All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Robert Rodriguez can't do wrong with me, no matter what he does, I'm bound to be entertained. I found Machete was better than his Grindhouse effort completely. Machete is a movie you have to be in the mood for, it's a lot of fun and surprisingly has a lot more plot than I expected. Also for this type of movie, the acting was pretty impressive. I knew I'd like this movie before seeing it, Danny Trejo is awesome, he defines BAD ASS in this movie. The action sequences are great, I just wish there would be more. For the type of movie this was, there were times during tame scenes with just dialogue (that did advance the plot but..) i just wanted to see Machete kicking ass. I'm not going to lie, I'm a fan of Lindsay Lohan, I think she's one of the most interesting celebrities there is, she doesn't get much screen time but her parts are pretty funny, I feel like she was under-used in this, as well as Michelle Rodriguez. Even though there are definitely things I would have changed with this movie, with a cast that ranges from Robert De Niro to Steven Seagal, you really can't go wrong. I had a lot of fun during this movie, as did everyone else in the theater, it's over the top and never fails to meet expectations when there's an action sequence. I found the opening scene was brilliant, I wish the entire film could have kept that energy but unfortunately there are times it looses it. For what this movie is, it's great, it's probably one of my favourite films of the summer, I haven't seen Piranha but I imagine this the same mindless fun. It's a good time, has some great comedic moments. My only complaint is there were times I felt the movie did take itself too seriously, but some people could argue that it is what kept this movie from being ridiculous. Either way, it's fun, not a movie to be heavily criticized. Robert Rodriguez knows what he's doing when it comes to exploitation films and he will definitely satisfy any person looking for just that.
Probably the most mixed bag of a film I've seen in a long time. None of it was consistent. At times, the dialogue zinged. At others, it was offensively bad. Sometimes it was the script. Others, the acting.
Sometimes the acting was passable. Others, over the top stupid. Others still... just plain bad. I think de Niro's close to having played enough bad roles to cancel out some of the good ones. Fortunately, Steven Seagal's character didn't require him to emote but did require him to be fat and lethargic. Worked out well, I suppose. Danny Trejo had surprisingly little dialogue or stake in the film as a whole and yet managed to have sex with pretty much every female in the film without even trying. Guess he's just super cool.
Even the social commentary. Sometimes, RR actually came off as a guy from Texas who knows how it really is out there. At others, just a mediocre screenwriter. I mean there was a scene where a group of bad guys were literally just standing around talking about how illegal immigrants aren't all that bad. Wow, dude. Subtle. The racism was also extremely forced and cliche.
Some of the gags were cool. Some funny. Some stupid. Some... mixed. I mean, really. Nothing consistent. The story came close. I thought it was fairly plausible and well put together but towards the end, it started to completely fall apart, maybe due to RR's dumb sense of humor and movie logic.
I think the only thing that might've been consistent was the action, which was... bad. Almost all the blood and gunshots were CG and the scenes seemed to be cut in order to hide it. Obviously didn't work.
Meh. I think RR's best work is with Antonio Banderas. I wish they'd go back to working together at some point (but please, no more Spy Kids, blegh!). Outside of the Mariachi stuff, Rodriguez is just the ultimate hit and miss writer director to the point that some of his films are so bad that they'll cancel out the good ones... like de Niro's stuff is on the verge of doing.
Apparently Machete will return. Could be just a fun gag at the end but who knows? RR is obsessed with gimmicks and crowd pleasing. Let's hope those make slightly better films.
Loved this flick. Rodriguez has a knack for making exploitation material entertaining, and Machete is no exception.
Loved all the little touches; the homage to Thriller: A Cruel Picture, with Michelle Rodriguez and her eye patch; the nod to Abel Ferarra's Ms. 45 with Lindsay Lohan (blech, though) in a habit with a massive hand cannon. And Steven Seagal who, while his death scene was the definition of bad acting, was still a blast to see back on the big screen after all these years of direct-to-cable/video dreck. Not to mention Rodriguez actually using all the clips he made for his Grindhouse fake Machete trailer in the actual Machete movie itself. He could have gone back, re-cast them, re-shot them, but no, everything in the fake trailer was used in the actual movie.
I saw it three times when it first came out and have watched it twice more since getting the DVD last week. And I agree with the OP -- in my eyes, Rodriguez can do no wrong (though I've yet to check out any of his kid movies).
though I've yet to check out any of his kid movies.
His segment in Four Rooms centered around two kids and a bellhop played by Tim Roth. It's called the Misbehavers and is IMHO the best thing he's ever done.
Otherwise, I'd steer clear. I'll give RR that his family films have an original style (very wacky, almost surrealist-influenced) and retain that trademark Mexican flavor but honestly, it's some of the worst shit I've ever seen for kids.
I thought for what this was...and was supposed to be, it was great!
Always loved Danny Trejo, way before he became cool.
I thought the acting was great for the most part, but again, where it wasn't, it wasn't supposed to be.
FX for the most part were also very impressive, but then again, there were some where it was obvious it wasn't supposed to be, like Machete on that motorcycle from the original trailer. But as James said, there were some hit and miss gags, like in the church.
Overall, I loved it. I laughed my ass off, I said, "Coooool!". I said, "Nice...". Good gore, but not as much as I expected. Good T & A, but again, not as much as I hoped for. BTW, was Lindsey wearing huge hair extensions to cover up her cans in the pool scenes? And when they did show her cans, I think it was a body double..anyone know?
It worked and brought back happy memories to when movies didn't take themselves so seriously and just good "clean" fun made a movie memorable, entertaining, and "good".
BTW, was Lindsey wearing huge hair extensions to cover up her cans in the pool scenes? And when they did show her cans, I think it was a body double..anyone know?
I think the hair was definitely intentionally. Probably the biggest copout of the whole movie. Lohan's boobs were already on the internet so who cares really? But given her intro, they were clearly trying to play up the fact that she was in this movie and most likely showing her boobs. Her face isn't shown for the whole sequence and then at the end, she gets a big fat closeup. I mean if they didn't want to show her boobs, they could've framed the subsequent scenes differently; the extensions or whatever they were just look stupid.
Sorry, RR. Machete is no Swordfish. I'm deducting points... then adding points. The "cell phone girl" was mucho bueno.
My boyfriend said Machete sure gets a lot of play because of the machete. Now he wants to get a bigger pocket knife.
Ahhhh...
The film, well, I have mixed feelings about it. Some parts were cool, but then some made me laugh when I think they wanted to be serious.
Swingin' from that guy's intestines was different. Kinda neat really. Never seen anything like that before.
Ok, so I guess I really liked the film. Liked it, didn't love it, but I would watch it again.
Award winning screenwriter Available screenplays TINA DARLING - 114 page Comedy ONLY OSCAR KNOWS - 99 page Horror A SONG IN MY HEART - 94 page Drama HALLOWEEN GAMES - 105 page Drama
When Steven Seagal looks good in a self-mocking role, it can't be all bad. And I was surprised Lindsay did not have a body double. Looks like a plastic job.
I'm pretty sure Lindsey did have a body double. You never actually saw her face and cans at the same time. I questioned this earlier in this thread, but thin king back, I'm pretty sure those nice assets weren't her actual assets.
I'm pretty sure Lindsey did have a body double. You never actually saw her face and cans at the same time. I questioned this earlier in this thread, but thin king back, I'm pretty sure those nice assets weren't her actual assets.
I'm pretty sure Lindsay Lohan doesn't have 'assets' of any kind - she's just yuck!
I'm pretty sure Lindsey did have a body double. You never actually saw her face and cans at the same time. I questioned this earlier in this thread, but thin king back, I'm pretty sure those nice assets weren't her actual assets.
No, you can see in these pictures those are definitely her assets. Those hair extensions, not so much.
I was thinking about the pool scene...but, yeah, those look nice...and definitely hers' although store bought, most likely...not that makes her a bad person...
I was thinking about the pool scene...but, yeah, those look nice...and definitely hers' although store bought, most likely...not that makes her a bad person...
Those don't look store-bought to me. I think thems are factory originals.
Watching this right now. Two thirds done. What a waste of talent. This isn't a movie. It's a commercial. How else can one explain all these name actors, but a ten million budget? I'm expecting Dick Cheney to pop out as the real villein any time. And man, I don't mind some stereotyping, but this is a joke. These actors should be embarrassed they took part in this.
Bouncing cars! Is this for real? This movie is actually bad enough to make me not want to watch movies anymore. Alba looks hot, but the world has youtube, no need to sit through two hours of this. Hey, the bionic man sound! Cool. Nice job, Hollywood. Unbelievable.
So, I take it you really loved this flick, huh, Kev?
I think it's pretty clear that peeps are either going to appreciate this for what it is, or hate it. It's definitely not for everyone and is not intended to be. One of the biggest reasons why a large budget shouldn't be employed.
This had a $10.5 Million budget and pulled in $44 Million WW, so it did well, although many saw it as a box office disappointment. There's a limited built in audience though, even with the star power it boasted.
Let me just start, Jeff, by saying I am the grandchild of immigrants, from an immigrant city with a heavy hispanic population. I am pro immigration, and I think we should welcome in Latinos. I've been to Mexico in the border towns, and wow do I understand why they come here. I don't blame them. So I have no problem with a movie whose premise is that Mexican immigration is good.
But this movie paints a world of cartoonish contrasts which insults the audience's intelligence. Was there even one white person in it that was not either evil or a buffoon? Is it that hard to understand that people can be pro immigration and at the same time want to control the border? Do we have to portray all people who think that this is common sense(most of the American public BTW) as being corrupt, murderous red necks?
Ok. If that's the presumption here, let's go with it. Since this is Simply 'Scripts', let's look at it from the script perspective. This script is so bad, it doesn't even seem like a first draft. It actually seems like it was largely thrown together while they were shooting. The plot is laughable. Not going to go into, but it's a joke. But we really kills me is the dialogue. Ok, the message they're trying to get across is that immigration, legal or otherwise, is simply a great thing, no one should question it, and anyone who does is a malicious idiot. We can get that very easily from the story. But they don't want to take any chances that stupid white people will miss the point, so they keep hammering it home in preachy, on the nose dialogue. I mean over and over. Who pays ten dollars to be preached to? By morons?
Then that last scene, with the exaggerated bouncing ghetto cars, sexy girls jumping out of ambulances with machine guns...for the love of God!
Let me guess what happened here. With the Arizona illegal alien law recently put in place firing everyone in Hollywood up, the director rushed to put this together. I know it was from a spoof trailer from Grindhouse, but it doesn't seem like they had a script ready. I'm thinking with the issue hot, the director went around and got fast track financing for this, signed up sympathetic actors, and hashed together this awful movie. They probably wrote scenes at the hotel on location while getting wasted.
It made money because the idea looked cool and was heavily promoted. I thought it looked cool. It made less then they thought because not too many people probably came home and said "go see this". Now, I know reviews were pretty decent, and it seems fairly popular online. But the average person that goes to movies does not post anything online. And I think the average person saw this and wished he could get his money back. The shame of movies like this is a lot of people will see it and not go see a movie again for five years. Movies like this with the political badgering shrink the industry, which is bad for anyone who hopes to make a living in it.
There were some entertaining set pieces. Very visual, and I know you like that stuff. I can appreciate that. I just think that even accepting their overt political premise, the plot, dialogue, and subtlety of that argument were missing, and therefore unconvincing.
Well, let me just say that first and foremost, it wasn't meant to be taken seriously in any way, by any person.
In many ways, it's what we here at SS call a "pisser". Every single character, scene, and action was meant to be cartoonish and over the top, much like most of the 70's "Grindhouse" genre was.
I think you have to understand that going in and be prepared for what you're going to get.
Same thing with its birth, in the Tarantino/Rodriguez Grindhouse double feature from 2007. Everything about them was ridiculous and over the top. The FX were meant to be ridiculous as well, while still pretty frickin' cool to boot. It's exploitation/sexploitation on steroids.
I have no problem understanding exactly why anyone would not enjoy this or downright hate it, but you do have to understand exactly what they were going for here.
You probably shouldn't waste your time on Hobo with a Shotgun, either, based on your feelings here.
I hear what you're saying. And I'm ok with the over the top violence and sexploitation. Why not couple it with a decent script? That's my problem with it.
I watched Ground Gog Day last night too. First time I've seen it since I've been writing and studying screen. Brings a different perspective. I looked at it for structural design. You could call it 3 Act, and there a lot of Blake like elements, even the hint of death where Blake expects it. But I would divide this into 5 acts, not 3. First the intro, up to when the first repeat day occurs. Then he struggles to figure out what's going on. Third part begins when the drunks analyze the half empty beer glass. He realizes he's seeing this the wrong way, missing the opportunity to have fun, so he spends this segment taking advantage of his "special powers" to get laid, and ultimately move on Rita. But eventually he fails to get Rita, and sinks into hopelessness. That's part 4. At last he comes to realize that he needs to change himself, and look at how he can use this to help others. That's part 5. From this, he transforms himself, wins the girl, and gets out of the loop.
But I noticed something else. The best part of the movie, in terms of entertainment, is by far the first half of the movie. After the midpoint, the movie still makes perfect sense, and maintains its intellectual power, but it loses much of it's entertainment value, and never gets it back. I found that curious, because I've been reading how a lot of writers struggle to make Act Two interesting. Tarrantino avoids this problem with non traditional structure, it seems. My very amateur assessment, of course.
Maybe that's what Rodriquez was attempting here in Machete. Experimenting outside the box.
^^ In my opinion, Rodriguez's resume makes it pretty clear that of all the myriad roles he takes on in filmmaking, writing is the one which he is least suited to. I'd personally just chalk the poor structure, and any other bad writing, up to...well, plain ol' bad writing.
I had a great time at Machete in theatre. Felt like one of those movies that someone in high school makes and your class gets together and watches and laughs every time someone they know comes on screen. Rodriguez is clearly more about fun than making any kind of art, but his approach is sincere and it's difficult not to find it infectious.
Oh I didn't mean to imply that Machete was poorly written in terms of what it set out to accomplish. Kevin was commenting on plot and structure in the film and wondering if Rodriguez was experimenting with structure; I don't think he was experimenting, I just think he doesn't really care.
But the writing is bad, or what we would ordinarily call "bad" with the implication of some sort of normative standard for commercial screenwriting.
Sockbaby, for example, is enjoyable and infectious, but I doubt anyone would call it well written...
I don't think Lohan had a body double. If she did, the body double is a better actress.
I tried to get into this. Michelle's eyepatch won me over eventually. And I did get a kick out of Seagal. He almost looks like a Columbian Drug Load! I mean, Lord.
I think if you took the preachy scenes out the film would entertain me more. Not only were they annoying in themselves, but they tended to be the worst written parts of the movie. Definitely better to keep politics out of film, whatever the agenda, unless it's something so general it applies to any position.
Pages: 
Author
Machete
Logged
Locked Board