• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Anyone seen Kill Bill yet? [merged]


log in or register to remove this ad

Kai Lord said:
When has a movie ever underperformed because of its length?
http://us.imdb.com/WN?20030721#4
Quentin Tarantino split new movie Kill Bill in two to stop studio bosses at Miramax from forcing him to cut it. The Pulp Fiction movie maker shocked Hollywood this week by announcing the eagerly-awaited film - which stars Uma Thurman out for revenge against a fellow assassin - will be released in two parts. Part one will debut October 10, a date for the second installment has yet to be announced, although it could come two to six months later, according Miramax co-founder Harvey Weinstein. The move allows writer-director Tarantino to get his full story before audiences and avoid potential cuts to get it down to a more viewer-friendly length. Miramax has feuded with directors in the past on film edits, including Martin Scorsese on Gangs Of New York and Billy Bob Thornton on All The Pretty Horses. Meanwhile, Miramax claim they are happy to be accommodating with Tarantino. Miramax spokesman Paul Pflug says, "We believe in him. He's somebody we have a great track record with. He's one of the key factors why Miramax has become who it is."
Well it's common knowledge that movie company executives don't like movies over 2 hours long because their research tells them they don't do as well. I'm not a movie executive or a focus group so you would have to ask one of them about it. If their research tells them long movies don't do as good who am I to question them?

Not to pick on you, but this amuses me and I've seen a number of people say this. Did everyone really crap their pants over one twenty minute fight sequence in an almost two hour long movie?

Watch Braveheart. A lot more fighting, and save for Sophie's arm and the Yakuza dude's head, a lot more gore. And it was three hours long.

Saving Private Ryan ran about two and a half hours and had two twenty plus minute gorefests that were so authentic they triggered traumatic flashbacks for many WWII veterans who saw them. Did Spielberg cut Private Ryan in two? Or Schindler's List?

If people who actually suffered such horrendous acts can sit through two and half to three hours of shocking re-enactments I think we can handle a three hour movie with a tongue in cheek Uma Thurman swordfight in the middle.

Volume I was mostly a snooze fest.

Or did the overlong Okinawa sequence have you hyperventilating in your box of popcorn? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess it didn't. Ditto for the toe wiggling and anime..
I'm not the general public, I can sit through hour on end of mindless violence (of course I have severe back problems and I cannot sit in one place for very long so a 3 hour movie would require a pain pill and would still be a torture test for me). The problem here is that they are not worried about die hard fans they are worried about the general public, can Joe Average off the street sit through 3 hours of this? It was Tarantino who said nobody would sit through three hours of this type of movie not me. It was the Miramax who decided to split the movie and that was one of the reason they gave. I was going by what Tarantino and others said about why they cut it in two.

http://us.imdb.com/WN?20030605#9
Stunner Lucy Liu is warning sensitive fans to avoid her new movie Kill Bill - because the dramatic violence will make them physically ill. The Charlie's Angels babe stars alongside Uma Thurman in cult director Quentin Tarantino's long-awaited fourth film, and predicts audiences will either flee from the cinema or vomit in their seats when they watch the extreme action - even if she thinks the violence is artistic. She says, "It's so violent. People will leave the movie theatre or get sick in the movie theatre. But there's so much violence that it becomes not numbing, but almost comedic. There's a scene where there's so much violence that the color of the film goes into black and white, so that the blood looks like oil. It's cinematic, it's art. You can take it to a different level, and show what violence is, in such a heightened manner that you don't think of it as violence anymore, you think of it as a language. If you go to Kill Bill, you know there's going to be violence - that's your option."
Me I wasn't phased at all by the movie, but I'm not a average viewer either. I've already pointed out that the movie didn't bother me at all and that I didn't think it was that bad, but we would have to poll people coming out of the theater to get a good idea of what the general movie going public thought.
The film was cut to double the profits. Plain and simple
for the record Kill Bill vol 1 was 111 minutes long, if it was cut in exact half that would make the whole thing 3 hours 42 minutes long. How many 4 hour movies have there been?
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0266697/trivia

During production, Tarantino wrote new scenes as he shot thus compiling massive amounts of footage.
&
At one point it was suggested that the film would be broken into two films, with the first one ending in a cliff hanger and the second being released two weeks after the first. This idea was shelved for a while and then revived by Miramax, although the gap between the films is to be somewhere between five weeks and three months (sources vary).
http://us.imdb.com/WN?20030225#7
Quentin Tarantino's new movie Kill Bill is so long, the filmmaker now plans to turn it into two separate films. The film, starring Uma Thurman, Daryl Hannah, Vivica A. Fox and Lucy Liu, was originally scheduled to hit American cinemas screens in October, and now it is expected that the second part will be released just weeks later. David Carradine, who stars in the drama says, "Shooting has been going on so long - with Quentin continuing to write scenes, that plans are afoot to turn Kill Bill into two 90-minute features that would be released within five weeks of each other. I probably shouldn't be saying this, but what the hell - they can't fire me." He adds, "It's a brilliant marketing plan. The first film would end with a cliffhanger, so that everyone would want to see the second half." Carradine, who landed his role in the flick after Warren Beatty dropped out, is expecting to go before cameras again to shoot extra scenes for the movies.
http://us.imdb.com/SB?20030716#2
Instead of releasing Quentin Tarantino's latest film Kill Bill, starring Uma Thurman, in its current three-hour-plus length or asking the director to cut it, Miramax is now planning to release it in two parts, published reports said today (Wednesday). The first part is due to be released on Oct. 10. Daily Variety commented: "Cutting Kill Bill into two seems to be an elegant solution since Tarantino gets to release all of his three-hour pic, while (Harvey) Weinstein gets a 90-minute movie (albeit two of them)." Today's New York Times pointed out that the story is told in chapters and therefore lends itself to a serial approach. "I've always designed the movie, thought about the film, as malleable in any number of versions," Tarantino told the newspaper in a statement. He suggested that there may be different versions for Asia and Europe.
http://us.imdb.com/WN?20030902#5
Maverick director Quentin Tarantino's upcoming two-part movie Kill Bill will be eligible for awards in two separate Oscar years - effectively meaning the film could win two best picture gongs. The marital arts revenge saga starring Uma Thurman and Lucy Liu was originally planned as a single movie, but because of its length, Tarantino and Miramax Films decided to split it in two, and open the first part in America this October. Originally studio insiders believed the second installment would follow soon after, qualifying it for the same Academy Awards ceremony next March. However, Miramax have confirmed the second volume will be released on 20 February, meaning it can only be considered for nomination at the Oscars in 2005. The decision to split the film has angered American critics, who argue the decision is just a money-making ploy to earn twice as much in ticket sales. Miramax has hit back, insisting the movie was too long to remain a single entity.
 
Last edited:

Kai Lord said:
When has a movie ever underperformed because of its length?
Well, to name three: "Gettysburg," "Gods and Generals" and "Renaldo and Clara." Those are just off the top of my head -- I'm sure there are others.
 

Funny, I don't remember this much ill-will generated towards Matrix: Reloaded/Revolutions, even though it's doing the exact same thing:

  • One story, split across two movies
  • "overly long" scenes that "pad the film"
  • 20-minute action sequence
  • Ends the first part on a cliffhanger

...hmm.

J
 

Well here are some more things about the movie being cut into two parts. Obviously this wasn't just something they did to get more money out of this. The movie was planned and shot as one movie and split later when they realized it was just too long. He filmed for 155 days in 6 different locations, that's just insane (well not Apocalypse Now insane, it filmed for 274 days).

http://filmforce.ign.com/killbill/articles/429/429127p1.html?fromint=1

July 16, 2003 - When director Quentin Tarantino first pitched Kill Bill to Miramax films, he attached the condition that he be allowed to film his entire 200-page script. Miramax executive Harvey Weinstein agreed to Tarantino's terms and invested the necessary cash.

Principal photography on the film, which was done in Japan, China, Mexico, and other exotic locations, recently finished after 155 days of shooting – quite a bit more than most Hollywood films take. Although only one film had been agreed to, Tarantino maintained that he was going to consider turing the project into two or three films. And now, according to The New York Times, he's decided to split the original project into two films.
http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/454/454145p3.html
The biggest controversy over Kill Bill besides its violence surrounds the decision to split this film into two parts. As a final question, we ask Tarantino whether this will change the dramatic structure of the film. "Yeah, I guess that it did, actually, as opposed to a movie where the whole first half is just complete viscera and eye-popping action and just meant to blow you away, all right...? The resonance comes in the second half... with more of the depth and resonance coming in, I guess that it did. Because this (Volume 1) is just about the good time, fun movie, movie aspect of the movie. And the second one will be the deeper exploration of it."
This is a pretty good 4 page interview (I just posted the last paragraph).

http://www.cinemareview.com/production.asp?prodid=2224
Originally planned as a single film, the movie will be presented in two installments, Kill Bill- Vol. 1 and Kill Bill-Vol. 2.

“If I had thought while I was writing it,” Tarantino says, “that [Miramax co-chairman] Harvey Weinstein would be willing to release it in two parts, I would have suggested it then. But I frankly never thought he would. Later on, when he himself said he didn’t want to cut a thing and would we consider releasing it as two movies, I said, ‘What an interesting idea!’ Within an hour, I had figured out exactly how to do it.”

When the time to make the final decision rolled around, in the summer of 2003, Tarantino showed Weinstein his cut of what would soon be designated Kill Bill-Vol. 1. He introduced the screening by saying: “This is either the first movie, or it’s the first half of the movie”. Weinstein’s response was unequivocal: “This is a terrific ending! So that’s it! It’s two movies!”

There is certainly more precedent in American film distribution now than ever before for planning films from the outset in terms of a series of several installments. And in Europe and Asia this has been common practice for decades. In fact, one of the key influences upon Kill Bill, Kinji :):):)asaku’s Battles Without Honor and Humanity, was an epic gangster drama about the decline of a yakuza clan, which was released in several installments from 1973 to 1976.
As it happens, each of the two volumes of Kill Bill has its own tone and mood and employs quite different narrative strategies. In terms of its Asian influences, for example, Vol.1 is dominated by Japan, as personified by Sonny Chiba (The Streetfighter), who plays the samurai sword maker Hattori Hanzo and who served as the film’s kenjutsu choreographer. Vol. 2, on the other hand, is dominated by China, as personified by martial arts movie legend Gordon Liu Chia-hui (The Master Killer), who plays the Bride’s implacable Shaolin Five Animals kung fu instructor, the “white eyebrow” monk Pei Mei. (Liu also has a small role in Vol. 1 as yakuza boss O-Ren Ishii’s top enforcer, Johnny Mo).
another pretty good article (which I just grabbed the part about the split from)
 
Last edited:

jdavis said:
another pretty good article (which I just grabbed the part about the split from)
Okay, so as far as Quentin's motivation, I can see it not being solely about money. Not so sure with Harvey Weinstein.

Note that neither of them stated it was cut because "it was too intense" which was the amusing assertion that I originally countered. Lucy Liu says she thinks it'll make people puke and suddenly Richard Roeper and dozens of people on the internet are jumping on the wagon and making claims like the one in your previous post.

The violence isn't why it was split in half. Lucy Liu didn't direct or edit the picture, and she certainly doesn't have final cut. What she thinks about the violence is irrelevant.

I do believe the other articles you linked paint a better picture of why it was divided. Quentin wanted to make it long for the sake of making it long and "epic", and Weinstein will do anything to make him happy, especially if it means doubling the studios profits, regardless of how blatantly tacky it is to the ticket buying audience.
 

Shadowdancer said:
Well, to name three: "Gettysburg," "Gods and Generals" and "Renaldo and Clara." Those are just off the top of my head -- I'm sure there are others.
Okay let me rephrase: When has a three or slightly longer than three hour movie ever underperformed due solely to its length?
 

Personally I'm glad the movie was cut in two.

I didn't know that it was going to be when I went and saw it, since I generally don't follow such things since I think it take some of the fun out of the final experience. I have to tell you that I was absolutely glued to the screen for the duration of the movie, toe wiggling, okinawa, anime and all. Because of how intensely I was involved with the movie though when the ending came it was like a rush of relief just because of the intensity of the experience for me. It was fun but tiring, like a few other things I can think of. I left the movie theatre fully sated, even though I generally dislike such endings.

On the other hand I watched Matrix: Reloaded last night and the result wasn't nearly the same, meh.

Even though there may have been other circumstances influencing the decision to split Kill Bill into two seperate movies, it was Tarantino's understanding of story telling that sets apart his cliffhanger ending from others I've seen. Definately leaving me at that fine point of feeling satisfied with what I've see, but still wanting to finish the story. I will happily shell out the money to see the next part without blinking an eye.
 

I actually enjoyed the Okinawa scene. It was fun how she felt him out to make sure that this was the Hattori Hanzo(who happened the greatest ninja not swordmaker, but oh well). She played a little diplomatic game with him.
I also enjoyed the ritual with the blades and the respect of the master craftsman toward his ultimate work.
You can't discount the great line,"If you come across God, he will be cut."
What seemed like padding to others I enjoyed just as much as some of the rest of the film.
 

I actually enjoyed the Okinawa scene. It was fun how she felt him out to make sure that this was the Hattori Hanzo(who happened the greatest ninja not swordmaker, but oh well). She played a little diplomatic game with him.
I also enjoyed the ritual with the blades and the respect of the master craftsman toward his ultimate work.
You can't discount the great line,"If you come across God, he will be cut."
What seemed like padding to others I enjoyed just as much as some of the rest of the film.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top