Perfect movie, but hoping to answer some questions.

Rating: 8/10 (12 April 2007)

After hours of research, reading people's opinions, reading up on actual "grindhouseal"-era movies, this is my explanation of the movie and why the two differed so greatly. Robert Rodriguez was introduced to grind-house cinema only about a year before actually writing this movie. He had no real background or knowledge of the old movies. He had only really watched a couple with Tarantino. Therefore, the movie "Planet Terror" is his initial response to the sparse viewing of grind-house material. It was put in front as an "appetizer" or a "hook" so that people would actually buy tickets. The movie was heavily focused on gore, action, and sex because he was going all out. He was making an "all in one", "here it is, BAM!!!" kind of attempt. The movie was shown first to keep the general moviegoer entertained and in awe. "Oooh blood! Explosions! Boobs!". "Death Proof" was the movie that is supposed to actually represent grind-house cinema exactly the way it was back in the 70s. The reason for the representation of long, endless, chit-chat pointless dialog is because in the heyday of G.H., the filmmakers had as much budget for these movies as I have in my wallet. They filled up about 70-80% of the movie with the main characters' (who were mostly empowered (and occasionally black) women) dialog of whatever they were talking about. The remainder scenes, with action or blood or effects or all, took all the budget these movies had. They couldn't afford anymore. To tell you the truth, old G.H. movies, after looking them up, actually suck big balls. They really are B-level movies to the core, and only have a glossy finish because lots of horror and action directors cite them as a big influence. They were boring. The only redeeming quality was finally seeing the "bad guy" or seeing a stabbing or blood (hint hint sound familiar?) or death. Everyone pretty much agrees that going to "D.P." after "P.T." was a steep drop in terms of entertainment, but to look at the movies subjectively, "D.P." was the truer movie, and the more successful in the aspect of showing what the old G.H. cinema really was. And I would complain about the cell phone bits, but again, in the 70s, they didn't feature cell phones because they didn't have them. They did feature whatever technology was available, like the latest cars. Anyway, back to the point. Everyone says what they want, but I am now convinced about the certain "holes in the fabric" between the two movies, and the initial apparent void in logical continuity putting the two movies together. I am happy. I'm not happy that no one liked "D.P.", therefore, not unlike Nazi (not using it negatively, just saying the first thing I could think of) propaganda, you just eventually conform to everyone else's opinions, which means that I don't like "D.P." as much as when we first saw it (I freakin loved it right after I saw it), just because everyone's coming down on it so hard, it's hard to like it, like someone makes a point to why it sucked, and I say "well, that is true, hmmm..." and eventually, you don't like it, you know? But now that I understand why this movie was like this and that movie was like that, I can comfortably start to grow my liking for "Death Proof" again, just as an ideal and homage to grind-house cinema. Also, keep in mind before you start to rebuttal about me being dumb for liking a movie that sucked, I am saying this as my opinion subjectively: "Planet Terror" was an exponentially more entertaining and well-paced movie than was "Death Proof". That's out of the way. On the other hand, I do like "Death Proof" just slightly more, just because of the more idealistic, stylistic, and traditional approach to the movie and characters themselves. I put every possible thought into explaining this phenomenon that is "Grindhouse", and I also hope you, the reader, recognized my attempt to be rational and unbiased, obviously with my statement that "Planet Terror" really was the better-produced movie. And I'm not guessing or crap-shooting or being a "fanboy", I researched this, starting from the night I saw the movie, and everything here is either paraphrased from a quote from a respectable source, an actual quote, or, when precursed by a statement of mine, is my own personal opinion. I'm not trying to win an argument, I'm trying to give an explanation the best way I can. Also, I'm not proclaiming to understand grind-house cinema, I was just quoting, but didn't feel like citing or putting quotes anyway. I guess that's it.