102 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

the current issue of Empire reviews the VOL 2 DVD, and the writer makes a good argument for not releasing KILL BILL in two parts but instead releasing it as one mammoth epic:

"....to understand just how much damage was inflicted on Vol. 2 - as opposed to Vol. 1 - by ... the consequent decision to hack the film in half, consider The Bride's reaction to the revelation that her presumed-dead foetus survived and has been raised by her nemesis. Physically exhausted, emotionally spent and in total shock, Thurman - in her best moment - sinks to her knees.

QT designed this twist so that we would share not only Kiddo's pain, but her fatigue and her surprise also. Following the original blueprint, the audience would barely have recovered from the bloody Blue Leaves battle and we would have NO IDEA the unborn child had survived - instead, we've coasted through an incident-packed but hardly shattering 90 minutes waiting for Kiddo to discover what we already know, and for an action climax to rival Vol. 1's set-piece that never arrives."

Seems Tarantino has realised that cutting KILL BILL in two may have ruined its chances of Oscar glory.

From http://news.bbc.co.u...ilm/3554536.stm:

Tarantino fears Oscar film snub

Cult film-maker Quentin Tarantino has said he thinks cutting his movie Kill Bill into two parts may have undermined its chances of Oscar success.

"I think we would have gotten considerably more awards play if the film had been one big, giant epic," said the US director.

Kill Bill: Volume 1 did not receive any Oscar nominations last year.

"I'm still hoping we're going to do good at the Oscars this year for Kill Bill: Volume 2," Tarantino added.

Despite his reservations, Tarantino said there was no other way he could have made the films.

"If I tried to turn it into a three-hour or two-and-a-half-hour movie, all the scenes that would go would be scenes I think give the movie its weight, its resonance," he said.

Scenes such as the graphic anime sequence and Thurman's training with a martial arts master would have been cut.

"If I truly, truly believed the film would have had more impact shorter, I would have done it that way," Tarantino said.

Yet he still hopes to have Volume 1 and Volume 2 playing as one long film in cinemas later this year for a limited period, in the run-up to the Oscars.

Both films have made a total of $136m (

[Harmsway]

Despite his reservations, Tarantino said there was no other way he could have made the films.

"If I tried to turn it into a three-hour or two-and-a-half-hour movie, all the scenes that would go would be scenes I think give the movie its weight, its resonance," he said.

Scenes such as the graphic anime sequence and Thurman's training with a martial arts master would have been cut.

"If I truly, truly believed the film would have had more impact shorter, I would have done it that way," Tarantino said.

There is validity to that statement in the sense that you can't release a four-hour film these days (though ROTK certainly seems to have pushed the envelope on that one). I still very firmly believe that Kill Bill works better as a four-hour film than anything else, and it's a shame that they had to split up to be released.

[DLibrasnow]

KILL BILL sucks the big one !!!!

[Harmsway]

KILL BILL sucks the big one !!!!

We all know your opinion, DLibrasnow.

[Loomis]

KILL BILL sucks the big one !!!!

I'd agree with that, although I'd substitute "THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH" for "KILL BILL".

KILL BILL is the best thing in the world!

[Jim]

KILL BILL sucks the big one !!!!

What have you told us that is new here? Surely you're not that starved of attention?

[Max Zorin]

KILL BILL sucks the big one !!!!

There's just no accounting for taste, it seems.

[Jim]

BTW, the current issue of Empire reviews the VOL 2 DVD, and the writer makes a good argument for not releasing KILL BILL in two parts but instead releasing it as one mammoth epic:

"....to understand just how much damage was inflicted on Vol. 2 - as opposed to Vol. 1 - by ... the consequent decision to hack the film in half, consider The Bride's reaction to the revelation that her presumed-dead foetus survived and has been raised by her nemesis. Physically exhausted, emotionally spent and in total shock, Thurman - in her best moment - sinks to her knees.

QT designed this twist so that we would share not only Kiddo's pain, but her fatigue and her surprise also. Following the original blueprint, the audience would barely have recovered from the bloody Blue Leaves battle and we would have NO IDEA the unborn child had survived - instead, we've coasted through an incident-packed but hardly shattering 90 minutes waiting for Kiddo to discover what we already know, and for an action climax to rival Vol. 1's set-piece that never arrives."

Yeah, I read that.

However, I think it helps vol. 2 that the audience knows something The Bride doesn't. For the whole of vol. 1, we are taken along - arguably taken in - by The Bride and one only knows what she knows - an all-knowing, all-wise superhero. Shoving that twist in at the end of vol. 1 gives the whole of vol. 2 a different perspective - not only in its surface style as a Western rather than an Eastern, but in this knowledge and distance the audience now have about the main character. Criticially, she is given a flaw. Accordingly, although - true - had it been kept as a shared revelation, it would have been a shocking moment, there have already been a succession of instantly shocking moments hurled at us throughout vol. 1 and I thought it was quite effective - and very clever - to have a "slow-burner" ticking away in the background throughout the second part.

My immediate reaction to the Empire comment was that the reviewer was disappointed that we didn't have vol.1 part 2, rather than vol.2. I guess, in short, I like it as it is.

[Tarl_Cabot]

KILL BILL sucks the big one !!!!

Ahh comon Darren, didn't you see Volume 2? You have to see it before your final judgement...

[Tarl_Cabot]

There are only a handful of Bond films as good as Kill Bill.

[SeaNNy-T.]

and bourne identity

[Jim]

Sorry, in addition to what I posted above, I have one "spoiler" question:

Are we meant to assume at the end of vol. 1 that Bill kills Sofie Fatale? There's just something about seeing only his hands at her shoulders that suggests this to me; also the stuff about "one last question...". Given that (from memory) she is not referred to in vol. 2, that's the conclusion I've reached.

Perhaps it's very obvious.

[Max Zorin]

I'd always assumed that, though in a movie that really gets off on showing grotesque character deaths, it's curious that Tarantino would choose to bypass hers.

[Harmsway]

Sorry, in addition to what I posted above, I have one "spoiler" question:

Are we meant to assume at the end of vol. 1 that Bill kills Sofie Fatale? There's just something about seeing only his hands at her shoulders that suggests this to me; also the stuff about "one last question...". Given that (from memory) she is not referred to in vol. 2, that's the conclusion I've reached.

Perhaps it's very obvious.

I dunno. It's left ambiguous, and I don't think it really matters. It really just depends of how you view the character of Bill. Is he the kind that would kill a person in his employ for that, or not?

[Tarl_Cabot]

Sorry, in addition to what I posted above, I have one "spoiler" question:

Are we meant to assume at the end of vol. 1 that Bill kills Sofie Fatale? There's just something about seeing only his hands at her shoulders that suggests this to me; also the stuff about "one last question...". Given that (from memory) she is not referred to in vol. 2, that's the conclusion I've reached.

Perhaps it's very obvious.

Interesting...I never thought about that. Sophie wasn't a viper assassin and it wasn't clear what she was before Oren left the vipers to become a Yakuza boss; I think she could be Oren's girl friend/employee...Anyway, i thought Bill left her alone as he didn't expect her to cross swords with a Viper and she was also maimed so why would he kill her? He does have some guilt about the massacre...

[JackChase007]

I kind of figured that she was left alive. The reason Bill had the DiVAS attack the Bride was because she broke his heart; Sophie did not, she was only doing her job but was maimed horribly. Not to mention, was she even working for him at that point? In which case, if she wasn't, then she didn't necessarily "fail him".

[Loomis]

Sorry, in addition to what I posted above, I have one "spoiler" question:

Are we meant to assume at the end of vol. 1 that Bill kills Sofie Fatale? There's just something about seeing only his hands at her shoulders that suggests this to me; also the stuff about "one last question...". Given that (from memory) she is not referred to in vol. 2, that's the conclusion I've reached.

Perhaps it's very obvious.

If he does kill her, my feeling is that it's a mercy killing - she's been sliced to buggery, after all. I don't think Bill's just trying to butter her up in order to get information when he calls her "my beautiful, brilliant Sofie" and so on. Well, he does want information, and, yes, he is trying to soften her up, but at the same time I reckon he genuinely cares for her and cannot bear to see her so badly injured. I also get the impression from that scene that Sofie doesn't particularly want to go on living, so perhaps a tacit understanding quickly develops between the two of them....

[Jim]

I'm rapidly having second thoughts! Maybe the apparent tenderness Bill shows towards her is to encourage a belief that he's not absolutely evil, given that it's all been a little one-sided so far. Perhaps makes his relationship with his daughter far more plausible.

Put it this way - after seeing vol.1, my original view was that he did kill her. After seeing vol.2, however, I guess I'm not so sure. Perhaps she is a pivotal character in Bill's humanity (or some such Sight and Sound-esque balls).

EDIT: having read Loomis' post above...hmm...another dimension... yeah, that's plausible, certainly.

Interesting couple of films.

[Loomis]

Maybe the apparent tenderness Bill shows towards her is to encourage a belief that he's not absolutely evil, given that it's all been a little one-sided so far. Perhaps makes his relationship with his daughter far more plausible.

I vaguely remember an interview with Tarantino in which he said that he wanted viewers to initially (i.e. pretty much all the way through VOL 1) feel that Bill was pure evil, before realising that he had his good sides too, a code of honour, etc. He contrasted Bill with Esteban, whom viewers were supposed to at first consider a harmless and charming old man, before finding out that he was just a soulless monster.

BTW, what are people's views on the deleted Michael Jai White scene on the VOL 2 DVD? Personally, I think it's awful and doesn't work at all - I was expecting a monumentally brutal, awe-inspiring fight designed to show just how lethal Bill is (something along the lines of the scrap between The Bride and Vernita, in other words); however, the scene appears to have been played exclusively for laughs, and as a comic interlude just falls flat. And what's with White's accent? Is he supposed to be playing a Brit, or just someone who's been badly dubbed into English (a la those cheesy old Hong Kong martial arts flicks)?

[Loomis]

Interesting couple of films.

Very fond of 'em both, but I think VOL 1 beats the pants off VOL 2, both as a stand-alone viewing experience building to a satisfying climax, and as a wildly inventive masterpiece of moviemaking (with VOL 2 - in which there's nothing to touch the brilliance of the anime sequence or the House of Blue Leaves showdown - there's the slight sense that Tarantino is beginning to scrape the barrel).

[Jim]

BTW, what are people's views on the deleted Michael Jai White scene on the VOL 2 DVD? Personally, I think it's awful and doesn't work at all - I was expecting a monumentally brutal, awe-inspiring fight designed to show just how lethal Bill is (something along the lines of the scrap between The Bride and Vernita, in other words); however, the scene appears to have been played exclusively for laughs, and as a comic interlude just falls flat. And what's with White's accent? Is he supposed to be playing a Brit, or just someone who's been badly dubbed into English (a la those cheesy old Hong Kong martial arts flicks)?

Dreadful, but as with you, yet to decide whether it was done deliberately dreadfully.

As to vol.1 or vol.2? I'm not sure. True, the anime and the House of the Blue Leaves are hard to live up to - but then they are stand-out things - I don't much care for the drawn-out method of The Bride's reawakening, nor for that scene with Hattori Hanzo at his bar or whatever it's meant to be - but there's just something about the scrap between The Bride and Elle (and the manner in which Elle disposes of Budd) which appeals to me. And there's something about the manner in which Pai Mei bops her on the head with his stick that cracks me up.

Too hard to choose between them. Different, but equal, if that makes any sense.

[Loomis]

Too hard to choose between them. Different, but equal, if that makes any sense.

Nah, for me VOL 1's the clear winner (which isn't to say that VOL 2 isn't terrific, too). I'd rank Tarantino's films as follows:

PULP FICTION (far and away his masterpiece)

KILL BILL VOL 1

RESERVOIR DOGS

JACKIE BROWN

KILL BILL VOL 2

[Harmsway]

Interesting couple of films.

Very fond of 'em both, but I think VOL 1 beats the pants off VOL 2, both as a stand-alone viewing experience building to a satisfying climax, and as a wildly inventive masterpiece of moviemaking (with VOL 2 - in which there's nothing to touch the brilliance of the anime sequence or the House of Blue Leaves showdown - there's the slight sense that Tarantino is beginning to scrape the barrel).

I think that's true. But I did feel that VOL. 1 was a highly shallow affair, and VOL. 2 has that black-and-white scene at the wedding chapel, which is probably my favorite scene in all of KILL BILL. There's great character work in VOL. 2, and while VOL. 2 lacks the visual dazzle of VOL. 1, I'm always tempted to take the film with more soul in it. That said, I've never been able to pick between the two. Love them both.

I ultimately prefer the original script's version of Vol. 2 - the beautiful finale with Bill and Beatrix facing off on a beach is much better than their lame scuttle around the table.

[Harmsway]

Too hard to choose between them. Different, but equal, if that makes any sense.

Nah, for me VOL 1's the clear winner (which isn't to say that VOL 2 isn't terrific, too). I'd rank Tarantino's films as follows:

PULP FICTION (far and away his masterpiece)

KILL BILL VOL 1

RESERVOIR DOGS

JACKIE BROWN

KILL BILL VOL 2

Well, I guess if you're judging the Kill Bill films on their individual merits that's how they would line up for me too. I typically think of the Kill Bill films as a solid whole, and having watched them back-to-back, I think they work better that way. I can't wait for the NC-17 director's cut Tarantino's got waiting for us.

[Loomis]

I think the only part of VOL 2 with real movie magic is the Pai Mei chapter. The other bits, well, they're superb, of course, but one gets the feeling that Tarantino is essentially on autopilot.

Obviously, Tarantino on autopilot is better than most directors at their best, but my point still stands.

[Bond_Bishop]

Volume 2 is the best. That montage of everyone that has been in the movies was quite good. Myself I don't think Elle is dead. Sofie maybe got to Two Pines after the four DiVAS attacked the wedding.

[CaCAA]

(for instance, the sticking plaster on the back of Ving Rhames' neck in PULP FICTION, and the question of what's in the briefcase in the same film).

The film alludes to the briefcase containing Marcellus Wallace's soul. The sticky plaster is put over the area in the back of the neck typically associated with the removal of one's humanity.

It's rumoured that Steve Buscemi's waitor character (dressed as Buddy Holly) from PULP is actually Mr. Pink from Reservoir Dogs, hiding from the police. I personally don't believe either of those, but I'm interested to hear other's thoughts.

Mr Pink was caught by the Police in Reservoir Dogs. There's a site dedicated to this, and if you listen EXTREMELY closely to the scene where he runs off, you can hear them capture him.

[Loomis]

That montage of everyone that has been in the movies was quite good.

Yes, very cool. I love that bit, and the song playing over it.

[Double-Oh-Zero]

BTW, what are people's views on the deleted Michael Jai White scene on the VOL 2 DVD?

Glaringly out of place and unnecessary, I thought. Didn't really add much to the story, other than show Bill's martial arts skills. Although White's death was particularly nasty and interesting, in it's own perverse way.

Anyway, like Harmsway, I prefer to look at Kill Bill as one whole film, now that they're both out on DVD. I'm still waiting to see how QT will present them in the Special Editions (stitched together as one film, two separate ones, etc). For now, here're my rankings of Tarantino's films (with KB as one film, mind you)

PULP FICTION
KILL BILL
JACKIE BROWN
RESERVOIR DOGS

[JackChase007]

Kill Bill was overall impressive and a very good film, however, I wasn't as blown away by it as I was with his other films. Then again, it took repeat viewings of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction to really appreciate them. So whenever they release the complete epic in one film, maybe my opinion shall change. But in the mean time:

1) Reservoir Dogs/Pulp Fiction (can't really decide which one I think is overall better)
3) Jackie Brown
4) Kill Bill