.

Hans, Houston, TX

Tarantino is like the emperor who wears no clothes. His movies suck, and no one in the media has the balls to say it.

Thomas, Tampa, Florida, USA

If 'Ghost Rider' and '300' are the wave of the future then we are all doomed.

I went and saw both. Both were terrible. I regret giving them my money.

Lynn, Houston, Tx

I'm concerned about Quentin Tarantino's obsession with violence, and bloody screenplays. Someone should keep any eye on him.

nik, sydney, Australia

Grindhouse was a piece of cinematic history, that later will be proved in DVD sales... The reason it failed is because it was to long for people to digest in one sitting... Though if your a fan it was exactly what you expect and more.

Al, clinton twp, michigan

grindhouse is hilarious, but how many people are fans of over the top cheesy b movies? my friend said it was like they made the movie just for us, and maybe they did just that. i dont' know how many people can really appreciate this kind of movie.

haun, muncie, indiana

The problem is poor marketing, there's no buzz on the streets or word of mouth for films or music anymore, instead they take the best 60 seconds of the film and show it to you in the previews on tv over and over, I feel like I've seen it already. If they were daring, they'd have started a whisper campaign, or let it happen organically, that Rose McGowan had a machine gun for a leg in the new movie, but not shown us in the previews! People would've talked about it and it may have gained steam, instead I feel like I've seen the best scenes, and likely have.

john mcglasson jr., pontiac,illinois, USA

I saw the trailers at 300 and it made me wince. 300 was at least based on an event. Grindhouse just plain sucked. Really, an automatic weapon as a prosthetic leg? Who wants to waste money on that trash?

Torrey Baird, Belen, USA/New Mexico

who cares?

Andy, memphis, tn

I saw the film on the opening weekend and thought it was o.k., but just barely. The best parts of it were shown in the trailers. It just wasn't that great of a movie IMO and failed to live up to the hype, especially at over three hours. FULL DISCLOSURE: I'm one of those unsophisticated dopes from the Midwest that the high and mighty Weinstein's forgot to "educate" before Grindhouse was released. Oh, and I liked 300 too. And the Spiderman series. And Star Wars. And Lord of the Rings. etc, etc. But I suppose we're an easy target to pin the blame on instead of admitting a mistake.

EPM, Peoria, IL

Tarantino is a overrated hack. He had one good movie in him (pulp fiction) and that was it. His latest self indulgent violence-fest flopped because he isn't making what people want to see. Only Tarantino wants to see the crap he puts out.

Art Vandelay, Houston, Texas

Apparently, audiences are smarter than I gave them credit for and are certainly less hypocritical than the psuedo-intellectuals that review films. Everything the critics lamblasted in 300 (stylized violence, over-the-top acting, corny or jingoistic dialog) is found in spades in Grindhouse. The bottom line is that 300 did it better.

Tom, Atlanta, USA

I'm not into gore, especially sadistic gore. I loved PF, however. Tarantino obviously had writing, editing, directing chops. Does he still possess them? Probably.
I do like the concept they were playing with here. I only wish they didn't drench it in sadisticly comedic violence (the worst kind). For those reasons I won't see it. I have no problem with a long film. Heck, I think it's great that we get more film for the same price.

Tom Roberts, Tokyo, Japan

That's the problem not all movie goers are sophisticated and smart like the pundits and the Times writer. Us morons like to
watch deadly killers with swords and sandals over movies with deadly zombies and 'killer cars'.

pedro , Anaheim, USA/CA

Doesn't anyone think that maybe in an overwhelmingly Christian country,like the USA, that the timing release ,Easter weekend, would play into the low audience? Of course, add to that the fact that people DO like to see uplifting, funny or non-violent movies they can take their families to and you get a bomb for the Weinsteins and Taratino.

ladyluck, orlando, florida

It's hysterical to me, this constant griping over how stupid the huge worldwide hit The 300 was and now the shock at how badly Grindhouse is doing by comparison. Aghast, we're asked, "How can the public be so dumb?" Sorry, Hollywood, but maybe you're the dumb ones. Apparently our betters just can't figure out why audiences might prefer to see a movie about heroism, and defending freedom against slavery, done in a visually interesting way with attractive actors/actresses as opposed to a bunch of seedy, morally rudderless non-entities dispatching each other in increasingly gory and reprehensible ways. Sacrifice for ones country as opposed to a sack of testicles and a rape scene interrupted by a melting penis. Women bloodily torn apart, a kid's head blown off for no reason, and a dog thrown under a truck as opposed to fighting against despotism and enslavement. Hmm, it's a puzzler. Memo to Hollywood: Cynicism and Irony are no replacements for story and character. Think about it.

Dave, NY, NY

I'm 53, born and raised in the South (USA) and never heard of, or saw low budget exploitation films so I'm clueless what Grindhouse is supposed to be a parody of. I can't imagine people in their teens and 20s (in the numbers needed to be a hit) would have any idea either, if my age group doesn't 'get it'. The online trailer struck me as so over the top and lacking in an actual story, what was the point in paying premium box-office admission to something like this? Hollywood, and most of television, has utterly, completely, stupidly forgottent that what I look for is ENTERTAINMENT. Not self-infatuated odes, not finger-pointing political correctness, not sanctimonious screeds, and certainly not insider-paens so obscure even professional reviewers can't quite grasp what's going on. ENTERTAINMENT. I go to movies to be entertained.

Jack Mackenzie, Gateway, Colorado

Grindhouse was great fun! I really liked it and I am disappointed that it wasn't a big hit because it would have been interesting to see other directors try their hand at it. I do think the concept went over the heads of some people. The advertisements weren't that clear that it was two seperate films. I think it would it be a mistake to release the films seperately though. I don't think they would stand on their own. I think it was better seeing it in the context of double feature. I wouldn't pay to see either of the films on their own merits. But if you can go see the film the way it was intended to be show do it. You may not have another chance.

Brian, Lowell, USA/MA

" TELEFON " was a Grade B movie ?
You are confused.

Michael , Gloucester,

I liked the movie. It could have been trimmed but overall it was entertaining.

Lynn, Greenville, SC

300 was an excellent movie - not onlyl visually, but in terms of its inspiring message about a small group of highly trained and dedicated people fighting, and ultimately winning, against almost inconceivable odds. The Spartans in the film, are noble, self-sacrificing, honest, courageous, patriotic and family-loving. All of the things Americans would love to see in THIS country.

Grindhouse on the other hand is ultra-violent, depressing gore with no characters that anyone cares about and no redeeming message.

VA Tech has shown once again that Americans are fed up with the violence in our culture. We don't want to glorify or support it. If that makes us "dumb" than so be it. At least I didn't spend $100 million to produce a piece of depraved garbage instead of...say...feeding countless poverty stricken children. What a waste of time, manpower, money and soul.

joan, Boston, MA, USA

It is interesting that the above photo show's an EXIT sign over the gentlemen's heads.

cliff owen, Reston, VA

The movie was really GOOD!!! Rodriguez's part was better then Tarantino's but his was still good. You paid the price for one movie and you got two, so stop whining!! This movie was ridiculously over the top and thats what was awesome about it!!

Matt, Phoenix/ Arizona,

I agree with Nancy Wilson's comment - that was very good. Tarantino's work is soulless and self-indulgent. I agree also that the Island is a beautiful film -- the visuals are stunning, the story has some real meaning and uplift about humanity. It has a spiritual and sincere quality -- it's a rare gem. The makers of ugly, gore and sex flicks like we see in so many indie films and by hollywood's hip set have lost touch with people. They think movie-goers are "dumb" if we don't want to get interested in their degraded vision of humanity. I would rank the Island as far better than anything Tarrantino has ever done -- it's one of the best movies in the past decade at least -- and of course, critics ignored it.

Reg, Rochester, NY

I never have seen the point in Tarantino, okay, he steals ideas from some fairly cool films, some of his dialogue has been well sourced as well, but if he can't make films of his own, why not give the job to someone who can?

What an idea, let's revisit some of the worst aspects of cinema ever inflicted on an (at the time fairly) innocent public and deliberately enhance the flaws. The seventies with added naff? You might as well vote for a president with all the worst aspects of tricky dicky but make him stupid as well, or bring back the giant over-chromed gas guzzlers and make them capable of ruining the countryside as well as the town....

This sounds like the sort of film I would avoid like the plague, I am heartened to know that there are other discerning cinema-non-goers who share my views.

People went for 300 because it does exactly what it says on the tin. They avoided Grindhouse because it does exactly what it says on the tin. Who's dumber, Hollywood or the audience?

Kidd Garrett, Bristol, UK

The real problem isn't as Neil Murphy said that they became to involved with their B movie homage, it's that tarantino can't stop homaging himself. I thought I would throw up if I heard any more stupid references to his own movies in Death Proof. Planet Terror was awesome though.

Mike Slag, Philadelphia, USA

One scene in the previews really made me retch about the prospect of seeing the movie, why I will likely avoid it. -- It was attaching a weapon to a woman's (I believe it was a female character) partially amputated leg. Not my idea of sexy, interesting or anything that might work to attract me to the film. Nothing else in the previews repulsed me, nor did the scenes of explosions and car wrecks attract me. Tarantino movies are usually an automatic draw for me but the stump weapon was enough to leave it as a Netflix item.

John, St. Petersburg, FL

I don't know about you guys, but it's not that I didn't want to go see Grindhouse, I just didn't want to go see it in the theatre. Going to see a movie in the theatres is so expensive nowadays that the price of admission for myself anf my girlfriend, some drinks and a popcorn will cost more than the purchase price of the DVD. I'm a busy guy, and I'd rather wait for it to come out on DVD and watch it in the comfort of my own home that drag myself out the the theatre and watch it with all the other mouth-breathers.

Jim, Dayton, OH,

people walked out 1/2 way through for good reason - the first 1/2 (planet terror) was good - but deathproof was so boring, people couldnt take it.

dennis, norman,

Most people have never heard of "grindhouse" movies - especially younger audiences. So what do you have? Commercials showing cheesy, bad-looking movies. If you saw an ad for a completely serious, non-parody movie that involved a woman getting a machine gun attached to her leg, would you jump to see it? It reminds me of the episode of the West Wing where the Hollywood producer is blaming CJ and her PR campaign for his movie not being nominated for any awards - "The movie was bad, Roger, it was just BAD."

John, Washington, DC

Lol at Bill who thinks that 300 was a good movie. Not many Americans would enjoy a film that portrays them as a corrupt foreign power with endless resources and materiel trying to crush a smaller independent civilisation.

Oh sorry, I forgot. Americans probably think they're the Spartans.

Octavis, Oxford,

This is typical Hollywood analysis - - the audience is stupid, thats why 300 made so much money; the audience is stupid, thats why they didn't pile in to see the borefest of GRINDHOUSE.

After lauding "SIN CITY" for the Weinsteins, pause to ponder why 300 did so well, since SIN CITY and 300 are sourced from the same writer, Frank Miller.

If only Hollywood arrogance could be pumped like oil, the land of movie factories would make more money than all of the Middle East combined.

Frankenfilm, Richmond, vA

I saw 300 last week because how can a movie that made all of that money be bad? Well let me tell you, it was HORRIBLE! It put me to sleep during the supposedly exciting war scenes. I couldn't stay awake. The only exciting thing about this movie was the impossing prince who seemed to stand 20 feet tall with that very feminine voice (which woke me up from my sleep).

So we go to see Grindhouse this week and talk about quality of work, storytelling and action. This 3 1/2 hour movie went by like/that. It was the type of movie I was expecting from 300. But at the end of Tarantinos 'Planet Terror' I was left wanting more even after 3 1/2 hours. I hope the re-release shows what happened to the girl left at the farm. Can't be anything good.

Ed, Chicago, USA

If dumb movies are the way of the future why did Lord of The Rings do so well. Titanic is hardly a dumb movie. It has nothing to do with dumb, only appeal. Quality always has a strong market.

Dave, London, UK

Perhaps our daily lives`are so filled with horrific, mindless violence we just cannot take any more when it is on celluloid. Public brain has atrophied which is why they love the asinine movies of Will Ferrel, Owen Wilson l and Vince Vaughn ( god forbid !! )

Personally i prefer movies that allow me to think and challenge my preconceptions., but art house has always been second cousin to the narcissistic Hollywood blockbusters for thrill or diversion seekers.

M McGregor, Tunbridge Wells, Kent

I think its bad timing, they tried to get a jump on the summer blockbusters and flopped. Also, as much as I like the idea of the old fashioned double feature, today's audiences are conditioned w/ an MTV-length attention span, so perhaps releasing them as 2 separate movies would've been more profitable.

I've not seen them yet, (busy law student) but hope to this week before they get yanked.

dan, Lansing, Michigan

Poor article. Quantity rarely equates to Quality in film. This double feature has also received great reviews by Critics and Film buffs alike.

Alex, London,

mathewdh says "Neither of these directors is noted for their family oriented fare?"
Please.
Ever heard of Spy Kids? It's that trio of"family safe" movies that's grossed about a half billion dollars world wide, all directed and written by Robert Rodriguez.
Grindhouse is so "in the know" that there's no doubt it's not for everyone. any movie that can take the piss outta a whole sub genre is *not* going to score well with mainstream audiences.

Greg Murtz, Eugene, Oregon

Here's a news flash. I go to the movies to be entertained. Although I am not a big fan of violence, if it fits with the story, I will at least understand why it was in the movie. However, I don't understand Tarantino's lust for pointless blood and guts. In my almost 50 years of watching movies, I have walked out on only one, Reservoir Dogs. The gratuitous violence was appalling. I came close to walking out on another movie, Kill Bill, and would have done so had it not been for the fact that my wife and I were at the theater with another couple and we did not want to be rude and leave them there. The critics say Tarantino is brilliant. I strongly suspect he is just mentally ill. He made a great movie with Pulp Fiction, but my admittedly brief exposure to the other two movies mentioned above was enough of Tarantino's "brilliance" for me. Needless to say, I have no intention of seeing Grindhouse, re-cut or not.

Drew, Sarasota, FL

They spend over $100 million to revive a low-budget genre that was unpopular the first time around (which is why they played in 3rd-rate moviehouses in the first place), and yet it's us movie-goers who are the "dumb" ones?

draked, Middletown,

The problem with Grindhouse is in "Death Proof". It's LOOOONG on dialogue and by the time the car chases get there, you're practically asleep. They could have cut a GOOD 20 minutes of dialogue from that half and gotten a great Tarantino picture.

Tom, Indianapolis, IN

The description of the movie (I haven't seen it) suggests that the directors became too involved with their 'homage' to 70s b-movies at the expense of the story. They need to remember that a large part of their audience will never have watched those b-movies and many people (like me) never liked them anyway.

Focus on the story and let the messages and homages unfold from the story, not the other way round.

Neil Murphy, cromer,

Tarantino has made exactly one good movie in his entire career: Pulp Fiction. Everything else he's made has been crap. Reservoir Dogs was downright execrable.

Rodriguez was my hero for making El Mariachi, a good movie, on a shoestring. I enjoyed his production diary, Rebel Without a Crew. His decline has been slower than Tarantino's but he's racing to the bottom too.

They're both has beens.

Chuck Roast, New York,

I should have left after the intermission previews- At least Rodriguez's portion was entertaining, Tarintino was beyond disappointing. Horrible and a waste of time...

Shannon, Atlanta,

People defending the directors and the films themselves should really cut all the rest of us a break. The films were BORING. Period. The directors thought that a mildly amusing film with a few "smart" quips could be sold to the movie going audience just because they are supposed to be a product of the self-proclaimed hippest directors in Hollywood. Oh, please. Sin City is by far an awesome film, there are several great Tarantino films, but even Rodriguez's From Dusk till Dawn was 10 times more entertaining than what he did this time around. I mean, even as film school projects, they are lame, boring and uncreative. I dare anyone to watch this thing a second time around and if you do, congratulations, for me it would be torture. The films were boring. Period. Stop trying to make excuses or that the audience "didnt get it". Those films were NOT entertainment, in any form.

Jake, Imperial Valley, CA

I find it interesting that a movie recreating a famous battle from ancient Greek history is considered as being pandering to a dumb audience.

Face it, the 300 was a good movie, Grindhouse was not. But I guess that's not the kind of explanations that are popular in Hollywood.

Bill, San Francisco, CA

300 is dumb? No, I think making a 3+ hour movie based on cheap, gimmicky movies is dumb. I actually enjoyed Rodriguez's Planet Terror - but come on, it was a cheesy zombie movie. Tarantino's "Death Proof" was just a self-indulgent snore. It wasn't 1/2 as good as the movies it was imitating, which weren't great in the first place.

Jim, Palm Harbor, FL

There's nothing in Grindhouse that hasn't recently proved to work for other movies. "Planet Terror" works as a comic zombie movie, and "Death Proof" works as a pop-culture-heavy thriller as sure as "Kill Bill" did. It's failure at the box office is a surprise, but it may, in fact, simply be a result of it's 3-hour-plus running time and the fact that no one in middle America knows what a "grindhouse" is. Name the movie "Drive-In," and maybe people will have a better idea what it conceit is.

Franklin, Athens, Alabama

An anecdote: The actress playing the chick with the machine gun leg was on THE VIEW last week. They played the clip of her shooting people with the leg. When it ended, the audience and the view women sat in stunned silence before anyone said anything. Nobody can cheer and applaud that violence. The movie sounds like a major misjudgement. And after Virginai Tech, forget about it.

Suzanne Michelle, Los Angeles, California, USA

To suggest that the careers of either of Tarantino or Rodriguez are damaged is ludicrous and smacks of hyperbole.Both are geniuses and will no doubt continue to create marvelous films.Additionally,it is not news to report that the moviegoing public laps up garbage.They've been doing it for years.

James, Mentor, Ohio

If Hollywood thinks they will have to "dumb down" the movies, they can keep enjoying huge losses.
It is unfortunate that most writers for commercial can't seem to emulate the riveting talent and character development of Mr. Milch (Deadwood) and Mr. Chase (The Sopranos) Perhaps viewers feel that Tarantino's self-indulgent, repetitive gratuitous violence is boring. They are called B-movies for a reason! No one ever really watched them...they were too busy snogging.

My visits to the local cineplex have dropped drastically over the past few years, due to the generally deplorable offerings available. What I, and I think many others, look for is a great series. I am holed up on the couch until the wee hours with my HBO or Showtime DVDs from Netflix. I can watch some really fabulous creative talent, without driving, commercials or abominable popcorn. And if I want to snog, I can do that too!!

GAC, Fort Collins, CO

"He’s got to start developing real characters and getting back to the things that people loved about his movies.” yes he made just enough decent movies to make that a plural, "reservoir dogs and "pulp fiction". Can anyone honestly say Kill Bill was worth 3 hours plus of their lives? Maybe the fact that people not going to the grindhouse double feature is a reflection of of the fact that maybe the last offering could of been well, dare I say it "self indulgent"? Which would make it the opposite of the B movies he claims to love so much?

simon , los angeles ,

I saw Grindhouse cast make a full court press on every talk show a week before release. That is the biggest tell that they knew it was a big stinker.
Tarantino lost it. When I look back on this and Tarantino's early work, I'm thinking he may really need some mental help. Rodriguez got suckered on this one. I saw him proudly talking about how he needed a stunt kid for the gross scenes and he used his own kid--classy. Did the cast read the script or were they in awe of big named directors? A note to the Weinstein's, since when do you spend $100M for a B-movie? I think it is funny how Harvey is going to throw another $30M on it and re-release it as 2 films. Maybe he can get the whole cast to make the talk show rounds again telling us that it was too long, the title was confusing, and please, please, please, see our piece of crap.
I think Nancy said it best "Tarantino has no love in his life, and it shows in his bankrupt films. The masses want to be inspired not revulsed"

zmo, allentown, PA

Please enough of trying to force bad movies down peoples throat. I saw Grindhouse and it was a bad movie. I love both directors and their other films, but this one was just plain old bad.

There was no characters that I cared about.
The violence was way over the top.

What is with the scratchy film and missing reels? I paid money to see a movie and I was given the damm magruder film!

Maybe next time they can make the audience chew tin foil, and squirt lemon in their eye?

John, haverhill, MA

I thought Grindhouse was a mixed bag, Planet Terror was exactly what it was meant to be. a zombie flick with tons of gore and thrills and chills to keep you in your seat. it did not drag for 1 minute. the trailers before and after were well done. Deathproof, oh lordy this was just bad moviemaking. i think the editor was out back huffing kerosene fumes or something becuase they let the ebonics dialogue ramble on endlessly. The message of the film was completely contradicted by what the second set of trashmouth chicks did to their moviestar girlfriend.

Chukzombi, Newark, Land of the Free

It could just be that by insulting audiences that haven't gone by saying they are not - hip, or we are attracted to 'dumb audience' movies that they are biting the hand that feeds them. That and the fact that the beyond extreme gore crowd isn't that big. And the biggest reason of all, they don't look like good movies. All the puply gory camp who cares.

Rey, Kearney, USA

This movie is:... Long.....boreing....and....STUPID. There is no redeeming explanation or justification. There were about 20 people when I went to see it and several left before intermission. I only stayed so I could "Knock It" and justify my comments. One more effort like this and Mr. Taratino's career will be over. The 50 minute female dominated conversations in both movies were nothing less than banal.

John, Mesa, Az, US of A

Neither of these filmakers are noted for family oriented fare. True, they make interesting and visually compelling stories. However, the real reason the film bombed on its opening weekend probably can be layed at the Weinsteins feet. Opening this type of film on the Easter weekend was an insult to the religious people of America. Easter is considered the major Christian holiday. This movie needed an adult audience to lift its numbers in the theaters, and they stayed away in the extreme. Most kids under 17 were not going to see the film due to age restrictions. Without an audience it bombed. Once the audience heard it had bombed that weekend, THEY avoided it like the plague the second weekend. Which is the fate of most films that open badly. This is not to be confused with good films that open small and open larger from word of mouth. No...Grindhouse was to be an cinematic event. I am thinking of Grindhouse as a war, and few showed up to participate. CHEERS...

mathewdh, Kent, USA

Tarantino has become successful by paying homage to the hack. Now he's becoming one himself.

He wouldn't know what to do with a genuine, affirming human emotion if his life depended on it. Maybe it's time for him to get married, have kids, and grow up.

Hollywood's obsession with stylized torture, gore, and violence are wearing thin. We're already neck deep in it on the evening news. Enough already.

Dave, Mpls. MN, USA

I rather liked "Grindhouse." It is what it is--that is to say, it's a fun movie with no real point other than to celebrate movies. The gore is a bit over the top, but no more so than in the first installment of "Kill Bill." On top of that, the violence and gore are inherently silly and exploitave, but the (intentionally) low-tech special effects give it an almost cartoonish quality. The Rodriguez contribution is probably a zippier, more entertaining film, but on the whole, I thought it was a very funny way to pass an afternoon.

John, Orlando, FL

The Wienstein Brothers seem to be trying to corner the market on the most disgusting types of films that can be released of certain religeous holidays. Black Christmas on Christmas and Grindhouse on Good Friday. I have seen Pulp Fiction and I remember walking out of the theater. The W brothers do not seem interested in any other market other than the confused adolescent white male. So be it as their garbage films and company go down the tubes.

Rey Padron, Miami, fl

Two weeks and the article acts like that’s it. Once it plays global--it just got picked up at Cannes by the way--it will make back its money. Plus DVD. It'll have enough bloody legs to go the distance.

The Wolf, Minneapolis, USA/MN

After seeing this film, I didn't marvel at the ground-breaking zombie special effects from Planet Terror, nor the iconic characters. I didn't wow over the tight car duel from Death Proof. I just thought, "My ass hurts." This was a three hour movie with with 90 minutes of story. The dialogue in Deathproof was so dull that when the yakkers suffered a gruesome death I felt sweet relief. My favorite scenes were the "missing reels".
The Hollywood types might dismiss the audience as "uneducated" for not getting the allusions to movies so obscure that only Tarantino has seen them, but we do have lives that don't revolve around Hollywood. And if Tarantino and the Weinsteins continue to make such self-indulgent films, their lives won't revolve around Hollywood either. The film was simply not the sort of tight, tense film we have come to expect from Tarantino. Rodriguez kept us through the first half. But fans didn't walk out on the second half from ignorance. They just walked out.

Chris B, Georgetown, TX

I'm a 53 year old girl/woman and I LOVED the whole
double feature with fake previews in between, And yes,
I did get a wee bit squirmy in my seat after about 2 hours
but still it was a fabulous ride all said and done,

I don't mean to be mean but I hope to gosh that film makers like these two gems don't ever let stop doing
their oh so talented thing----no matter how dumbed down
audiences are getting. To the rest of us they are a
treasure!!!

Lisa, vancouver,

I'm 60 yrs old. I grew up watching many of the original "grindhouse" pictures in the seedy, old urban theatres. Those pictures were crap then and this re-do is even worse crap now. What a stupid idea, Quentin! THAT'S the real problem. It will NEVER be appealing.

Randy, Atlanta, , GA

Grindhouse is a masterpiece. The trailers alone were worth the price of admission! It's not their fault that the dumbing down of America has caused such films as 300 to become smash hits. If people like them give up or give in to the almighty $ we'll be force fed that crap in droves. I'm 27 so I barely remember drive-ins and only saw B movies on TV. I've never studied film but I'm a fan of it and I totally respect Rodriguez's visual genius Tarantino's attention to detail that translates into some of the best dialogue in movie history. I applaude The Weinstein Company for it's innovativeness. It's courage to go against the grain with Tarintino films and others alike is what made them rich and carved their nitche. If they were to turn their backs on that same spirit now would be a slap in the face to all that helped made them rich in the 1st place

Zack, atlantic city, nj

grindhouse is the best movie i saw in years. the whole time i was in the cinema, nobody left to go to the bathroom, we were all riveted on the film. grindhouse is excellent. but, i didn't hear anything about it until just a few days before it showed in ashland kentucky, when i watched rodriguez and tarantino on the charlie rose show. planet terror is excellent and deathproof is excellent. and i loved this movie.

zaneohio, Lucasville, ohio

Just saw the film tonight...and while yes, both could easily be trimmed...it made for an entertaining evening. Well worth your time...particularly for buffs of 70's exploitation films. Two thumbs up...cut off and in a jar.

Austin, Augusta, Ga. USA

Dear Hollywood

“dumb audience-friendly movies such as 300 and Ghost Rider were the way of the future”

Please get off your high hoarse.

The reason why Ghost rider attracted any kind of audience was because of curiosity, we wanted to see how you were going to pull this off even though it was one of the worst films I had ever seen. Grind house was to distracting to enjoy and it looked like the usual “post” Desperado movie. Word of advice to these two gifted directors, stop listening to your “yes-men” and groupies and look at the ingredients of some epics. The two of you are more than this.

David, Midland, Tx

Three things that Hollywood doesn't seem to understand:

1. Calling your audiences (AKA potential CUSTOMERS) dumb is not a wise move and make us like you less.

2. The mass majotity of US movie theater audiences are kids high school age and under. They were born in the freakin' 80's and 90's!! How on earth are they going to understand and appreciate a 1970's nostalgia flick with grainy film footage. They're playing HD X-Box 360 everyday. No wonder the movie 300 was a smash hit.

3. Your more sophisticated adult movie watchers have sweet home theaters and will wait for DVD to avoid the movie theater crowds (which primarily are annoying, obnoxious kids.)

JoeC, St. Louis, MO, USA

Comparing Tarantino with Beethoven is almost as pathetic and ridiculous as this awful film. Profanity for profanity's sake, and violence just for the heck of it, no wonder people are walking out. What boggles my mind, is why are critics fawning over it? There is not a single character you care about in this whole 3 hour mess. The story is a bore, the dialogue intollerable, and when it's over, you feel filthy. This is what the cinema has become? Then let us stay away in droves. Contrast with a film like, The Island. A story. Got that? A STORY! People that are fascinating, a theme that is profound and mystical, music, beauty and incredible action, not to mention a touching love story. Tarantino has no love in his life, and it shows in his bankrupt films. The masses want to be inspired not revulsed, news, life, gives us more than enough of that.

Nancy Wilson, Seatlle, USA/ WA

The possible other problem with Grindhouse -- other than the fact that it really is not up to the caliber of their other films -- is that it is too gory for even the hardiest of filmgoers. I saw it last weekend and was completely appalled at the shocking violence and tastelessly gory scenes. (Yes, I understood going in that it is a parody, and I am no prude -- love HBO's Rome, Sopranos, all other Tarantino films etc.) But this was about as much fun as I would imagine any normal person would have watching a snuff film. I walked out 3/4 of the way through in disgust.

Arjuna, Honolulu, HI

Disney had Fantasia and now Taratino has Grindhouse. Both fantastically, daring concepts that just missed the mark with the public. But just like Fantasia, I think Grindhouse will ultimately find an audience and Taratino will be redeemed.

Eric, Frisco, TX

The Weinstein Company took an independent spirit hit on the chin here. I think the Weinstein brothers probably went against their best instincts about marketing a daring concept that would test generational appreciation of a fringe experience even in the height of its own era. But their genuine hopes wanted to give their star directors a change to present "Grindhouse” the way the directors wished to keep the artistic integrity as a full back to back movie experience. So the marketing campaign came down to selling it as full Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino movies back to back, rather than marketing it as a 70’s experience. Also, there this was the added problem that both movies are polar opposites, with very different market segment appeals. The article ends on a bit of a hopeful note, but to say to Tarantino should "start developing real characters" is like saying Beethoven should be Schumann, or Mozart should be Chopin. An artist does what he does.

dougla1, New York, NY

though grindhouse was not without problems (it was pretty much two feature length films back to back) I think its refreshing to see one of the few directors who are truly able to say that they are given the artistic freedom to take their films into new directions and that aren't constrained by the producers. its a shame that grindhouse hasnt done better as it IS a good film (especially the tarantino segment)

dan, boston, MA