Previous Comments

[1] On Apr-08-2007, Esco wrote:

That sux. I loved the flick and was hoping for a slew of them. This was a holiday weekend and the theatres seemed to be filled with people taking their kids to see The Robinsons and TMNT. Maybe it'll pick up next weekend. It's not impossible.

[2] On Apr-08-2007, Matt wrote:

I wish I could be that optimistic, but Grindhouse's big crowd has already hit up the theater---three times, on my part---and the ship has (unfortunately) sailed. This sucks. I was really hoping for a Grindhouse 2, but this isn't giving the Weinsteins any reason for it.

[3] On Apr-08-2007, ButchTheBoxer16 wrote:

Don't give up hope yet guys. If shit like Basic Instinct 2 and Garfield 2 can get made and Rocky Balboa can get made after Rocky 5 sucked, then there is always hope. All we have to do is spread the word about how funny, awesome, and kick ass the movie is, get your friends to see it, and see it yourselves multiple times. I am going to see it once every weekend as long as it is in theaters. I suggest everyone who cares do the same. Props to Matt for having seen it 3 times already.

[4] On Apr-08-2007, Matt Rosen wrote:

I'm not that surprised. In my neck of the woods, it did well filled the theater as well as any of the films that beat it out. The trouble was that it's so long it only had 4 showings each day. It didn't really do poorly; the other shows just racked up sales because they were able to get two tickets for every one that Grindhouse could. Hence they got twice the sales.

[5] On Apr-08-2007, Matt Rosen wrote:

On the other hand, according to that article, this doesn't seem to apply to most other theaters.

[6] On Apr-08-2007, Matt wrote:

Good point with the "Garfield 2" and "Basic Instinct 2" thing. I think I'm off to see it again tomorrow with some people who haven't seen it yet, so, hopefully I can keep spreadin' the good word.

[7] On Apr-08-2007, Pistol Opera wrote:

... Kinda like "Four Rooms", huh? ... Bottom line: "Grindhouse" (which I unbelievably have not been able to go see yet, having JUST had a baby daughter and spending the holiday w/ relatives!) will be MAD profitable worldwide and on DVD, so if QT wanted to do another one, I'm sure he would. I imagine the "Grindhouse" concept will be franchised out instead, though, and QT will move on to his next masterpiece ...

The running time was too long, and there were TOO MANY "family" films clogging the multiplexes this holiday weekend, plus the concept is too esoteric to turn on the masses en masse. I guarantee the film will have an EXCELLENT long box office run, though. I just wish they'd released it in 2 separate film formats as well; I PERSONALLY could have easily justified 90 minutes away from fam obligations this weekend for QUENTIN TARANTINO, but a 3-hour-plus movie marathon is a no-can-do fer this papa over Easter weekend!

[8] On Apr-09-2007, Niko wrote:

why is everyone ignoring that fact that it only showed in 13 cities??? is that wrong?

[9] On Apr-09-2007, ButchTheBoxer16 wrote:

It didn't only show in 13 cities. It only had midnight premieres in 13 cities. But it is now in wide release. So go see it.

I can understand why it didn't do too well opening weekend, but that just means we all need to see it that many more times for it to do well. But don't just see it so it will warrant a sequel, see it because it is a damn good time at the theater!

[10] On Apr-09-2007, Pete wrote:

GRINDHOUSE was a great time at the movies, but I think it was released at the wrong time. Easter weekend people want happy happy joy joy, not bloody bloody gory gory.

Still, movies arent about opening weekends. Theyre about how good the movie is and its resonance, and GRINDHOUSE delivered totally.

[11] On Apr-09-2007, JACK TERRI wrote:

correct: movies are definitely not about the box office.
And also, if QT really wanted to make a grindhouse sequel I don't think he would have much trouble doing so. Think of everything he has done for the Weinsteins.

[12] On Apr-09-2007, Pete wrote:

We'll see, I really hope GH makes a bit more $$ before its gone. Its such a fun thing to see a double feature in this day and age. Id love to have another experience like that in a few years.

Im sure itll do great on DVD. Everyone will be picking it up.

[13] On Apr-09-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

Glad to see everyone talking sense. Saying a movie is a bomb for a weak opening weekend is like saying you'll never please a woman because you only lasted two minutes when you lost your virginity. Give Grindhouse time to find its audience. Just like Kill Bill (Which is more popular in Asia than it is in the states), it'll make a mint with second run theaters (Where it BELONGS, anyways), overseas and on DVD. Robert Rodriguez and Tarantino both have a history of their films doing very well internationally and on DVD, and Rodriguez is still allowed to do whatever he wants even if his movies don't ALWAYS do so hot in theaters. Ever since Jurassic Park, people think a movie's a loss if it doesn't set any box office records, so I'm glad to see everyone here knows what time it is.

[14] On Apr-09-2007, Fman wrote:

the biggest reason Grindhouse was at 4 this week was most likely because of the fact that it was Easter break and we all know little kids wouldn't want to [at least their parent] watch it. I loved Grindhouse, in fact i saw it twice in one week, which is not really that much, but I never watch a movie two times in a row. Death Proof defintley had lesser moments than Planet Terror as well. I have a feeling Tarantino helped a lot on Planet Terror because Death Proof was not exactly QT Material except for the dialogue

[15] On Apr-09-2007, ColinS wrote:

I believe word of mouth will move the box office numbers in the positive, happy direction for the second weekend. Easter weekend was indeed disappointing, because the back to back movie Grindhouse experience should have track 20mil min, just on Robert Rodriguez 'R' fan base alone. Quentin Tarantino fan base are more whiners about his movies, but Robert's fans in the 18 to 35yr male demographic love his stuff almost unconditionally. The buzz for his movie, "Planet Terror" and the trailers are quite high for the people who saw them this last weekend.

I think many people feel they have to sit for 3 1/2 hr. But, they could leave after the trailers and not feel cheated. In fact, the "Grindhouse" concept is TWO movies for the price of one.

Frankly, I think folks would be missing out on "Death Proof" if they leave. A good portion of Tarantino "fans" have been trashing this movie as "boring." If folks are patient with the film, it is a cinephile's sublime gem. All I can say is WOW! when I first say it last Thursday (I saw it again Friday). Indeed, it is another masterpiece from QT, and I sincerely wish he takes it (the full version; about 30mins was left out for "Grindhouse") to Cannes, in competition. It is THAT good!!!

[16] On Apr-09-2007, Gilbert Smith wrote:

I don't get people. They say "Death Proof looks stupid, he needs to make dialogue driven movies again!" and then it turns out to be dialogue driven like his earlier work, so then what? "Death Proof is stupid, too much talking!"

Come on QT bashers! CONSISTENCY, PLEASE! QT can't refute you when you keep changing your mind! Of course if your goal is to look hip by bashing a popular director, I guess you have to latch on to anything to dis, you can't just come out and say "If I admit I like QT, I'll look like a conformist."

[17] On Apr-09-2007, Matt wrote:

all i know, is that i went to see it and it totally kicked ass, i loved the whole experience i was pumped the whole time, i was never in a hurry i was nice and relaxed just reading to see it all, the whole audience would cheer, laugh it was great, ( SPOILER: i remember when stuntman mike first crash his car to shit everybody was quiet and all you could hear is my friend say: " he lied... that cars dead" then everybody laughed so it was really a great time. loved how it looked old and warn out amazing. it sucks how it didin't do that great. i was expecting it to beat 300 but that's alright...

[18] On Apr-09-2007, Pete wrote:

Death Proof is the film that im still thinking about. It had way more resonance than Planet Terror. Sorry, but that was pretty forgettable to me.

I wanted GRINDHOUSE to be #1 like everyone else. Im dissapointed it only hit #4, I was convinced it would be #1. But Easter weekend, I dont think it was the best time for a double feature of horror movies to be released.

[19] On Apr-09-2007, JACK TERRI wrote:

When watching a tarantino film you go down a rabbit hole: as one critic opined about pulp fiction.
His movies are all about resonance. When you see a QT film it's truly an event, an experience. There's a rush that goes through you as you step into the theatre and you just go "Whoa Baby!" It's the rush you get from only a few other master directors such as Terrence Malick or Brian De Palma.

He's simply the man.

[20] On Apr-09-2007, B Rad. wrote:

We need more movies like this one. The double feature was fantastic, two completely different styles of directing with the same actors. It was like going to the movies and sneaking into another directly thereafter, brilliant. I will have to say that QT did an excellent job here, yeah it was slow for some in the begining but this is a character study, thats how they start. Anyone who likes zombies, gore, and half naked hotties should be there!

[21] On Apr-10-2007, Toothpick Nick wrote:

The "double-feature" thing is an advantage to some (like me) and a disadvantage to others. If you're mostly there to see "Death Proof," then you have to endure "Planet Terror." You're paying one price on the ticket for two movies to be financed. You have to take a piss after "Planet Terror," but you don't want to miss "Werewolf Women of the SS." The Weinsteins had to realize there were going to be some inherent casualties with this film.

On the flip-side, I had a HELL of a good time. The theatre was howling. HOWLING. It wasn't a "let's be a nice, clever little movie for the nice people to watch" - it was a fuckin' experience! While I really liked Robert's half, I got SUCH a rush out of Quentin's. I really fell in love with the characters. I went back for the second time in the same weekend to hang out with my new "friends," and it was still, maybe even more of a hooting, giddy, applauding, ass-kicking adventure, wrestling back and forth between The Girls and Stuntman Mike.

When I worked in a movie theatre last year, I came to learn this: most movies exhaust their value after the first viewing. A mere few make it to the third. I haven't seen "Shooter," but it looks like a "one-er" to me (maybe a "never-er"). "The Host" may taste like Lucky Charms, but more than likely it'll be soggy and the milk will be all colored and warm tomorrow. But "Grindhouse," there's stuff in those two movies that lasts. It doesn't tell you what to think - it just offers you the chance to get to know some interesting characters. There's just something timeless.

I think word-of-mouth will help "Grindhouse" find its audience. I found "Death Proof," and even "Planet Terror" to a degree, to be very appealing to women just as much as men. It's like a chick flick, just with more people getting killed. Most of the main characters are women, and we really root for them. Their dialogue is real and funny and charged, and you get the sense it's not bullshitting you. I recommended it to my mom, and she's super stoked to see it.

[22] On Apr-10-2007, Danny Warren wrote:

Well, around the middle-east of missouri here, the only theaters that are showing it are in St. Louis. The rest of them refuses to show any movie that isn't animated, have superheroes, or has Will Ferrel in it.

Case in Point. When Kill Bill Volume 2 came out, it played on one screen for one week. When Talladega Nights came out it played on two screens for three months.

A lot of more rural theaters aren't playing Grindhouse. And those that are, you have to go through about seven levels of security to make sure you are not 16 and want to see the movie.... because rated R movies make all peoples under the age of 17 murderous psychopaths who kill mercilessly while sexually fornicating and smoking the reefer.

[23] On Apr-10-2007, JACK TERRI wrote:

They sure do!!!!!!!

[24] On Apr-11-2007, noblepaladin wrote:

Even though Easter weekend and the fact that Grindhouse is 3 hours long hurt the movie, I think bad advertising is what hurt Grindhouse the most. For us fans, we were sold on the Tarantino/Rodriquez name attached to the front of the movie. Normal movie viewers need convincing. What do you remember from the trailers? A woman with a gun leg flying around shooting everybody up. Some guy killing women with his car. Very cheesy 70s style advertisment.

Basically, people categorize the movie as a gore/thriller/horror film. However, even fans of gore/thrillers are not sold by the cheesy advertisement. The trailer doesn't make it look gory or scary (in fact, Grindhouse is not scary or too gory, the gore is all cartoonish and unrealistic, there is nothing like the popping eyeball in Hostel). It does not promote the theater experience that made Grindhouse so great. Also, I laughed as much in Grindhouse as I would in many comedy movies, especially during the fake trailers, another great point that the advertisements fail to capture. Like Snakes on a Plane, there was strong hype, but only hardcore fans went to see it opening weekend. However, Grindhouse reviews are very good, so hopefully other people will go watch it after hearing about it.

Worst of all, I think the advertisements completely alienated the female audience. Most girls who saw the movie seem to like it, especially Death Proof. But based on the trailers and commercials alone, girls will not watch Grindhouse.

I admit it is a difficult job to advertise two movies at once. On a 30 second commercial slot, that leaves 15 seconds each. You can't expect the viewers to go online and look up the movie and find out if it is worth seeing or not.

[25] On Apr-11-2007, Jason Taylor wrote:

I'm not suprised! I finally got around to see the film yesterday, and the showing I went to only had about 5 people in it.

While, overall, I did enjoy the movie. I could see why this film wouldn't appeal to everyone. I think it's best left for the hardcore fans of the genre.

I mean, did you ever see a true classic grindhouse film ever make it to number 1? Or number 20 for that fact?

[26] On Apr-13-2007, Stuntman Bob wrote:

It sucks that a film as good as Grindhouse is passed up for a bunch of crap, but as we all know, the formulaic garbage of Hollywood has put the wonderful simpletons under its spell.

[27] On Apr-14-2007, lori wrote:

I saw the movie tonight and being a fan of Quentin's work It was as I exspected.It was off beet,scary,and funny in a Quentin kind of way. It rocked!!!!!Can't wait to see it on DVD!

[28] On Apr-14-2007, Anthony Schiavino wrote:

We're seeing it today but it doesn't take a genius to figure out why it didn't do well. The movie was released on Easter weekend and whether you're a church goer or not the majority of people are going to spend time with their families...hence the reason I'm going today. If they do happen to go to the movies they're going to go see crap like Are we done yet because it's billed as a family movie. The scary part isn't the movie. It's the fact that the people making these decisions couldn't figure it out. Pretty basic. Now people are going to be expected to pay twice if they want to see both movies but haven't had the chance to go to the overpriced as it is theater.

[29] On Apr-14-2007, Autumn Reyes wrote:

I loved GrindHouse it was the greatest movie I have ever seen. I am not the typical Taranino fan because I go to Catholic School, i'm a girl, and only in the 8th grade. Still, I loved this movie!!!

[30] On Apr-26-2007, Jeff wrote:

Why am I going to see the movie more than once? I saw it and liked it. All my friends have seen it. I could care less about boosting the numbers for a studio. I'm not going to cough up another $30 to see the movie at least three more times so Tarantino can go to sleep at night feeling like his movie didn't suck. The people here (including myself) liked it but I guess a lot of the country can be turned off by movies like these if those persons have traditional values. Also, I agree it wasn't an ideal time to release the film.

[31] On May-13-2007, pulpdog wrote:

For me death proof was one of the best explotation movies i have ever had the pleasure to sit through i dont know why so many didnt i kept on telling my friends to go see it but they wanted to watch freakin aquatin hunger force

Recent Grind House Headlines

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