Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003) & Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004)

[David Rees]

Anyone who loves action, exploitation cinema should love Kill Bill, sure it "borrows" from lots of films but it is done in an exciting and fresh way, with some great dialog too.

[Guest Markgway]

with some great dialog too.

[venoms5]

QT haters amuse me. You guys always sound like you all have a personal grudge against a man ,like he raped your daughter and punchedyour wife in the face or something. Even funnier is that you all call him thief [everybody lifts something , thats just how it is-i belive it can be called inspiration],hack, and every other name in the book yet youve obviously watched all his films. Why? He sucks remember.I ask all of the Haters[and yes you are haters] , what have YOU done? Wheres your screenplay? Your experts in cinema, right? Critics are peolple who wish they could ,but really cant.

I guess I'm sort of a QT hater. I obviously don't know the man personally but it would be nice if he'd do something original for a change and stop with the fake personality when promoting his movies. He pretended to be black while promoting JACKIE BROWN with the ridiculous swaying of his hands and uttering "know what I'm sayiiiin...?" over and over. If this is his true personality then why not do it all the time?

I was very glad when that abomination that was GRINDHOUSE died swiftly at the BO and then QT and the Weinstein's scrambled to make excuses as to why it failed. One of the best was that "People in the South don't know what a double feature is." Such horse sh*t to cover up an utter turd of a cinematic bowel movement such that QT and Company thrust upon an unsuspecting world.

I am not originally from the South but have lived here for the bulk of my life. When first moving here, me and my family used to frequent two different drive ins here. On the weekends there were double and triple features mostly of kung fu flicks. Nobody left after the first presentation. Those guys can't confess that they made a lifeless, soulless excuse of the magic of 70's (and early 80's) guerrilla exploitation filmmaking that could not match the veracity and ferociousness of any of those movies. Then QT says in an interview "I'm proud of my bomb". then says he wants to shoot a serious movie....A movie about slavery(????) So now (or at the time) he wants to do a remake of MANDINGO? Or in his case, it would more resemble the extreme exploitation nastiness of the sequel, DRUM.

Oh, and I have written three scripts, another almost finished and another barely started but have yet to sell any of them so does that at least qualify me somewhat to voice my opinion on this oddly worshipped man who can write, no doubt, but seems incapable of creating a cohesive production anymore?

PS: His newest is what EVERYBODY HAS BEEN WAITING FOR....a remake of the most likely superior Enzo G. Castellari war picture THE INGLORIOUS BASTARDS.

[SlothStyleKungFu]

...PS: His newest is what EVERYBODY HAS BEEN WAITING FOR....a remake of the most likely superior Enzo G. Castellari war picture THE INGLORIOUS BASTARDS.

That's a common misconception but it isn't a remake in any way shape or form. He just co-opted the title (and considering the film had like a dozen alternative titles in the first place, hardly a shame). It is a WW2, guys-on-a-mission flick like the Castellari film, or Dirty Dozen, Guns of Navarrone, etc, etc, etc, but it is Tarantino's take on that particular genre.

[venoms5]

That's a common misconception but it isn't a remake in any way shape or form. He just co-opted the title (and considering the film had like a dozen alternative titles in the first place, hardly a shame). It is a WW2, guys-on-a-mission flick like the Castellari film, or Dirty Dozen, Guns of Navarrone, etc, etc, etc, but it is Tarantino's take on that particular genre.

Yes, I've heard all that, too yet QT himself has stated before he was remaking the film. Talk of doing this film goes back as far as 1994 that I know of. Regardless of how different the movie turns out to be, remakes are seldom the exact same as the source anyways. Look at how different THE THING remake was. Completely different from the original. The title is the same as are ideas present in Castellari's film. That's pretty much a remake to me regardless of how subtle the similarities are, or will end up being.

[oldeschool17]

I thought it was overrated as well. I initially only saw the first part when it first came out and saw most of the 2nd part recently this year.

[daTOAD]

He pretended to be black while promoting JACKIE BROWN with the Cover and over. If this is his true personality then why not do it all the time? "

First of all," ridiculous swaying of his hands and uttering "know what I'm sayiiiin..." is pretending to be black? I could be offend by that, though I dont think you were trying to be offensive venoms5.

With all due respect, he may be that way all the time.Out of the 365 days in a year we see about 10 hours of his life, so i cant tell you how he is off camera.We just see bits and pieces of celebrities lives and then think we know everything about that person because of an appearence on Leno or a dvd interview.

"Oh, and I have written three scripts, another almost finished and another barely started but have yet to sell any of them so does that at least qualify me somewhat to voice my opinion on this oddly worshipped man who can write, no doubt, but seems incapable of creating a cohesive production anymore?"

Man, if your a human with a brain you can voice your opinion. I dont mean any disrespect by that, Im just saying everyone has the right to ther own opinion. Ive written several screenplays ,but that doesnt mean anything.Im no more qualified than the next man to speak on whats good or bad. If you like it ,you like it.Spielberg once said he makes movies he wants to see. Simple ,but true.You think Indiana Jones is an original idea? I really believe the problem people have with QT is that they feel mislead. Pulp Fiction was QTs CTHD. It attracted people who werent fans of the genre. So now those people are in this world[cult cinema for lack of a better term], and are lost and dont know how to react to these films. Pulp Fiction and CTHD held theyre hands and guided them through, but Grindhouse and Kill Bill threw them in head first , with the understanding that the people who watch these films know what to expect.

Im suprised Venoms5, cause ive seen your posters and cult movie reccomendations. You know this world. What didnt Death Proof do right as an explotation flick. Watch Fight for Your Life and Death Proof back to back and i dare you to tell me QT didnt knock the ball out of the park with this classic.

[venoms5]

He pretended to be black while promoting JACKIE BROWN with the Cover and over. If this is his true personality then why not do it all the time? "

First of all," ridiculous swaying of his hands and uttering "know what I'm sayiiiin..." is pretending to be black? I could be offend by that, though I dont think you were trying to be offensive venoms5.

With all due respect, he may be that way all the time.Out of the 365 days in a year we see about 10 hours of his life, so i cant tell you how he is off camera.We just see bits and pieces of celebrities lives and then think we know everything about that person because of an appearence on Leno or a dvd interview.

Out of all the interviews I've seen him in with his roadrunner speech he's never acted this way save for the JACKIE BROWN promotion. Judging by what people have said that have worked with him, he's a fake individual whose head exploded the moment people began paying attention to him.

Man, if your a human with a brain you can voice your opinion. I dont mean any disrespect by that, Im just saying everyone has the right to ther own opinion. Ive written several screenplays ,but that doesnt mean anything.Im no more qualified than the next man to speak on whats good or bad. If you like it ,you like it.Spielberg once said he makes movies he wants to see. Simple ,but true.You think Indiana Jones is an original idea? I really believe the problem people have with QT is that they feel mislead. Pulp Fiction was QTs CTHD. It attracted people who werent fans of the genre. So now those people are in this world[cult cinema for lack of a better term], and are lost and dont know how to react to these films. Pulp Fiction and CTHD held theyre hands and guided them through, but Grindhouse and Kill Bill threw them in head first , with the understanding that the people who watch these films know what to expect.

I took it from your initial post that you took offense that people were slamming the man especially when asking "What have any of you done?" Again, I don't know the man personally, he'd be an interesting conversation piece but considering his attitude towards fans and the general public that kept him going for a number of years, he's not someone I would want to keep company with just based solely on how he's perceived on television and in magazines.

Im suprised Venoms5, cause ive seen your posters and cult movie reccomendations. You know this world. What didnt Death Proof do right as an explotation flick. Watch Fight for Your Life and Death Proof back to back and i dare you to tell me QT didnt knock the ball out of the park with this classic.

Yes, I am a massive fan of exploitation cinema and both filmmakers missed the boat with their overdone, over polished, highly stylized big budget "grindhouse" movie. And no, I wasn't being offensive but I think you know what I meant. Anyway, Rodriguez came the closest to capturing the 80's style drive in classick but QT's movie did nothing for me. To keep from having to reiterate my utter disdain for this movie below are comments I made last year after seeing it...

FINALLY finished this near two hour female MY DINNER WITH ANDRE married to DUEL and other car crash/bang'em up flicks. Far more conceited than the other movie, you get damn near 50 minutes of unlikeable drunken women having useless conversation in a bar only to be given (near) 50 more minutes of Rittilin deprived women having more useless conversation before the big car chase finale. Hell, you forget Kurt Russell is even in the damn movie.

Some of it's great, but not enough to recommend this to anybody. What the hell kind of exploitation movie was this supposed to be? No wonder people were walking out of the theaters for this one.

And why the hell does QT have to write two paragraphs of dialog for something that can be said in a few words? This one is brimming with far too much "My name is QT in case you don't remember and my writing is so fu**ing cool that I'm gonna shove it down your fu**ing throat in such a way that you'll fu**ing remember next time in case you fu**ing forgot!" diatribes that this wasted glob of funds would have been best suited as one of the faux trailers with one of THOSE being the FEATURE PRESENTATION.

And this...

I don't even think I'll bother buying this when it's released (if in fact they deem it financially worth it) as a whole film as it was theatrically. Not even for the trailer of features. Maybe if they did a long 2 hour trip down memory lane detailing THE REAL exploitation grindhouse classics as part of the package, THEN....that would make it a bit more worthwhile.

FIGHT FOR YOUR LIFE isn't even in the same class as DEATH PROOF. I see no comparison there. However, I do see a comparison to VANISHING POINT and nods to stuff like DIRTY MARY, CRAZY LARRY. If you want to see some real exploitation "classicks", than the ones below are among many that will fit the true DOUBLE BILL...

POOR PRETTY EDDIE

MANDINGO

DRUM

TRUCK TURNER

LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT

I DRINK YOUR BLOOD

FOXY BROWN

DEATHRACE 2000

HUMANOIDS FROM THE DEEP

GALAXY OF TERROR

FORBIDDEN WORLD

DEATHSPORT

THE GREAT TEXAS DYNAMITE CHASE

THREE THE HARD WAY

GOODBYE, UNCLE TOM

JUNGLE HOLOCAUST

MAKE THEM DIE SLOWLY

RACE WITH THE DEVIL

WALKING TALL

RUN, ANGEL, RUN

THE LOSERS

INVASION OF THE BEE GIRLS

PIRANHA

ALMOST HUMAN

ROME ARMED TO THE TEETH

TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (1973)

EATEN ALIVE (1976)

WELCOME HOME, SOLDIER BOYS

and on and on and on.......

I simply would like to see the man do something original for a change and stop with the homages. Everybody knows what he likes. Everybody knows the man can write. Why not create something special and put his skills to the best use? He can continue doing what he's doing for all I care but each subsequent film of his gets more and more pompous...

[Chinatown Kid]

He needs to come up with something original and refreshing like when he came out with Pulp fiction and recieved so much praise. That's his best film imo although I haven't saw Jackie Brown but I need too, Pam Grier is hot! The problem with homages is that they are rarely equal to what they are paying homage to. I don't know why he felt the need to try and act Black though, seems Blacks would have been offended.

[Guest Markgway]

Not an exploitation fan but I've seen (from Venoms' list) WALKING TALL (good film) and TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (lame first half, gripping second).

[daisho2004]

I'll be honest I really enjoyed Kill Bill uncut but pt.#2 Sucked I thought not enough action after the 1st. movie I was expecting so much more. I think some of his ideas are original maybe part homage but overall I enjoy most of his movies. But as an actor himself not crazy about him, he's OK sometimes I feel he shouldn't be in his own movies if so do a walk by like Alfred Hitchcock did.

[gravedigger666]

As actor he was really lame in From Dusk Till Dawn,luckily in Reservoir Dogs he got only few lines and that is good thing for movie.

[venoms5]

QT pretty much derails Miike's SUKIYAKI WESTERN DJANGO from the start. The beginning features him as a gunslinger and his dialog and acting in this sequence is both atrocious and laughable. I got the feeling the only reason he was in this movie (his character also pops up later in the film) was giving Miike a brief walk on in Eli Roth's HOSTEL.

[gravedigger666]

SUKIYAKI WESTERN DJANGO f

that is movie I never will see.Ok it pops up at bargain bin for 1€ I might buy it but still does not mean I necessarily watch it.Django is real classic and his name should not be used in any movie made these days.

[venoms5]

There's not even a character named Django in the movie. At the end they mention that this baby seen in the movie grows up to be a man called Django as if they're setting up for a sequel.

[gravedigger666]

huh:mad:

[Bravery]

I don't know why he felt the need to try and act Black though, seems Blacks would have been offended.

I know I was offended, he almost seems to get a kick out of using the N word. As for his movies, I found none of them original, they are all exploitation movies. But, I did love Jackie Brown, I can't get enough of Pammy Grier <---so damn fine

[gravedigger666]

I know I was offended, he almost seems to get a kick out of using the N word. As for his movies, I found none of them original, they are all exploitation movies. But, I did love Jackie Brown, I can't get enough of Pammy Grier <---so damn fine

of course/thankfully I can`t speak from behalf black skin people so dunno how much they feel they are hurt.But over here besides N word they get offended from Black and African too...what should call them?darkskinned with ethnic origin?I know I am bit racist but it is fact cameldrivers and people with dark skin commit hell lot crimes more than local folks.Law can be sued from that,I am sure in islam countries law is not gentle for rapist and thieves but over here it is,cutter head and arms should be allowed over here also.cultures should not be mixed,there is always people who cannot get along with it and that creates trouble...if tarantion gets kicks from N,sweet.

[daTOAD]

"I know I am bit racist but it is fact cameldrivers and people with dark skin commit hell lot crimes more than local folks."

Sounds like more than a bit, go educate yourself.

"Judging by what people have said that have worked with him, he's a fake individual whose head exploded the moment people began paying attention to him."

The dudes a geek. most of the beautiful hollywood people that hang on his nuts are just doing it for a part.He tells stories of these people trying to talk about theyre film knowledge ,but really have no clue what theyre talking about.I can tell hes an awkward dude from interviews. He doesnt seem fake , just an awkward geek who gets overly animated when talking about things he loves.

"FIGHT FOR YOUR LIFE isn't even in the same class as DEATH PROOF. I see no comparison there. However, I do see a comparison to VANISHING POINT and nods to stuff like DIRTY MARY, CRAZY LARRY."

Love both VP and DMCL , but the ONLY thing they have in common with DP are the cars. FFYL on the other hand creates a situation where the viewer wants the villians dead[ we hate these guys for what theyve done to this family].Not only dead ,but wants the victims to be the ones that do it -and in a viscious way. Thats the pay off for sitting through 90 mins. of rape, rascism, and cruel behavior. To me that whole film is a set up for the end-and what a great payoff it was. Same for DP- IMO the whole film is the set up for the ending when the bad guy gets what he deserves , also like Last House On The Left. IMO these films have the same intentions.

[venoms5]

Love both VP and DMCL , but the ONLY thing they have in common with DP are the cars. FFYL on the other hand creates a situation where the viewer wants the villians dead[ we hate these guys for what theyve done to this family].Not only dead ,but wants the victims to be the ones that do it -and in a viscious way. Thats the pay off for sitting through 90 mins. of rape, rascism, and cruel behavior. To me that whole film is a set up for the end-and what a great payoff it was. Same for DP- IMO the whole film is the set up for the ending when the bad guy gets what he deserves , also like Last House On The Left. IMO these films have the same intentions.

Yes, but in DEATH PROOF you go over nearly an hour of film (maybe more) before you see Russell's character again. Meanwhile he bombards us with useless dialog about obscure movies NOBODY but a chosen few will know about and sometimes it's questionable that QT has seen some of them as he has often mixed up movies he discusses or ones he has actors discuss and if I'm not mistaken, he mixes up the name of the 60's pop rock band Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick & Tich in the movie.

Since you were discussing FFYL, as much as I enjoy a good revenge flick, I felt that the family didn't dish out enough punishment, or more accurately, the cruel villains didn't suffer as much as they should have at least not to me. It will most probably be the prime example, or most well known of the Race Hate Genre, though.

This is just my opinion of his movies, of course. I'm just not that big a fan of his movies anymore. I'll see them I just don't get all worked up over them now. I thought RESERVOIR DOGS was great (although the movie reminded me a lot of Carpenter's THE THING which was integrated ingeniously into the film) and PULP FICTION was not the first film to be shot with a disjointed structure but nonetheless, it was a fine film although I despise the over reliance on drug related ideas found predominantly in his movies. JACKIE BROWN was good, too and it was great to see Robert Forster again as ALLIGATOR is one of my favorite movies made all the more enjoyable for his screen presence. He has said JACKIE BROWN was his ode to the Blaxploitation genre but honestly, had he not made that comment, I'd never made the connection as it had none of those films audacious and over the top violence. Still, his great writing is much in evidence there.

There's also word that he's remaking Russ Myer's FASTER, PU**YCAT, KILL! KILL! Have you heard this daTOAD?

[Guest Markgway]

"*****CAT"?

Why does this forum have a stupid censor filter? Aren't we all adults here? I don't need protected from BAAAAD words or household pets.

[peringaten]

"*****CAT"?

Why does this forum have a stupid censor filter? Aren't we all adults here? I don't need protected from BAAAAD words or household pets.

Yeah! What the fuck?! That shit's wack.

[SlothStyleKungFu]

Yes, I've heard all that, too yet QT himself has stated before he was remaking the film. Talk of doing this film goes back as far as 1994 that I know of. Regardless of how different the movie turns out to be, remakes are seldom the exact same as the source anyways. Look at how different THE THING remake was. Completely different from the original. The title is the same as are ideas present in Castellari's film. That's pretty much a remake to me regardless of how subtle the similarities are, or will end up being.

Well, if he really was correctly quoted saying "remake" then it must have been some typical Tarantino verbal diarrhea because, again, like I said, its a WW2 guys-on-a-mission film like many others, but I've read the script and the plotting/characters has nothing to do with Castellari's Inglorious Bastards at all.

He pretended to be black while promoting JACKIE BROWN with the Cover and over. If this is his true personality then why not do it all the time? "...

As for his wiggerisms, that annoys me too. Buuuutttttt, according to his own accounts of his childhood, his single mom dating a black guy who took him to many movies (blaxsploitation&kung fu) with a black crowd... I think his penchant to slip into that comes from the same arrested development/childhood hangups that affect his overall film making tastes.

[venoms5]

I've read the script and the plotting/characters have nothing to do with Inglorious Bastards at all.

Refer to my comment about THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD and Carpenter's version. The only similarities there is the setting and that's it. The same seems to go for this new QT crap. Nothing similar but the setting and seemingly some plot points, too. Somebody else on another board posted about "the script" and said the same thing you did. Why even bother calling it INGLORIOUS BASTARDS then? It can't be the "popularity" of the movie as that movie is pretty obscure as it is. You don't call it a remake, but I do. It pays some sort of homage or reference to the earlier film. Regardless of how small that notice is, it's a remake to me.

[SlothStyleKungFu]

Refer to my comment about THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD and Carpenter's version. The only similarities there is the setting and that's it. The same seems to go for this new QT crap. Nothing similar but the setting and seemingly some plot points, too...

Unlike The Fly, Body Snatchers, or The Thing which had a general idea, reworked, but similar in the source and remakes, Bastards is just a WW2 flick, thats about it as far as similarities go. He could have called his Bastards, The Filthy Dozen, or The Machine Guns of Navarrone and it would have as many referance points to those WW2 films as it does the Castellari flick.

Somebody else on another board posted about "the script" and said the same thing you did. Why even bother calling it INGLORIOUS BASTARDS then?

I didnt get it either. The rest is an original take on the genre but I guess he just liked the title, naming a group of soldiers that, and was too freakin' lazy to come up with something better or equally cool?

You don't call it a remake, but I do. It pays some sort of homage or reference to the earlier film. Regardless of how small that notice is, it's a remake to me.

Fine by me, but its really referencing a whole, huge genre, not one specific film, so its about as much a remake as any other film he's made. Its like calling Jackie Brown a remake of Coffy or Death Proof a remake of The Swinging Barmaids.