From Dusk Till Dawn (Robert Rodriguez, 1996)

[Cinesimilitude]

The following is a review I wrote for english, and I partially agree with what I wrote. I just want to hear what you guys think.

Fear and Loathing at the Titty Twister.

The Film From Dusk Till Dawn follows two criminals on a jolly jaunt from Abilene, Texas to El Rey, Mexico, trying to escape the wrath of the Texas Rangers. The formula that one would expect this tale to follow would be to end the film once they are safe in Mexico. In this tale, that is where the story truly begins. Now, I'm no mathametician, but I'm pretty sure director Robert Rodriguez understands that guns plus boobs plus vampires equals fun.

It's a damn hot day in Big Spring, as Texas Ranger Earl McGraw's patrol car barrels down a two lane highway towards Benny's World of Liquor. As the ranger parks and steps out of his vehicle, A voice on the CB advises of two suspects in a bank robbery, wearing dark clothes, armed, and extremely dangerous. Earl enters the store and begins to converse with the clerk behind the desk, a greasy hawaiian-shirt wearing boy named Pete, as two couples peruse the magazines and coolers. We discover the two men that pulled a bank job in Abilene killed four rangers, three cops, and a civilian. Shortly after Ranger McGraw goes to the bathroom, the two men reveal themselves to the audience as the two suspects described only moments before. As Seth Gecko (George Clooney) points his revolver at Pete, anyone with a decent sized television set is going to notice the tip of his gun's crosshair is orange, as someone did a piss poor job painting over the toy's certain feature, inherent with every plastic gun sold in Wal-Marts across the country. You know right away that this is guerilla filmmaking, the film exudes a 'who cares if its wrong, its fuckin' cool' attitude. After a string of F bombs between both parties, Texas Ranger Earl McGraw is shot in the head, sneaky Pete shoots Richard Gecko (Quentin Tarantino) in the hand and subsequently goes up in flames with the help of some alcohol and lighter fluid. Pete jumps the counter while on fire in a last ditch effort to end the tyranny of the evil brothers. He is shot many times, body checks a popcorn kernel stand, and dies to the popping sound of our favorite cinema snack. The Gecko brothers exit the store and calmly discuss the ins and outs of being 'low-profile' as the store goes up in flames. They slump into the front seat of their 1975 plymouth and take off down the road. As the southern rock soundtrack swells, and credits start to roll, you realize you're about to embark on a different kind of road trip.

The Geckos check into a dirty motel for some good old character building. After revealing the boys took a hostage from the bank, the script, written by Tarantino, masterfully uses the handling of said hostage to reveal certain aspects of the relationship between the two brothers and some of their individual characteristics. We quickly learn that Seth is the brains of the operation, and Richard's head isn't straight. This is viciously displayed when Seth returns from 'Big Kahuna Burger', only to find Richard has raped, killed, and mutilated her body. Rodriguez, who also edited the picture, builds suspense by cutting in single frames of the bloody hotel bedroom overtop of Clooney's disgusted stare. His reaction evokes a feeling of a good guy who is just a victim of circumstance. The brothers then meet up with Jacob Fuller (Harvey Keitel) and his two children. The Vacationing family man and Pastor, Jacob, Has been recently widowed and is struggling with his faith. Seth and Richard hijack Jacob's RV and take his family hostage in an attempt to get across the border unscathed. Richard's character is developed further with minimal dialogue and lustful visuals aimed at Jacob's daughter. The dialogue between Richard and Jacob foreshadows the nights events with lines like “Those acts of God really stick it in and break it off, don't they?â€

[Antoine Doinel]

Regardless of my opinion of the fim (I like it far less than you do), the review I feel spends far too much time in plot description, along with a healthy dose of spoilers. This isn't so much a review as a description of the film.

You have a good knack for capturing the energy of the film, but I think you could go much deeper in terms of themes (perhaps not with this film in particular though).

I wouldn't mind if you posted your paper on Dogville when it's done though....

[Andre Jurieu]

... and I partially agree with what I wrote.

That sounds a little weird. What part(s) did you disagree with?

[Cinesimilitude]

It was only supposed to be review, but it had to be 1000 words so I had to elaborate with the plot coverage.

Andre, I agree with the review, but I do see it as a waste of a few hours more than a good film experience. It's just entertaining. I built up my faith in the film to achieve the 1000. but I think I could have been honest and still hit the quota. I Wouldnt have given Keitel such a blowjob paragraph, and I would talk about things I don't like, like how it deteriorates in the last 20 minutes to just dull vampire killing, and a cheesy ending.

and yes, I coud definitely go deeper into themes, but the assignment was clearcut in asking for a simple love it or hate it approach, and then why. talking about the themese would deviate from that.

It's the first thing I've written for marks in 2 years, so I should get better, thats what school is for, right?

[teddyleevin]

For me, the films better half lies within the scenes before they arrive at the "Titty Twister."

[Cinesimilitude]

I hated my review, but I got B+ on it. I guess I'm just good at bullshitting, because I really don't like the film as a whole at all. It would have been so much better if Quentin's character killed like 6 guys at the bar to take Selma Hayek hostage, with maybe 1 or 2 of them being Federali's, setting in motion a series of events that lead to the death of both brothers, but not before Keitel and Clooney reach mutual redemption through heartfelt profanity-filled dialogue.

[Fletch F. Fletch]

You may want to look into the two types of pictures that influenced Tarantino's idea for From Dusk Till Dawn. As I understand it, he took two well-defined genres: the kidnap film that started up around the '40s and '50s and the horror film, which, well, has been around since cinema was brought about. The interesting part of Tarantino's trickery, though, and what doesn't work entirely well for me, is that he cut From Dusk Till Dawn up by the kidnap and horror movies. The best part of kidnap films were the beginning (the caper and escape); just as well, the best part of horror is the latter half (blood, guts, warts and all). Delicious, delicious, bloody food for thought.

Yeah, you can tell that Rodriguez was influenced by the siege mentality films of George Romero (Dawn of the Dead -- the tip off being Tom Savini's role in Dusk) and John Carpenter (Keitel's son wears a shirt alluding to Carpenter's Assault on Precinct 13).

[rs98762001]

What a terrible film this is. I remember it being one of the few times I've come close to walking out in the theater. Thinking about this now is like being transported back to another era, one where anything vaguely associated with that massive-foreheaded waste of space Tarantino would get produced and fawned over. Wonder what happened to his great acting career?

[Cinesimilitude]

He's got bit parts in both servings of grindhouse, and a role (not sure how big or small) in Miike's next film. He plays a rapist in Planet Terror, which should be disgustingly hilarious.