Famine's Review: Kill Bill

  • Thread starter Famine
  • 18 comments
  • 769 views
Famine

Famine

GTP Editor, GTPEDIA Author
Administrator
89,220
United Kingdom
Rule 12
GTP_Famine
Yes, it belongs in the Movies forum, and yes it'll be moved there, but I hope it'll spend a few hours in here first as with my Matrix: Revolutions review a few weeks back.

Kill Bill. What a crock of ****.

Firstly - it's billed as the "Fourth Film from Quentin Taratino". http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000233/ - but we'll ignore that for now, as he directed only a segment of The Four Rooms, and. My Best Friend's Birthday doesn't appear to be feature length.

Next up comes the violence. Can Tarantino make ANY film which doesn't have some form of extreme violence in it? The tongue scene echoes the ear scene from Reservoir Dogs just TOO much for me. It all just verges on senseless violence and leaves me just frankly not caring what happens to anyone in the film at all.

Third is the timeline - yes, Tarantino can't stick to linear story-telling! What a shock. It almost never comes off well - the exception is Memento and that is kind of linear but backwards. Sort of. I don't give a rat's ass about O-Ren Ishii, because of what I've seen at the very beginning of the film. I don't care about the fight with the Crazy 88, because "The Bride" hasn't done yet what we already know she's going to do (err... going to have will be having done?). In fact I don't care full stop.

Oh yes, and "The Bride". What the hell is the deal with bleeping out her name? I don't particularly care anyway, but if you have to build in gimmicks like this to your films, it suggests your film isn't interesting enough in the first place.

I'm not a big fan of Anime/Manga, which probably puts me in the wrong position to enjoy this film. I fear Tarantino has discovered Urotsukidoji and suddenly become a Japanese-fanboy like our pink-writing twelfth-wit member here. Although I can actually speak/read/write Japanese I'm not an all-Japanesey-thing-loving gimp. The Anime style blood gushing - especially Mr. Tanaka and Sofie - just left me slack-jawed and frankly bored rigid. Utter toss.

Overall review: Too much concentration on silly fight scenes, too much Anime influence, too much gimmickry, Uma Thurman has hideous feet. Crock of ****.

I liked Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs, as an addendum. But I don't fete either as great films. Just watchable.
 
I've been thoroughly unimpressed by Tarentino. I couldn't agree more.
 
I think you took the film too literally. That, and you appear to have only seen Volume I, since there is nowhere near as much violence and gore in Volume II.

QT was trying to show all kinds of different genres of film and television he saw as a kid, including animation, western, comedy, kung fu, etc. And whats the problem with not going in a linear order? I had no problem with it, it didn't lessen the final battle at the end of Volume I. If you went into the film thinking the Bride wouldn't win even before the picture started, then I think you kind of missed the point of the film.

The gore is not meant to be taken literally, it's humorous, he purposly exaggerated it. If you have a problem with the violence in Kill Bill, then how can you handle violence in most other films these days?

I for one thought it was a good film. It's not meant to be some major breakthrough film.
 
attachment.php


Haven't seen it. Not going to.

I'm afraid that I just don't want to see that much violence in a movie. And I'm quite capable of self-censoring. The "ear" scene in Reservoir Dogs scores a big fat "Next" on my DVD remote.

This wouldn't be the first time he's used anime, which featured quite heavily in the Stone-directed (but Tarantino-written) Natural Born Killers.
 
I'm in the UK - Kill Bill Volume 2 has only just been released at the cinemas, with Kill Bill Volume 1 just being released on DVD.

That aside, why should I have to watch the second installment of a film to enjoy/pass comment on the first part? I enjoyed Lord of The Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, and said so before I'd seen The Two Towers, for a random example.

I don't have a "problem" with the violence and gore - I just don't see why it's necessary. It's almost computer-game like - kill 88 grunts then meet the "boss".

Violence is never humourous, even when presented in a comicbook style. "Haha! She chopped her arm off!"... It reminds me of a phrase in South Park: Bigger, Longer, Uncut - "Horrific deplorable violence is okay, as long as nobody uses any dirty language"

There is no problem with non-linearity - but Tarantino seems incapable of doing anything but, and it's rarely (in all cases) done well.

I missed the point of the film? Wow - that's a leap of faith for you. You missed the point of my post - by showing the name of O-Ren Ishii crossed off her death list in the VERY first scene, I had no interest at all in the introduction of, history of, henchmen of or manner of O-Ren Ishii at all, thus negating 40 minutes of the film.
 
I have seldom read a truer paragraph as this :
"I don't have a "problem" with the violence and gore - I just don't see why it's necessary. It's almost computer-game like - kill 88 grunts then meet the "boss". "
Seems like the line between video games and movies get blurred as more so called " artist " try to figure on what style of content will sell the most tickets.
 
You should see part 2 because part 1 is not a complete movie. The film was meant to be shown as 1 big 3 hour long movie, but the studio cut it down in post production.

And what action movie has violence that is necessary?

And I don't see the problem with the Bride saying that she killed O-Ren Ishii, and then showing HOW she killed her... If they had shown her killing O-Ren, then crossing her off the list, would it have changed the film at all? If you had no interest in the film just because she said she killed her before actually showing killing her...then I think you really shouldn't be watching the film in the first place.
 
Originally posted by The359
And I don't see the problem with the Bride saying that she killed O-Ren Ishii, and then showing HOW she killed her... If they had shown her killing O-Ren, then crossing her off the list, would it have changed the film at all? If you had no interest in the film just because she said she killed her before actually showing killing her...then I think you really shouldn't be watching the film in the first place.
Click to expand...

It would have changed it a bit. Crossing off her name in the beginning says she has completed part of her task and it's time to move on to whatever will be happening next in the film, NOT lets go back in time and show you what happened. Putting it in at the end would show a sense of achievement, that something got done, and gives meaning to the scene being there at all in the first place. (It's hard for me to explain what i'm thinking right now - hopefully that got it through)

I definately enjoyed the movie but there were a lot of small things that could have been changed - namely the overexaggeration of the blood and the scene where she killed who knows how many hundereds of people in that restaurant

I'd also like a bit more explanation on the significance behind the man that manufactured that sword (i forget his name). Does the 2nd movie talk about what Bill did to him or is that left as mystery?
 
The mystery is that the charcacter of Hattori Hanzai was on old samuari movies that were aired in America, and QT liked him so much he brought him on for the movie.

And if you think that The Bride wouldn't succeed in killing O-Ren if they had put her crossing off the list at the end, then I think you really did miss the concept of the film...I mean, who really thought she'd lose?
 
Originally posted by The359
then I think you really shouldn't be watching the film in the first place.
Click to expand...

Brilliant. I'll point out any DVDs I plan to watch in the next 6 months, and I'll let you tell me whether I should or shouldn't watch them then.



Allow me to expand - in many films a character is introduced. Their history is explored, their mannerisms covered and their personality is appreciated by the audience. Then they die. In all the intervening time the audience has been appreciating the character and learning about them.

In Kill Bill we KNOW the character will be dead at the end of the film, whether it is part one or part two - there is no reason to take an interest in the character, her history, her mannerisms or her personality (and I must add, the "I'll say this in English" section is the WORST use of lazy-language since "Well let's use it then" in "Rumble In The Bronx" - where Jackie Chan and Stanley Tong in fact continue talking Cantonese, but are dubbed in English). All of the time spent covering her is effectively null film - there's no point to learn about her past at all.

As for "what action film has violence that is necessary?", I quite agree. The last action film I saw was... err... probably "True Lies". I won't use the South Park quote again, but it adequately sums up my feelings on most "blockbusters" which come from the US.


My favourite film is probably the Lord of the Rings as a trilogy. My favourite single film is Sleuth.
 
I'm not really a big movie critic, although I must say that I've read some of Famines reviews of movies and our opinions generally do match up. I'm going to say thanks for letting me know to skip out on this movie (even though I am a fan of the anime genre, I feel real-life movies need more story and less flashy unrealistic violence (although certain Jackie Chan movies are alot of fun). With that said, I must ask you, Famine, have you seen the Lord of the Rings 3 yet? (I dunno if you've posted a review or anything; I'm too lazy to exit the thread and look while I'm posting). I must point out now that the soundtrack for that movie is the best soundtrack I own.
>END.randomtangent
 
The whole point of the history of O-Ren Ishii was most likely just to show her power, and how difficult of an opponant she would be. She was the hardest of all of The Bride's opponents to kill in both films, and I think QT did it right to give some background as to why O-Ren is what she is.

Besides, for a film that lasts 3 hours, you need a little bit of background. Beware, there's some of it in Volume 2. It helps make the story complete though.
 
It seems like you're taking the movie too seriously, but I could be wrong. I found myself laughing through most of Kill Bill vol. 1. It was just sooooo over the top that it was comical. I wouldn't give it an Oscar. I wouldn't say it's "the best movie of the year," but I think it's definitely an enjoyable film.
That said, I have yet to see Vol. 2, but I'm hoping to see it next week after my finals. If QT's previous films are anything to go by, I think I'll enjoy it.



-Mark
 
Originally posted by milefile
Tarantino is the most overrated film maker I can think of. Pure hype. No substance.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and I thought Oliver Stone was bad enough. Quentin Tarentino is like Oliver Stone's crack baby.
 
I watched the film just the other day and really enjoyed it.

I liked the different angles put into the film eg the brides name bleeped out, the I'll say this in english bit, the cartoon section.

I guess different films appeal to different people for different reasons, but I really enjoyed it.
 
Saw it last night with a few mates and found it very funny... but in a "this film isn't that great, but the spraying blood and crap storyline make it a laugh".

Was looking forward to seeing it since it came out in the cinema... left feeling a tad dissappointed.

Could have been much better.
 

Latest Posts

Back