Kill Bill: Volume Two

[mutinyco]

SPOILERS (not that mutinyco cares or so...)

That's the thing. Everybody is pointing out their favorite MOMENTS, but nobody's explained what makes it successful as a whole. Because I don't think it is. I agree there are some very inspired bits. But as a whole film is has no sense of urgency, no sense of cohesion, no sense of pacing. As for liking Bill by the end, I don't think that's clever, but a poor design on Tarantino's part. Because by the time we get to the end, there's been nothing within Bill's development to explain how he could've ordered and performed such a cold-blooded massacre -- including putting a bullet in the bride's head. His excuse, that he just sort of "lost it", doesn't hold. It's weak. I never believed that Bill could have been the leader of an elite killing machine.

And come on, if all of these people knew she was coming after them, HOW DIFFICULT WOULD IT HAVE BEEN TO KILL HER? REALLY?

[SHAFTR]

SPOILERS (not that mutinyco cares or so...)

That's the thing. Everybody is pointing out their favorite MOMENTS, but nobody's explained what makes it successful as a whole. Because I don't think it is. I agree there are some very inspired bits. But as a whole film is has no sense of urgency, no sense of cohesion, no sense of pacing. As for liking Bill by the end, I don't think that's clever, but a poor design on Tarantino's part. Because by the time we get to the end, there's been nothing within Bill's development to explain how he could've ordered and performed such a cold-blooded massacre -- including putting a bullet in the bride's head. His excuse, that he just sort of "lost it", doesn't hold. It's weak. I never believed that Bill could have been the leader of an elite killing machine.

And come on, if all of these people knew she was coming after them, HOW DIFFICULT WOULD IT HAVE BEEN TO KILL HER? REALLY?

and how did Pai Mei jump on top of a sword?  That's impossible!

I don't think realism and your complaints aren't really justified in a movie such as this.  It's not supposed to be realistic, your last complaint is just ridiculous.  It's like hating weterns or action films because the bad guys always miss.  There are certain conventions of a genre that are there and it is just the way it is.

[A Matter Of Chance]

I saw it, I loved it. I laughed a bit more that I thought was needed, but it was amazing. Say what you want, I was never bored, I was hooked. Quentin is a master, he knows what he does. I have to say that maybe those that detested volume 2 did so due to the lack of pure blood lust in the first movie. I loved every second, Carradine was great, Uma's never been better, Quentin is at the top of his game... again, and the ending where she kills bill, was amazing. Pai Mei was cool too. Better than volume 1, for me.

[A Matter Of Chance]

SPOILERS (not that mutinyco cares or so...)

That's the thing. Everybody is pointing out their favorite MOMENTS, but nobody's explained what makes it successful as a whole. Because I don't think it is. I agree there are some very inspired bits. But as a whole film is has no sense of urgency, no sense of cohesion, no sense of pacing. As for liking Bill by the end, I don't think that's clever, but a poor design on Tarantino's part. Because by the time we get to the end, there's been nothing within Bill's development to explain how he could've ordered and performed such a cold-blooded massacre -- including putting a bullet in the bride's head. His excuse, that he just sort of "lost it", doesn't hold. It's weak. I never believed that Bill could have been the leader of an elite killing machine.

And come on, if all of these people knew she was coming after them, HOW DIFFICULT WOULD IT HAVE BEEN TO KILL HER? REALLY?

and how did Pai Mei jump on top of a sword?  That's impossible!

I don't think realism and your complaints aren't really justified in a movie such as this.  It's not supposed to be realistic, your last complaint is just ridiculous.  It's like hating weterns or action films because the bad guys always miss.  There are certain conventions of a genre that are there and it is just the way it is.

I agree 100%

[nix]

Exactly Shaftr.

Tarantino uses some of the conventions of each genre he's paying homage to, but the difference, mutinyco IS the little moments. Other movies in each respective genre would have left  these out. These aren't just my favorite parts, hell I basically described the whole fucking movie.

I don't expect you to understand what I mean, because you don't seem to like Tarantino movies. But hell, just one example of a director who uses a series of moments to create great cinema is Godard. There are several more (no point in listing them). So your argument about listing all of my favorite parts makes no sense.

I've agreed that volume 2 feels a bit incomplete, but like I said before, I'm trying to put the two volumes together in my head, and from what I can decipher, together it's a goddamn masterpiece.

We think it's good. You don't. And that's fine, I'm not trying to convince you to like it, I'm just telling you why I do. Can we please leave it at that?

[pete]

spoimlers

hey pete, I really like that chapter where you're teaching the Bride

thanks, but I liked that chapter when I was chopping sushi the best.

[Sleuth]

spoimlers

hey pete, I really like that chapter where you're teaching the Bride

thanks, but I liked that chapter when I was chopping sushi the best.

Pete, you ALWAYS chop sushi

[mutinyco]

I'd prefer it if nobody edited my posts. I don't think I spoiled anything that hadn't been covered in previous posts by other people.

I'm not trying to be argumentative here. I didn't hate the movie. I just found it unaffecting and boring. And I don't dislike Tarantino, since I was into him before a lot of people here had pubes. I saw Reservoir Dogs when it first came out and immediately read his original scripts for True Romance and NBK. But by the time he got to Pulp I found he wasn't progressing. It was all style and no substance. All reference and no originality.

I'm not sure the Godard reference holds up, because, yeah, Godard's films usually aren't successful as wholes. His parts are more interesting. And as Tarantino, himself, pointed out, he's no longer a fan of Godard. He considers him to be college-level thinking. Somebody to be grown out of. A phase.

I think the criticism that nobody tries to stop The Bride is perfectly valid. If the only thing in favor of it is convention, then where's the progress? Again, most genre movies AREN'T good movies. There's a reason they're referred to as "B-movies." This is a major issue, because without them trying to stop her there's no TENSION. If they tried to organize to stop her, then you'd have great suspense! But as it is, this film is a series of unorganized, yet elaborately staged action pieces. There's NOTHING holding any of it together. There's no forward momentum and NOTHING to motivate the jumbled structure.

I like the little things. I like little things in movies. But you can't make a film just of little things. True, most features are all about action and momentum and they discard the fun details. But here, it's just the opposite. It's a series of fun moments without an overall objective. It's probably better as 2 films. I kind of enjoyed the first one, even if it was for only the superficial aspects: style and action. If they'd been 1 film it would have been an unrelenting clash of mismatched styles.

You see, my biggest gripe is that all Tarantino is offering is STYLE. That's NEVER been the trademark of greatness. What made filmmakers great were the IDEAS they were putting forth. Name one great filmmaker whose sole objective was style. Welles? Fellini? Godard? Kubrick? Scorsese? Altman? It was their IDEAS. It was their attitudes. What made them great was the RISKS they were taking. Fellini hovering the statue of Christ over Rome in La Dolce Vita. Kubrick annihilating the world in Dr. Strangelove. Welles attacking the most powerful media mogul in Citizen Kane. That's what made them great: THEIR BALLS!

I don't see ANY of that here or within QT's work. And I find it really frustrating. Because he's obviously got talent. And as a person, he's REALLY nice and approachable. But it's distressing for me to see fans and critics alike sucking his dick, instead of firmly (no pun intended) pointing him in the right direction. He's promoting "cool". Well, how many cool guys do you know who ever amounted to anything? Fonzie was the coolest, right? Well, look at Fonzie's life -- he was a loser! It's the geeks, nerds and misfits who change the world. QT is obviously one of those. Only he's been brainwashed into thinking he's the other. And it's affected his work.

[modage]

maybe he was putting out ideas while you were asleep?  perhaps because tarantino is such a stylish filmmaker people dont want to give him credit for putting out any ideas into his films although they're probably there if you look for them.  maybe mishmashing these unrelated styles IS his idea?

[Tictacbk]

Kill Bill, to me, is an exercise in style.  That is its idea, and QT is obviously very successful in that.  To say that the film carried no momentum is just ludicrous.  From vol1 to vol2 there was an insane amount of momentum.  Granted, it slowed down, but only because if it didn't Kill Bill would've been a boring film.  As for QT not having Ideas in any of his films besides Rdogs is just plain bullshit.  Pulp is full of ideas regarding redemption, and crime and whatnot.  Hell, the way he uses dialogue so well and takes his time with everything could be considered an "idea."

[mutinyco]

No. His dialogue is style. If you want to talk ideas, which nobody around here really does, let's move this discussion to here: http://xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=5946

[El Scorchoz]

I saw the film last night and really liked it. However I didn't think the Uma-daughter scenes were very effective. especially the last one. and the art direction in mexico really bothered me.

aside from that, I loved Caradine! Madsen was great, his boss was really good too. I thought it was funny and highly entertaining.

That fight scene with Uma and D.Hannah was awesome.

[Ghostboy]

I'm working on my review, and once I've finished it I'll throw my two or three cents in as to why it's a great movie.

However, if someone thinks that the pinnacle of Tarantino's career is Reservoir Dogs, and that his work since is bereft of new ideas, there's no point in arguing with them since they're simply diametrically opposed to what people like me see as progression in talent. I mean, I don't even really like Reservoir Dogs anymore.

[mutinyco]

A similar opinion to mine: http://arts.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2004/04/16/bftara16.xml

[tpfkabi]

i happen to love Godard, but didn't he borrow a lot of scenes from other movies as well? i'm sure i've read that (or am i thinking specifically of Truffaut's 400 Blows?) but i can't confirm since i haven't seen the films that influenced the New Wave directors.

anywho, about the film. after watching Kill Bill Vol. 1 on DVD twice in the last couple of days, it's stature has grown considerably.  it's not the blood and/or fighting aspect of Vol. 1 that i'm drawn to, but QT's use of interesting cinematic devices, etc. the opening scene/credits........the long shot in the House of Blue Leaves.......the school bus pulling up in the window.........the Kaboom cereal box and the crackle of the cereal when Uma walks away as we see the little girl's Pumas.......there are just a few off the top of my head...... and i just don't think there are as many of these types of moments in Vol 2.

S P O I L E R S

i agree w/ someone that the buried alive scene was amazing.......it really makes the viewer "feel" like they're buried alive.......it seemed she climbed up a lot more than 7 feet to get out though...........i liked the b&w chapel scene.......SLJ's cigarette smoke and the Ford doorway shots.......Carradine was great.......i really don't see how the shotgun blow to the Bride's chest didn't effect her more..........some things went on for a little too long...........and the mother/daughter thing seemed too sunny for QT.........it just didn't seem to fit him..........so i'm not sure how i feel just yet.........Kill Bill Vol. 1 > Vol. 2 for now..............just waiting to see the spliced together film........hopefully with the Crazy 88 scene in full color..........and yes, the Beatrice(sp?)/school girl scene was really weird........why was B an adult?