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

[daTOAD]

"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 "

True, but i have a theory for that. Kurt Is an icon. Its hard to hate Snake Pliskin. Its probably impossible for fans of these type of movies to not root for him, so you have to create someone you like or feel for a little bit more than Kurt-and cut his screen time.You had to get to know these girls. I would agree , that it didnt work and came off as long winded nothingness, but i think i saw what he was trying to do-so i gave him a pass.Just my theory.

I agree also with what you said about FFYL, but you know what i mean- the point was to get to the payoff[ending] , though it should have been better. If DP was released in 1973 , it wouldve been a drive inn classic. Same for KB. Most Drive-Inn[cult] flicks are horrible anyway and hardly ever deliver. IMO these two did.

I really dont view Jackie Brown as Blaxplotation. I see it as a caper flick. Like that movie a lot. I heard Faster *****cat was a rumour[i hope so-the original is the ****]. What i wanna know is how is QT gonna advertise using the word Bastards, for his new flick?

[daisho2004]

Yeah I agree Death Proof just dragged on & on I was like OK enough of this, I almost turned off the movie.

[ministry88]

Well, um, it's taken me something like 18 months to reply to Runningman's question if I'll review KILL BILL Vol. 2 in a similar fashion. Unfortunately, the answer is "no."

These days it seems I've temporarily hung up my official film critic hat and just done my criticism as the whim strikes me (as I did with the first KILL BILL film that started this thread). But I am flattered that you value my insights, Runningman.

AND MY GOD! This thread still LIVES after nearly 2 YEARS! I honestly didn't think to keep checking it after a month or so after I started it. But I just caught up with all the subsequent posts and there were some great points and all without dumbass flame wars! Just another reason I think this is the best cult/kungfu/whatever film forum on the web!

[mpm74]

Some Kill Bill Vol. 3 news...

While promoting The Hateful 8 at this year’s recent Comic-Con, Quentin Tarantino opened up about a potential Kill Bill Vol. 3. Tarantino intimated that it was a definite possibility and that Uma Thurman was definitely up for another round as The Bride.

The 3rd installment of Tarantino’s Kill Bill saga – and even some prequels – have been rumored for years. According to Thurman, an unfinished script does exist. There was even some talk of it being done entirely in Anime-form. In the past, Daryl Hannah confirmed a Vol. 3 was happening. Vivica Fox, who is about to reignite her career with an ID4 sequel has expressed interest in returning for a cameo.

http://www.cityonfire.com/vivica-fox-ready-for-the-third-round-of-kill-bill/

[Cognoscente]

On 12/13/2006 at 2:50 AM, Guest Ministry88 said:

The problem with this film is it has no center, no soul. It's just a big mush of previous cinema put in a postmodern blender. To me Quentin represents what is wrong with postmodernism and our current dilemma inherent in the decadence of Western art and civilization: it creates this weird, self-referential, artificial reality so far entrenched with previous texts and art that it's hard to tell what's real or original anymore. Cleverness and gimmick value are heralded for originality.

To understand where he went wrong with the Kill Bill duology is to compare it to Wong Jing's High Risk. The Jet Li movie is a parody of (and homage to) action movies as well as martial arts movies, but it maintains enough of its own identity to be recognised as a genuinely classic movie. Coincidentally, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood reminds me of High Risk in terms of it being about an actor whose stunt double happens to be his best friend and bodyguard.

I remember watching Kill Bill when it first came out, I was hoping that it would be referential in an original way...but the movie is just one long trailer that serves as a gateway drug to Asian cinema. Kill Bill, in a way, was the beginning of the end for how strict that filmmakers should be. That gimmick of splitting a long film into two parts just smacks of laziness, and it goes against that old writer's wisdom of killing your darlings.

Back to his originality (of lack thereof), Quentin is the equivalent to a modern heavy metal band who steal so many riffs from the oldies but the youngsters are too nascent to know any better. In non-rock terms, he is like a techno artist who is more interested in incorporating samples than creating new work.

Edited May 2, 2021 by Cognoscente

[DrNgor]

Meghan Markle is now in the news for attacking movies for promoting female Asian stereotypes, including Kill Bill:

https://variety.com/2022/film/news/meghan-markle-kill-bill-asian-dragon-lady-stereotype-1235393174/

I posted these thoughts on FB:

So, Meghan Markle called out films like KILL BILL; FULL METAL JACKET; and AUSTIN POWERS IN GOLDMEMBER for its stereotyping of Asian women. I'll share some of my thoughts here, and would invite my friends (especially my friends who just happen to be AAPI) to share their thoughts, too. I'd like to learn more from your points of view.

KILL BILL - Quentin Tarantino made these two films as an homage to his favorite film genres, which included Japanese chanbara films and Chinese kung fu movies. Lucy Liu's character is based in part on Meiko Kaji's character from LADY SNOWBLOOD; in fact, after this movie found success worldwide, actress-singer Meiko Kaji herself came out of retirement to record some new music. Obviously, the original character was vengeance-driven antihero who inhabited a very grey area, while Liu's Iishi O-Ren is a straight-up villain.

The article points to the character as being "hyper-aggressive." But the truth is, every character in those films is "hyper-aggressive." The movies are a pastiche of genres known for their violence: kung fu; chanbara; Spaghetti Western; American exploitation; Eurotrash; etc. To single out one character on account of her race in the KILL BILL movies seems disingenuous.

It also points to the "Dragon Lady" stereotype. That one was is weird, because I always understood the "Dragon Lady" stereotype was related to sex: the cold, manipulative Asian woman who uses sex as a means to her own (nefarious) ends. That stereotype goes back to things like the Fu Manchu movies, like the 1930s MASK OF FU MANCHU, where the villain's daughter (played by Caucasian actress Myrna Loy) was hinted to enjoy screwing her male captives until she tired of them. The thing is that Lucy Liu's character in KILL BILL wasn't very sexualized (although her younger anime character was...kinda...in a scene that reminded me of the HK movie LETHAL PANTHER). So she doesn't really strike me as being very Dragon Lady to me; her brothel madam character in MAN WITH THE IRON FIST moved closer to that particular stereotype.

FULL METAL JACKET - Let's get one thing straight: Any man (of any race) who watches a film like this and catcalls an Asian woman with "Me so horny" or "Five dolla! Sucky! Sucky!" is a piece of garbage. 

Now, what about the inclusion of scenes depicting American soldiers and the SE Asian sex industry during the Vietnam War? It obviously was a thing, perhaps moreso than other wars--or maybe that Vietnam occurred as the Hayes Code ended and the MPAA ratings system was being founded, and thus could actually show scenes like that, unlike movies made during and immediately after WW2. As I understand it, my dad, a Vietnam vet, was often tasked with fetching soldiers who were spending too much time in brothels and bringing them back to base.

It thus brings up a question of intellectual honesty. Think of that movie THE PATRIOT, in which Mel Gibson's character has to be likable for modern audiences, so he's depicted as housing happy sharecroppers on his plantation, as opposed to slaves, which would have reflected the reality of that time period. Going back to Vietnam War, if a lot of soldiers did spend their time with prostitutes during that conflict, wouldn't it be allowed to be depicted as part of historical honesty, even if that means that some oversexed frat boys years later will quote that in the worst way possible?

AUSTIN POWERS IN GOLDMEMBER - This one is probably the most complicated, as far as I'm concerned. The attack is that a pair of supporting characters portray Asian women as oversexualized. Those would be "Fook Mi" and "Fook Yu", whom are identified as Japanese twins (despite their names being a vulgarization of Chinese names).

But GOLDMEMBER is a parody of 60s spy movies, like James Bond, Matt Helm and Derek Flint. As far as I know, nearly all the women in those movies are oversexualized. For better or worse, that was part of those movies' lasting appeal. And in the Austin Powers movies, you already had characters like "Alotta Fagina" and "Felicity Shagwell." So, the Japanese (ugh!) twins are no more oversexualized than any other female character in that particular series. And being a parody, the use of stereotypes and absurdity is sort of expected--my favorite jokes in that film are the non-sequitur attacks on Dutch people.

But being in a series in that had mainly been Euro-centric up until the third film shook things up--the female love interest is played by Beyoncé--I can understand people thinking, "White, white, white, white, white, white, Asian (but they're sex kittens), white, white, Asian (but they're cowardly Japanese men running from "Godzilla"), white...." In the wake of Michelle Yeoh kicking butt in TOMORROW NEVER DIES, I can see filmgoers wanting more of the contemporary than the old school in that particular department.

Edited October 6, 2022 by DrNgor

[TibetanWhiteCrane]

Maybe this dumb bitch should just shut her trap. That would be nice.

[8DiagramAuntieFighter]

OP was on a mission with their post.😭 I’m not fond of the movie for similar reasons, but my lord.