I’m still not sure how Death Proof is supposed to be “appreciated.”
My rule of thumb is that movies that need 10 things to go right just so you can “appreciate” them are usually movies not worth it. At the same time, my impression of Kill Bill (part I) was pretty negative but then when I saw the second part, I changed my opinon of the whole thing.
If you ask Tarantino, all you need in order to enjoy this movie is a passion for old movies shown in run-down cinemas. Movie that the likes of Roger Corman shot for a weekend on a budget that today won’t cover the light rental for a single day.
The plot is pretty simple, there are no abrupt turns, unless you count the car chases. Someone summed it up in a sentence: a psycho named Stuntman Mike (Kurt Russell) stalks and kills beautiful women with his car.
I found Tarantino’s famous dialog scenes dragging and the overacting unbearable (obviously it was meant as a reference to the cheeseness in exploitation flicks). So the cheese was a bit much when it comes to the static scenes which probably comprise 80% of the movie.
When he finally hits the car scenes, I wished there was a lot more of them. The stunts, the sounds, the tempo were all so perfect, I walked out of the theater happy. Would I see it again? Not sure… but I’ll sure buy the Death Proof DVD, if I see any of those get-three-for-just-$10 deals.