Yep, I maintain that Death Proof is by far the better movie. But I've hated everything Rodriguez has done in the last decade, except maybe Once Upon a Time in Mexico. Hate, hate, hate, the nudge-nudge wink-winkiness of his grindhouse efforts, as well as his over-reliance on ridiculous cgi.

That being said, I do love the giant blood squibs he uses in this one, and props for the John Carpenter throwback score, I really wish more movies had old school synth scores (Part of the reason I LOVED Universal Soldier: Regeneration, which you guys should do some day, its the Godfather of direct-to-video action movies).

Speaking of Robert Rodriguez, his second film, Roadracers is presently streaming on Netflix Instant.

From Wikipedia: Roadracers is a 1994 made-for-television film directed by Robert Rodriguez, his second feature film following the success of his 1992 debut, El Mariachi. The film originally aired on Showtime Network as part of their Rebel Highway series that took the titles of 1950s-era B-movies and applied them to original films starring up-and-coming actors of the 1990s (including the likes of Alicia Silverstone and Shannen Doherty) and directed by established directors such as William Friedkin, Joe Dante, and Ralph Bakshi. Rodriguez was the only young director to participate in the series. The series was produced by the son and daughter of Samuel Z. Arkoff, the co-founder and producer of American International Pictures (AIP), the distributor of the films this series takes its titles from.
Robert Rodriguez's take concerned a rebel named Dude Delaney (David Arquette) who dreams of leaving his dead end small town and becoming a rockabilly star but gets caught up in a nasty feud with the town's local sheriff (William Sadler) and his son (Jason Wiles). Salma Hayek plays Dude's girlfriend, Donna.

Me again. If you've never seen it, it's worth at least one watch. It has yet to be released on DVD in the US. There's an Australian release you can purchase on Amazon. Those of you frustrated by Rodriguez's over-indulgence of CGI and bombastic action will be pleased to know this film contains neither. Due to its $1,000,000 budget and cable TV resources, it's refreshingly restrained.

I'm saving my opinions on Death Proof for Death Proof, but I will just say this:

When I first saw Grindhouse in the theater, I was initially disappointed in Planet Terror and was more favorable to Quentin's segment. Having revisited both films many times on home video (separately and together as Grindhouse), my feelings have essentially reversed. Planet Terror has a fun sense of imagination, energy and plain wild ambition that the other film doesn't have until the last act.

I think it's part of what made Kill Bill: Volume 1 so entertaining. Instead of just being content with making a kooky, crazy Chopsocky film, Quentin worked at it to make sure it was also a good movie, with fleshed-out characters you cared about and a rich, engaging story with pathos and sincerity.

Imagine what could have been if he had applied that thinking to Death Proof. Don't get me wrong, I like that film, but I feel it's more of a lark, whereas I think Planet Terror is more worthwhile and rewarding.

I dunno, I just can't get invested in a movie that's trying to be so goofy all the time. Which is weird, because I love the Evil Dead movies, so I'm not really sure what's different about something like Army of Darkness vs Planet Terror, and why I can love one and dislike the other. I love individual bits of Planet Terror, like the hospital knife attack sequence and the running over zombies with a big-rig, but I can't help but think "man, I wish these sequences were in a movie that was taking itself more seriously so I could care about these characters"

When I first saw them, I liked Planet Terror more because it was fun. But I found myself thinking about Death Proof more, especially in terms of how it plays with tension, expectations, and structure. If the challenge was "make a grindhouse-style picture that doesn't suck" both are winners.

QT often bugs me because of how he too often has his characters parrot his own sentiments (and Abernathy, Stuntman Mike, and Zoe are ALL doing it in DP). But RR often bugs me because of how he sometimes goes over the top from ridiculously cool to ridiculously dumb.

johnpavlich - You've convinced me, I'll give it another shot and see if it grows on me. Perhaps I've been too hard on it. Its been awhile since I've seen it, but my biggest issue wasn't the construction of the characters themselves, but it was just something about the line deliveries, where I didn't buy that the characters in the movie "believed" the universe they existed in. In Big Trouble in Little China, the universe is insane and crazy but I buy that every actor believes in the world, whereas there's just something self-aware to me about the way the actors deliver their lines in Planet Terror.

I'll agree to disagree for now until I give it a rewatch.

I prefer Death Proof to Planet Terror, but I will concede that it could do with some trimming down. It's weird, cause they used the 'missing reel' gag at least once in that flick. It would have worked, I think, to just have skipped a lot of the slower bits by having the reel tear or something. Maybe make that film look a lot more beat-up and use that condition as an excuse to bail out of a scene at any given moment and cut to something more interesting. Shoot some more stalker bits where Mike's tailing these girls out into the country or something. It's been a while since I've seen it, but from what I remember after they hit the convenience store Mike just vanishes until the chase scene.

Also, you guys should do Sin City.

This is what a Tarantino pitch is like-