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