the chutry experiment

I think the two films should have been switched. The slowness of the start of QT's would have been better up front. I have to say, though, that I spent much of the two hours laughing hysterically. I see what you mean about it being intellectual, and it certainly is, but in such a way that I was rolling at so much of it. So were a group of kids a few rows behind us. It was a pretty raucous room for us.

I'm thinking of doing something in the future on the critique/support of masculinity in these movies.

Have you seen anything about Naveen Andrew's character being gay? We wondered about that, especially in light of his explicit emasculation of other men.

I haven't seen anything about Andrews' character's sexuality , but his fascination with emasculating other men seems too significant to ignore.

Tarantino's gender politics have always struck me as incredibly ambivalent. Certainly his films seem to simultaneously deconstruct and reinforce traditional notions of masculinity, but he also does interesting work on representations of women (note his reworking of blaxploitation in both Jackie Brown and "Death Proof").

Interesting that you suggest the order of the films should be reversed. I think I like the structure--it's almost like a good indie rock song, starting off loud, then turning down the tempo in the middle before the big finish. My audience was relatively subdued, but that could be due to watching the film in a an art house theater.

Speaking of Grindhouse's gender politics, check out this Richard Corliss article from Time magazine. I think he misses or misreads the satire in these scenes, but he's right to point out that the multiplex tends to favor boys to some extent.

I can't wait to see these films. I thought it was interesting that in his review of "Grindhouse" on NPR's "Fresh Air," David Edelstein said that it was a shame that most people would see these movies at home. He suggested that they really should be seen in the theatre, as part of a collective experience.

RE: The switched batting line up.

I think Tarantino's slower pace would have made a nice opener but it wouldn't have made much sense. Rodriguez is making a grindhouse film, Tarantino is de-constructing one, so you really needed a reference point established. The more I think the about the film in terms of this dynamic (Rodriguez=Reference Point, Tarantino=Deconstruction), the more I get out of it although I still feel that the Tarantino piece is a disappointment (and this is coming from both a Tarantino fan and, paradoxically, someone with relatively low expectations).

Matt, I'm inclined to agree with Edelstein, but to be honest, my audience was relatively subdued.

Drew, you're right, of course, that the films wouldn't have worked as well in reverse order. I think QT is always going to struggle to match his successes with "Pulp Fiction" and "Reservoir Dogs," which will likely always lead to the contradictory expectations you describe.

In thinking about your comments together, I'm still convinced that what I enjoyed most was that the film evoked the kinds of screening experiences that aren't available in a smaller city like Fayetteville. Had I watched this film in DC or Atlanta (where I might catch a midnight screening of Beyond the Valley of the Dolls for example), I'm not sure I would have enjoyed it as much.

I enjoyed the experience of it above all and would suggest it to anyone but as a film and not an experience, Grindhouse left me with a rather empty feeling.

This is an honest question because your comment is provoking me to reconsider a couple of my analytic practices: How do you separate the film from the experience in a case like Grindhouse where the film itself is calling forth a specific kind of experience? Isn't the shared cinematic pleasure part of (the meaning of) the film itself?

I had a similar sensation watching "I Heart Huckabees." I enjoyed the movie as an experience but I didn't feel like it works as a film, more like a philosophy lecture. I think the issue of separating the film from the experience is obviously more embedded in the essence of "Grindhouse" and may have contributed to its relative box office failure this weekend (I think it grossed 11 million when expectations had it at twenty...then again, the movie is over three hours and has a big rated R hanging around its neck).

I would hope that expectations for Grindhouse would have taken those details into account, but clearly predictions were way off the mark. Grindhouse's bad opening has sparked a number of interesting but overwrought conversations about QT, audience expectations, etc. The folks at Cinematical, especially, seem to be overreacting a bit.