Viewing Thread:
"My Kill Bill thoughts."

Although I had low expectations when going to see this last night, I can however say that despite these misgivings, I still thought it was utter unadulterated toss.

I love his previous films as much as anybody, but what we have here is massive hype all because it’s from Tarantino, the man who’s brain has been sweating in it’s own pop culture loving juices ever since Jackie Brown, and for me it delivered very little. Despite the ravings from all the beardy wannabe film studies students about all the amazing qualities of the cinematography and the style he created, it still sucks big time *in my opinion*.

The script wasn’t anything amazing. A few cool lines here and there but not the barrage of cool and quotable lines we know and love from his previous films, and overall it just wasn’t a patch on his other things. There wasn’t even really a decent story created.
The fragmented chronology loved by QT and used so effectively in his previous films just didn’t work, seemed utterly pointless and even confusing as to why he bothered.
The movie as a whole was too bitty, and played out like a load of scenes cobbled together rather than a proper flowing movie, and it just lacked something.

Most of the film just played out in too much of a clichéd ham-fisted manner, whether this is intentional I don’t really care. The characters were totally 2 dimensional and also highly clichéd. The Bride goes to Japanese sword maker, two minutes later she has a mighty blade to vanquish the evil-doers. There was no real build up to that, she just went there, got the sword and that was it. No epic journey to find an amazing sword, it was just given to her.

The last battle of vol. 1 was also a big disappointment, we had The Bride battling through hoards of Yakuza minions, and the scene is set for an excellent grand finale. We enter the highly clichéd Japanese winter garden, where an epic duel should amaze and delight the filmgoers. But the fight was naff. Hardly the epic and amazing duel we should have expected from two so-called amazing warriors. Wolf from Gladiators had better fights when he bashed the hell out of plebs with his pugil-stick.

I love kung fu, I like on-screen violence, and I liked the atmosphere Tarantino created/stole, but the whole time I just felt he was lurking behind the camera, nodding and winking to fellow film nerds when he pays homage/rips off various old school kung fu bits, all the while believing he was the greatest kung fu director in history, when he clearly isn’t. The fight scenes were ok, nothing amazing though, especially if you’re used to watching many a kung fu film. Was the violence so OTT that it was done to make up for the lack of a decent movie? I think so.

QT has tried to do something different; he’s taken his maverick style and applied it to old kung fu genre and the crossover just failed. The characters were boring, the plot simple and uninspiring, the script disappointing and the action was nothing special. It’s just lazy filmmaking; take loads of classic ideas from the Kung Fu genre and stick them all together and serve it up to the masses. But because it’s from Tarantino we shouldn’t question it, we should just say, ”it’s cool”. I don’t agree.

The anime flashback bit was pretty good, though just because Tarantino likes a bit of anime doesn’t mean he should stick a 5-minute section slap bang into the middle of his film. It’s an interesting idea, but was just out of place and reeks of self-indulgence.

If you want to watch a decent kung fu film, there’s plenty on offer, from cheesy ones to ultra violent ones, and if you want to watch a decent revenge flick, then watch Point Blank or, heck, even Commando.

I’m sure the movie-going masses enjoyed it, as they tend to lap up everything thrown at them nowadays, especially if it has any type of kung fu in it, but this viewer was disappointed he’d wasted £6 and had to bother venturing out on a cold Sunday evening for two hours of overrated pap. My brother went with an open mind, and he hated it too, and he’d wasted £6 and some petrol.
Style over substance, self-indulgence from a director, lots of blood and limbs being chopped off doesn’t make a film great, and how people could call this the best film of the year is insulting to the other great films released this year.

I’ll still go and see volume 2, purely because Michael Madsen will feature, and may be good in it, and there’s the hope that it surely can't be worse than volume 1.

Wow, so there is somebody else out there with the power of independent thought, and doesn’t just follow the trend of liking it because it's Tarantino.

I agree with Totoro's review. It bugged me the way the film started, announcing it as the 4th film is pretentious and doesn't impress anyone) - I hated the way the musical cues and soundtrack itself were stolen from Sergio Leone and Ennio Morricone. I hated the fact that all the tension is taken out by showing you the end of the movie right at the start.

I saw the C4 special last night and it was painful to watch the actors trying to talk about these totally one dimensional characters. Elle Driver and the Bride hate each other so much because they are both blonde apparently.

And QT really believes he is the world's most creative director. He's not paying homage to his sources because he rarely gives them credit. It's just that other people see right through him.

The end of Reservoir Dogs is his biggest rip off I think, it's identical to Chow Yun Fat's 'City on Fire'.

For Kung Fu flicks, it gets little better than Jet Li's Fist of Legend.

Sorry, I'll stop stirring now.

Goatboy wrote:
> It's not even a kung-fu film, it's a revenge
> flick with a section set in Japan.

I don't get when people say 'oh, it hasn't got the same cutting script that Tarantino normally produces.' Um... because it's a kung fu flick? And in kung fu flicks, isn't the emphasis normally on the... kung fu?

That was a response to gerrods "Your loss that you didn't enjoy it, I suppose." not your post. Doesn't the fact that I just said a simple "yes" to a rather large question see a little strange?

I would say I knew a few of the references, but not the totally obscure ones, yet you try to impress everyone with your Harry Knowles-esque movie buff knowledge by testing me. Well done.
If I wanted to be tested on obscure old film references featured in Kill Bill, then I’d go on Mastermind and sit in the big leather chair.

Totoro wrote:
> Yes.
--

In response to
"So you obviously got the references in practically every scene then."

I liked it. Just thought you might like to know. Rank it below Fiction but above Dogs. And, obviously, Jackie Brown.

(And I didn't have a clue what all those kung fu Shaw Bros referenceys were. But wasn't GoGo in Battle Royale?)

Goatboy wrote:
> But that's my point - you said you *did* get them.

When?