Previous Comments

[1] On Mar-16-2007, Ethan wrote:

This isn't really a surprise because just like most of the exploitation movies made have had heavy cuts here and there leading to a final uncut version on DVD. That will probably happen with Grindhouse upon it's DVD release. All in all it'll still be awesome and impressive.

[2] On Mar-16-2007, Connor Bell wrote:

I highly doubt it'll be NC-17, I remember when people were complaining that Pulp Fiction should of been NC-17. I don't doubt Tarantino and Rodriguez will cut stuff, but I highly doubt Zombie and Roth will. It was a mistake for Tarantino to be involved with Hostel, he shouldn't of allowed Eli Roth to direct a trailer, it will only end badly

[3] On Mar-16-2007, Anonymous wrote:

When I read that article, I was both really excited because they're really, REALLY paying homage to their glory days, a lot more than I thought they would, and I was disappointed, because I either won't be able to see it in theaters if it gets the NC-17 or I'll have to wait for the unrated DVD if it's an R.

[4] On Mar-16-2007, Cherokee wrote:

Chewing on a baby? Woah man, hahahahahahahaha.
Oh, I feel tainted laughing at that.

[5] On Mar-16-2007, Pete wrote:

I cannot wait for this. Im gonna buy my ticket, a bucket of popcorn and a soda and just have a great time.

[6] On Mar-17-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

I believe that, to preserve the integrity of the work, QT and RR might just go for an NC-17. Maybe I'm delusional, but the new guy in charge of the ratings board has said that he doesn't want the NC-17 rating to be a kiss of death.

And besides, this thing is so hyped, it's gonna make a fuckload of money regardless. Tarantino said "These scenes are so unbelievable you literally have to pinch yourself. That's always where cinema can go for me!" If he really means that, he'll go for NC-17.

[7] On Mar-17-2007, ButchTheBoixer16 wrote:

Gilbert Smith, if it were up to QT and RR, then I agree that it no doubt would be NC-17, but I am betting that the Weinsteins plan to keep it R so it will gross more money. I am sure the NC-17/Unrated DVD will kick plenty of ass though.

[8] On Mar-17-2007, misterpink867 wrote:

lol chewing on a baby.

that's pretty intense.

[9] On Mar-17-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

The whole point of Grindhouse is seeing it in a theater. It has to be "I cannot believe I'm seeing this in a theater".

Anyone with the internet is desensitized to seeing gross stuff at home, it's seeing it in public that makes the experience so crazy.

Either QT and RR will release an NC17 and put a huge dent in today's self censored entertainment world, being forever regarded as heroes of the first ammendment, or they'll rob the viewer of the experienced promised for over a year now.

[10] On Mar-17-2007, Anonymous wrote:

RR and QT actually have final cut on their films. If they want it NC17, it'll be NC17. They might opt for an R just to keep the Weinstein's happy, but the Weinstein's aren't gonna be able to force them into anything.

[11] On Mar-17-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

Sorry I keep posting, but a message to the third poster:

If it IS NC17, I think QT and RR would be happy to hear that younger kids snuck in. Remember QT is the guy who said young girls should go see Kill Bill, and that he's FOR piracy because it allows people to see movies that are otherwise unavailable.

Sneaking in is easy. Just buy a ticket to something else, and go into Grindhouse when nobody's looking. Some theaters don't even care. I've bought a ticket for one movie and walked into another right in front of the staff.

If it doesn't work the first time, go to a second run theater a month later and try again, it's guaranteed to work at a true grindhouse theater.

[12] On Mar-18-2007, Pete wrote:

You can sneak in, but if you think that the attendees wont be looking for underage kids in Grindhouse, youre crazy. Youll probably get kicked out.

[13] On Mar-18-2007, Mick wrote:

I would actually prefer to see Grindhouse as an NC-17. An R rating (while the audience is more expansive) would put a dent in the impact of the film. It's like QT said, you wont believe what you are seeing while you're watching this movie. An R-rated film could never handle that... it needs to be unrated or NC-17. Also, on a similar note... check out the Documentary, "This film is not yet rated"... its great!!!

[14] On Mar-18-2007, garth wrote:

Come on. how is the "report" even getting any credence?

This is just someone who has seen the movie saying "it's too extreme for an r rating"

There is very little way that the MPAA gives an NC-17 rating to a movie with the names Tarantino and Rodriguez attached to it.

No way in hell.

[15] On Mar-18-2007, Garth wrote:

Another thing...

People seem to think this is going to be some crazy, shocking, disturbing movie.

Come on, Tarantino's doing a slasher (sorta) and Rodriguez is doing a zombie movie (sort of). They're not doing anything groundbreaking, come on.

[16] On Mar-19-2007, ButchTheBoxer16 wrote:

"There is very little way that the MPAA gives an NC-17 rating to a movie with the names Tarantino and Rodriguez attached to it.
No way in hell."

Are you kidding me? If a friggin movie with puppets (Team America) got an NC-17 rating, Hostel had an NC-17 rating, and Saw III had to get like 7 or 8 trips to the MPAA to get their NC-17 rating reduced to an R, then I think QT and RR are guaranteed to get slapped with an NC-17. RR's "sort of zombie movie" will probably be extremely violent and graphic and from what I and others have read about those fake trailers, they are pretty fucked up too. Eating a baby. That is NC-17 material on its own. So ya, maybe it isn't groundbreaking (although bringing back Grindhouse kind of is), but it is at least NC-17 worthy stuff.

The only debate is whether it will stay NC-17 in theaters, or get edited down to and R and then released Unrated on DVD.

[17] On Mar-19-2007, mike wrote:

dumb ass thats not even a scenes, its one of the commercials for the film that rob zombie did...

[18] On Mar-19-2007, Garth wrote:

"Are you kidding me? If a friggin movie with puppets (Team America) got an NC-17 rating, Hostel had an NC-17 rating, and Saw III had to get like 7 or 8 trips to the MPAA to get their NC-17 rating reduced to an R, then I think QT and RR are guaranteed to get slapped with an NC-17."

Good thing you got my point. My point is that Grindhouse has the names TARANTINO and RODRIGUEZ on it. Oh, and a little known set of brothers called the WEINSTEINS.

No. Way. In Hell.

Wow, Team America got an NC-17...a movie by the two guys who basically paraded the fact that they tricked the MPAA into giving South Park an R rating. Good example.

[19] On Mar-19-2007, matt wrote:

You have to take into consideration that theaters aren't going to want to show an NC-17 film. It's too much of a hassle for them because they have to take further measures to keep kids out of the theater. That means they will have to pay their staff to stand outside the theater and check people's tickets.

So that means that Grindhouse won't be getting the ticket money even from kids who sneak into movies. I remember reading an interview with the guys from Saw, and they said that more people saw Saw (ha) than the Grudge, but the Grudge got more money. It's because kids snuck into Saw and bought a Grudge ticket. If they put Grindhouse out with an NC-17, they won't get it into most major theaters and they won't get the money from teenagers. I don't know if Tarantino and Rodriguez and especially the Weinsteins want to be fucked that hard.

[20] On Mar-19-2007, Jesus M wrote:

Quentin says he can do what he wants and that "they", whoever that is, can't tell him what he can and can't do.

Let's see if he sticks by his word, and lets this film happen the way he and RR envisioned it.

If I feel they both sacrifice their artistic integrity as independent directors this time around I'm not sure if I will see the film in a theater unless it is they way they intended.

The MPAA is a joke. Not Yet Rated exposed them.

Quentin and RR need to put their reputations on the line, and stick their chests out. There will be no better way to start a boycott of the MPAA than with this movie.

[21] On Mar-19-2007, John wrote:

Just cut out Rob and Eli's trailers. They are both no talent hacks. Quentin and Robert should have done the trailers themselves.

[22] On Mar-19-2007, John wrote:

Don't cut one fucking second of this film. PLEASE.

[23] On Mar-20-2007, Garth wrote:

"I remember reading an interview with the guys from Saw, and they said that more people saw Saw (ha) than the Grudge, but the Grudge got more money."

And they would know this how?

Sounds like sour grapes to me.

[24] On Mar-20-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

What's with all this hate for Eli and Zombie being involved with Grindhouse? Don't you think trashy, crappy, ultra schlocky trailers are EXACTLY what Grindhouse is all about, or have you not read one single interview or article on this project since it was conceived?

[25] On Mar-20-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

Besides, what would it do to QT and RR's reputation if they went and had their friends make fake trailers only to say "Oh yeah, we're cowing to the MPAA and a couple people online who don't like you. So we're scrapping the stuff you put all that hard work into." Getting rid of the fake trailers would be a complete betrayal of everything this movie is supposed to be. Nobody would take Rodriguez or Tarantino seriously ever again.

[26] On Mar-20-2007, Garth wrote:

"Don't you think trashy, crappy, ultra schlocky trailers are EXACTLY what Grindhouse is all about, or have you not read one single interview or article on this project since it was conceived?"

Everything but the "crappy" part. The reason Tarantino is doing this is because he LOVES these movies. Genuinely. He doesn't love them in an ironic "so bad they're good" way. He LOVES them.

Go ahead, find SOMEWHERE that he says he's trying to make crappy movies.

Please.

Somewhere.

[27] On Mar-20-2007, Svengoolie wrote:

There are some genuinely good points being made here, and I see both sides of the argument. It was a good read.

I just wanted to poke my head in to point out the idiots here, though. Some of you cunts need to learn what apostrophes mean. Annoying as hell.

[28] On Mar-20-2007, John wrote:

Eli and Rob make annoying pointless movies. I wish someone would make a real horror movie and not add jokes and people from the wb. It makes me sick. From Dusk till dawn was awful because they didn't make a straight horror film. I had hopes for Grindhouse but it's going to be a schlocky mess. F**k, why the f**k would they get the guy who did Shaun of the dead to do a trailer. That movie blew.

[29] On Mar-20-2007, John wrote:

I can't believe the girls they have in this movie. Fergie? who... Rose McGowan? boring... Rosario Dawson? ugly..

Only big truck monkey morons who read Maxim would think these girls are hot and good actors.

[30] On Mar-20-2007, Pete wrote:

Noone has to go see these movies, if you think theyll suck, go see something else in April. No big deal. Why get all PO'd about it?

[31] On Mar-20-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

For real. Sounds like John is getting a damn ulcer at two minute trailers and girls he's not attracted to. If you're not interested in Grindhouse, don't bother hangin' around forum threads dedicated entirely to Grindhouse. I don't go hang out on Britney Spears forums. Simple.

Legitimate criticisms are one thing, but out and out negativity and disdain is just a waste of everyone's time.

[32] On Mar-20-2007, John wrote:

Wrong, everyone can say what they like. I will say what I like. You not agreeing with what I say is not important to me. I am a fan of Quentin. Thats why I'm here. I love this web site. I can say what I like about Pulp, Res, four, and Kill. I can also say what I don't like about from and grind. Hanging out with Robert and Eli has ruined the spirit he once had. I'm sorry I don't have the popular opinion about the way film has been going for the last 10 years. Pointless stories made by inept directors starring dreadful actors. The future seems so bright for film. I can't wait until the devil's rejects 5 comes out or Hostel 10. I will see Grindhouse because I support quentin. The only thing thats going to save this film is Kurt Russel and the car chase scenes. I await you daft remarks.

[33] On Mar-20-2007, Anonymous wrote:

John wrote:
"Eli and Rob make annoying pointless movies. I wish someone would make a real horror movie and not add jokes and people from the wb. It makes me sick. From Dusk till dawn was awful because they didn't make a straight horror film. I had hopes for Grindhouse but it's going to be a schlocky mess. F**k, why the f**k would they get the guy who did Shaun of the dead to do a trailer. That movie blew."

First off...jackass, is that From Dusk Til' Dawn wasn't supposed to be a straight up "horror film". It had the same influence of the Grindhouse theme to it. A movie so bloody, sex filled, and ridiculous stunts and lines made it what it was. And Grindhouse isn't supposed to be a straight up horror film either. You gotta understand what QT and RR are trying to do here with this film. It is a tribute to a genre of films that they grew up on and love, paying homage to them with their own Grindhouse flick.

[34] On Mar-20-2007, John wrote:

Watch some real Grindhouse films. If you can keep yourself away from those great Saw films. Grindhouse films are gritty violent and without self conscious humor.

jackass...

[35] On Mar-20-2007, Garth wrote:

"I'm sorry I don't have the popular opinion about the way film has been going for the last 10 years."

And I'm sorry that, even though you claim to be a Tarantino fan, you have already made up your mind, having seen about 3 minutes of the 3+ hour experience.

jackass...

[36] On Mar-20-2007, ButchTheBoxer16 wrote:

"I can't believe the girls they have in this movie. Fergie? who... Rose McGowan? boring... Rosario Dawson? ugly.."

OK John, I will give the Fergie one to you, although I think this is her first acting gig (correct me if I am wrong), so no one can judge her acting skills if you haven't seen them used before.

Rose McGowan boring. Maybe in other movies she has stared in, but I seriously doubt any part of Grindhouse will be boring, let alone a part that belongs to one of the main stars. You can be in 20 boring movies, but when the right project comes along and you take it, then at least you can have one movie that kicked ass. This could be that movie for her.

And Rosario Dawson ugly? Well first off, that is a matter of opinion because I think she is hot. However, no matter if she is hot or not, she is a very talented actress and as we all know, Tarantino gets the best from his actors/actresses so I have no doubt that she will be aweomse in this, no matter how she looks.

[37] On Mar-20-2007, Mick wrote:

I think what people are forgetting about Grindhouse is that its not supposed to be the greatest fucking movie ever made. I looks like it'll just be straight up gruesome fun. Its not trying to be anything other than what it is. If it gets an Nc-17, great... all the more gore for my eyes to enjoy.

PS- John havent you ever heard the saying "dont judge a book by its cover?" You've seen approx 4 fucking minutes of the goddamn movie... nobody knows how it is yet.

[38] On Mar-20-2007, John wrote:

Your absolutly right. How could I have been so blind. Thank you for persuading me. I love to hear you monkeys babel. I'll go out and watch rent and saw right now.

[39] On Mar-20-2007, GMan wrote:

The problem with John's opinion is that it's not opinion, it's just unfounded negativity. Opinion is when you watch a movie and evaluate it (And by the way, the effectiveness of art is objective, not subjective, I'd get into but I don't think John's the aesthetic philosopher type). Shitting-all-over-something is when you judge a movie as being total shit from the get go. Besides that, John already said "Don't cut a second of this film!" and that contradiction suggests he's either schizophrenic or just talking out of his ass and really doesn't care one way or another, just likes stirring up argument.

Argument's great though, it forces you to think about why you love what you love. What John's doing isn't argument though, he's just saying "Hey that's my opinion!" which isn't a defense of your opinion, it's cowering away from having to defend it.

LE SIGH! I wish I could meet someone who was critical of the movie while still knowing how to use their brain.

Oh well, thanks for the laughs.

[40] On Mar-21-2007, Pete wrote:

Youre either going to complain that Grindhouse isnt the real thing, or just go see it and take it for what it is and enjoy it. I watch the old Grindhouse films AND I appreciate what QT and RR are doing with their GH concept. You dont have to hate it because its not the real thing. Its 2007, not 1977 and these guys are both geniuses, they arent hacks. So yes, there will be some differences there especially.

QT isnt going to do Pulp Fiction again. Hes trying new genres, new styles. Thats what its about if youre an artist. Not staying in one certain genre your whole career. Thats BS.

QT has seen so many gory horror films and gialli, do you really think hes going to do the same old thing with it? Its going to be what HE wants to see from that kind of movie and thats fine with me. I love gialli, slasher films and car chase movies, so Im psyched.

[41] On Mar-21-2007, Garth wrote:

"Its 2007, not 1977 and these guys are both geniuses, they arent hacks."

Well, I've yet to see anything to convince me that RR is a genius...

[42] On Mar-21-2007, The "Real" John wrote:

I was the "John" who said don't cut a second of the film. From then on unfortunately another "John" bashed the movie for no apparent reason but not me. That was "Douchebag" John.

[43] On Mar-22-2007, Anonymous wrote:

it's rated "R" saw the tv spot...so hopefully they didn't have to cut out anything in the film....we'll just have to wait and see

[44] On Mar-22-2007, ButchTheBoxer16 wrote:

Rated R for strong graphic bloody violence and gore, pervasive language, some sexuality, nudity and drug use. Just like I thought it would be, rated R. Expect an Unrated DVD.

[45] On Mar-22-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

Damn...

Rodriguez is a cinematic genius, even if his scripts aren't as good as QT's. He's one of the best action directors there's ever been, and whatever the pretentious film school fags tell you, being a great action director DOES require a lot of talent.

[46] On Mar-22-2007, Pete wrote:

Rodriguez writes, directs, scores, edits his own films, has his own film studio, plays in a band, paints, draws.

Nope, hes not a genius at all.

???

[47] On Mar-22-2007, Garth wrote:

"Rodriguez writes, directs, scores, edits his own films, has his own film studio, plays in a band, paints, draws.

Nope, hes not a genius at all."

Whatever. I can write, direct, edit, paint, score and star in my own films if I wanted, too, but if they're mostly crap, then am I still a genius?

[48] On Mar-22-2007, Pete wrote:

All RRs stuff isnt crap. Its not as good as QTs work but its decent. Hes got talent.

[49] On Mar-22-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

When it comes to how good an artist is, you have to say "How good are they at what they do". Malaguena Rosa = best rock song I've heard in ten years. Mariachi series = best Mexican and guitar themed action movies ever made. Sin City = Exactly what a Sin City movie should be. In terms of what Robert Rodriguez does, he's a genius at it. You can argue over the relevance of what he does, maybe you prefer art films to comedy-action flicks, but can you name someone better at what RR does than RR himself? Is there someone who could have done a better job with the concept behind El Mariachi?

If you think his films are kind of shallow, I won't disagree. The deepest thing he's come up with is the subplot about the CIA agent in Once Upon A Time In Mexico. I've read the script and Planet Terror is a change of pace. It's loaded with real drama and pathos. But that's not cinema, that's writing, there's a huge difference.

[50] On Mar-22-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

Still talking! If you don't want to get into it, don't bring up as interesting a topic as whether or not a director is a genius, haha!

You should also keep in mind that RR has been financially successful at everything he's ever done. That doesn't require genius, but it does require competence. Someone who's highly competent at everything they ever do is usually called a genius.

Because he's an action director, RR doesn't get his props. If he were making faggy Sundance movies, everyone would love him. He's done a lot for movies in general, though. He's like the flagship for the digital video movement. He's probably inspired more aspiring young filmmakers than any other director. He's revolutionized how people use digital effects in film. People like to pretend he's irrelevant because he makes movies with bazookas and gunfights and 3D sharks and silly stuff like that, but if you look at everything he's done for film and film culture, he's one of the most important directors ever.

And if you really want to get into it, you could say film was invented for action flicks. Certainly every film star for the longest time was an action star. Charlie Chaplin was just as physical as Jackie Chan. Errol Flynn and Douglas Fairbanks were practically kung fu heroes. If action film is irrelevant, then film is irrelevant. Even his critics won't say that RR isn't a good action director.

[51] On Mar-22-2007, Garth wrote:

Wow.

Um, yeah, he's a pretty good action director.

I just guess that you equate "poor writer who can direct a pretty good action scene" with genius. I don't. I recognize him as a pretty decent director. He's no genius though. I would lump him in with such directors as Eli Roth, Rob Zombie and, to a lesser degree, James Wan, as decent directors who could make much better movies if they worked with a good writer instead of insisting on writing crappy scripts.

I think From Dusk Till Dawn is easily Rodriguez's best movie, and it isn't lost on me that it is based on a script by an excellent writer, even if the script is not that writer's best script by a long shot.

And yes, of course Rodriguez is an inspiration, but it's mainly because he was noticed by Hollywood for making a competent action movie on a tiny budget. Good for him, I just don't think he's a genius in ANY form (though I think his scores are always really fucking cool).

[52] On Mar-22-2007, Bret wrote:

I'm shutting down this thread since GRINDHOUSE Got an R Rating.

Recent Grind House Headlines

Or check out all the entries in the Grind House category.