Reviewed on June 6, 2009 by

Posted in Action / Reviews

Death Proof

death-proof

FTF Boo Rating

User boos

1 is good, 5 is bad.

[Total: 23    Average: 3.3/5]

OK, Quentin Tarantino has officially run out of credit now. Pulp Fiction was awesome, one of the best films I’ve ever seen. The next Tarantino film I saw was Jackie Brown. Jackie Brown was boring, but I let it go because Pulp Fiction was awesome. Then I saw Kill Bill, which was also boring, but again I let it go because Pulp Fiction was awesome. However, I just watched Death Proof, and I don’t care how awesome Pulp Fiction was, Quentin Tarantino needs to fuck off now.

Firstly, let’s talk about the feet. I’m not interested in feet. In fact, nobody other than 50 year old unemployed kerb crawlers is interested in feet. I have never been attacked by football hooligans or racists, but if I was, I’d imagine at some point I might be on the floor with a load of feet smashing into me, which would be the exact same experience as watching Death Proof.

I took notes while I was watching this film, this a quick snapshot of them:

  • Girl sends text message, I didn’t need to see that
  • Feet
  • Stuntman Mike gets a lap dance
  • More feet
  • Stuntman Mike kills everybody in the film
  • Introduced to new characters
  • For some reason it’s in black and white now
  • More feet
  • That hot girl I like is one of the new characters, that’s a bonus
  • Colour comes back
  • Feet
  • Boring conversation
  • Feet
  • Stupid statistic gets raised which I’m going to complain about
  • Black girl is apparently playing the role of a stereotype
  • More Feet

Now, about that stupid statistic. One of the new characters is a black girl who, as mentioned in my notes, is playing the role of a stereotype. I will call her stereotype. Stereotype tells her friends she is carrying a gun, to which one of her friends says “You are more likely to get shot if you carry a gun than if you don’t”. Here’s why this is totally flawed logic. The only reason that statistic is true is that you are more likely to get shot if you live a lifestyle that necessitates the carrying of a gun. Most ganstas carry guns, therefore the vast majority of people who get shot are carrying a gun. This does not mean carrying a gun makes you more likely to get shot. Most gangstas wear baseball caps as well, that doesn’t mean you’re more likely to get shot if you wear a baseball cap. This is a correlation, not a cause.

This is similar to the annoying statistic that shows you are far more likely to have an accident on roads you know well than roads you don’t know well. Experts say this shows that you’re more likely to stop paying attention on the roads you know well, which will lead to you crashing. This ignored the blindingly obvious fact that the roads you know well are the ones you are on most often, which of course makes it more likely you will crash on them than a road you have never been on. Put it this way. I drive down the road my apartment is on every day. I have never been to Blackpool. I have had one car accident. Is it more likely that was in Blackpool, or the road outside my house?

The above two paragraphs were totally superfluous to the review of this film weren’t they? If I were reading this, I’d find that really fucking annoying. This leads me to another point. This film constantly just drowned itself in random boring conversations of no relevance to the plot, if there even was a plot. Every time Tarantino does this in a film now it gets more depressing. It’s like watching an ageing stripper parade herself to a group of uninterested punters. The “Royale with Cheese” conversation of her youth long gone, she desperately tried to recapture it in the hope for some semblance of attention and validation. But it’s gone, forever, and she should get off the pole now.

And finally, Uma Thurman. Uma Thurman wasn’t in Death Proof, but I still don’t like her, and I’m pretty sure it’s Tarantino’s fault she exists.

Death Proof on June 6, 2009 rated 3.0 of 5

« The X Files: I Want to Believe | Terminator Salvation »

Comments

  • Tizz said, on Saturday, April 3rd, 2010

    Yeh i did find the random conversations in this where at the point where you felt he was trying to hard, and almost forced to be as “clever” as convos in previous films. I did enjoy deathproof though… maybe what kept me going to the badass second half with the car chase was the fact im a leg guy and this film delivrerd plenty of that! cos apart from that I can only remember a few scenes from the film, and not the female roles or “charecters”

  • Collin said, on Monday, November 15th, 2010

    You’re seriously a joke of a movie critic. I could maybe see from your point of view if you came up with anything other than you’re flawed perspective of this film.

    Good day, sir.

  • Tim said, on Thursday, December 9th, 2010

    I thought as a punchline, IF you had been absorbed by the film (many hadn’t), that Tarantino’s wiping out all the first girls in one fell swoop was pure genius…

    Of course most got sick of their conversations long before then.

    That and the last frame of the hammer kick to Stuntman Mike’s head. Priceless.

  • Luc said, on Thursday, December 9th, 2010

    @Colin – What site do you think you’re commenting on? This isn’t called “SensibleFilmReviews.com”. And try and learn the difference between “you’re” and “your”, 12 year old children can, you should too.

  • Nicole said, on Saturday, January 8th, 2011

    First of all, Fuck off. The reason stereotype is a black stereotype is because this is an exploitation film. It’s a reference to the blacksploitation films of the 70’s. That New Zealander is also a stereotype. It’s just a Russ Meyer-esque sexploitation film for the modern day. Did you also notice that all the girls were massively hot bad arses? It’s called Grindhouse for a reason. Cheap thrills, that aren’t supposed to be critiqued seriously. And I fucking loved it.

  • Jim said, on Tuesday, March 29th, 2011

    I think Tarantino has officially lost the plot. Thought this would be a cool blu-ray but very boring. Glad I only paid $10. Not made by people who are into cars or know anything about cars. Could have been a great car movie instead very dull. What’s with this 70’s reference stuff? Funny for one scene but a sign of lack of ideas and originality.

  • Jim said, on Wednesday, April 6th, 2011

    This piece of shit was devastatingly boring except for the car chase at the end. Tarantino obviously has lost the plot and has no idea what he’s doing. He’s so full of himself and apart from Pulp Fiction all his movies are garbage.

  • Duncan Whittaker said, on Sunday, January 1st, 2012

    The above review is a very accurate description of what is the worst film that I have ever seen.

  • GOOD AT COMBAT said, on Tuesday, November 6th, 2012

    I LOVED THE MOVIE, I just purchased grindhouse on blu ray that lets you watch the ENTIRE grindhouse feature back to back. Both movies delevired, this is exactly what I was expecting, The movies are supposed to be about voilence, perversions, sex, fetishes, and explotations. It was like going back in time and watching something I never got to do(im too young). It felt like I was in some ghetto movie theatre in the 1970s!!!!! I love the how the first movie planet terror has refrences to the next movie your about to watch(like the julianna jungle is dead on planet terror0 I loved the preview for machete ANOTHER GREAT MOVIE,the previews and commercials between the movies was a nice added touch. So whats the problems THAT ALL OF YOU HAVE WITH FEET?? ALL OF THOSE GIRLS ARE SUPER FINE!!!! just becuase your wife,girlfriend,significant other has ugly nasty stinky feet dosent mean every other girl does (ever heard of a pedicure???) I liked seeing all those fine women with sexy legs. I liked how the talk about weed and fucking guys, it makes it seam REAL, not all girls talk about shopping and clothes only.great action scenes, kurt russel does a great job. Ive seen the entire thing twice now. that more than 6 hours enough said!!!!

  • Liam said, on Sunday, November 11th, 2012

    Clearly few of you got the point of this film…

    The film clearly follows in tradition of small budget exploitation cinema of the 70s, playing heavily on sex, lack of exposition and style to keep you planted. This isn’t an action movie. They dialogue serves as a means to make you feel connected to the characters in a very smart way. If conversation isn’t enough to make you connect with characters, your not appreciative of how dialogue can be used to make you connect with characters.

    The films this is born from employs the same sort of techniques…only this film does it in a MUCH more fleshed out way, which is great.

    Also, the film isnt meant to be a glorification of the genre. more of a homage. it probably is technically a bad film. but that’s only because ALL explotation cinema is crap, and thats where this film succeeds in buckets. it nails everything it sets out to. It’s not a film about cars. this isnt a fucking car movie so get over it. there is an appreciation…but it’s not car pornography. go watch the fast and the furious if that’s your thing. its more of a horror/retribution flick. If you can’t see past this shit…then you’re a dumbass.

Add your comment, but don't be a dick

( required )
( required, but not shown )
( optional )