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

Rate Kill Bill Volume 2

Rate Kill Bill Volume 2 on a scale of 1-10.


Essentially, I am convinced that Tarantino put everything he did into the movie simply because he thought it would be cool. The man has a good head for the flow of a story, which is why it's not just a random collection of images, but his motivations are simple and direct.

That's not the case with, say, Passion of the Christ, but discussing precisely why would involve starting a theological debate that would get this thread locked for sure. Let's just say that the violence of that film is much harder to justify in an intelligible, conscious way, and the motivations of its director (and the appeal to the masses) is anything but simple.

Finally, it is undeniable that Passion is memetic propaganda in the oldest sense of the word. Kill Bill is not propaganda. Except possibly for the idea that it's good to enjoy cool stuff.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Thinking it would be cool and it being cool are two different things and totally dependent on the definition of cool being used (the definition being personal). Doesn't change the fact that violence and 2D characters sell tickets. KB is propoganda in that its promotes the idea that liking Q.T. and his films makes one hip and cool. Not that you have this idea, (or you may, i don't know :) ), but I've seen and heard enough of that view point in my neck of the woods. (Hey I'm so hip I can't see over my own pelvis - Z.B.). Have fun grinding the axe on PotC :)

As an aside - this is just one in a long stream of movie disappointments over the last year or two - I don't know what I'm looking for in a good movie but I have seen it precious little in a long time.
 

I tend to think that QT is subtly mocking the "violence and 2D characters = tickets" idea, but YRMV.

Could you offer an example of a good movie, Abraxas? It would be easier for us to look if we knew what to look for.
 

Lets see - a few that I thought were good (as opposed to those that I just enjoyed)

12 Angry Men - the original
Master and Commander
Miller's Crossing
Usual Suspects
Pulp Fiction

come to mind.

As for newer movies (other than MaC) that I personally thought were good . . .
I'll have to think - none leap to mind (sad when I look at all the ticket stubs from the theatre I've collected :lol: )
 

ROTK had some fantastic scenes: the lighting of the Signal Fires across the Mountains, Faramir's charge against Osgilith, the Charge of the Roharrim, Theoden's death, Sam carrying Frodo after Frodo said he couldn't go on any further, etc.

Braveheart was fantastic. The best historical movie of the last ten years (except for Passion).

L.A. Confidential is my favorite gangster movie of the last few years (and the best movie I've seen by Russell Crowe).
 

barsoomcore said:
I'd like to know your reasoning behind the statement "the movie lacks hidden obsessions and unconscious messages." I find it tremendously unlikely that this is true, and I wonder why you think it is.
Wrath of the Swarm said:
Essentially, I am convinced that Tarantino put everything he did into the movie simply because he thought it would be cool. The man has a good head for the flow of a story, which is why it's not just a random collection of images, but his motivations are simple and direct.
As an answer, this only half-satisfies. My question isn't really "Why did he put what he put into the movie?" It's "Why do you think there's nothing in the movie he didn't intentionally put into it?"

That is, what is your basis for thinking that this movie does not display ideas or points of view that the director did not intend?
 
Last edited:

I find it difficult to imagine that anyone would think Bill, Elle and Vernita Green were flat characters. I thought Carradine brought so much weight and compassion to his part that it was impossible for me not to believe this was a real person.

Likewise Elle, who you could see had simmered with jealousy towards Beatrix all her life. She'd always been second-best to Kiddo. With Pai Mei, and most importantly with Bill. When Bill calls her in the hospital to abort the murder of the unconscious Bride her responses are perfectly in line with the bitter woman we see in Part 2. Not a flat character in any way.

Even Vernita Green, only onscreen for one sequence, provides us with a memorable character. "I shoulda been mutha-f&*#ing Black Mamba." That's a heartfelt statement, specific to that person in that situation. She, too, hated the Bride -- you could see it clearly.

I mean, we all have our own opinions, but I think that the idea that the characters in this film are FLAT is hard to support. I welcome efforts to do so, however.
 

Different people have different perceptions.

Carradine was replaying his kung-fu character with grey hair - and spouting wierd mystic psychobabble presented as philosophy. Esteban was a more memorable character. Bill was merely the catalyst that created the revenge seeking rampaging bride. Oh well. And once he made a point of telling the story about the Five-Point-Palm Exploding Heart Technique it was obvious that it was gonna be used on him.

Elle was the replacement chick with a chip on her shoulder - thats it. Just the number two blonde bitch pissed at the number one blonde bitch. Because she adequately demonstrated hate doesn't make her an in depth character - and her blinding was another-one of those instances where I knew what was gonna happen before it happened.

As for Vernita - she was just the warm-up fight to show how heartless the bride was and how skillful she still was even after the 4 year coma. The most memorable bit about that chapter was the cereal box - Kabooms - that was funny.

There are 2 reasons that explain some of my dissatisfaction with this movie
- It was too predictable - not in a you knew the bride would win way, but in a you knew exactly what was going to happen next way.
- The bride reminded me very much of the character Thomas Covenant. She just wasn't my kind of anti-hero.

I liked KB1 movie much more than KB2.

Oh, and my list of recent movies I consider good includes the LoTR movies, I was listing non-fantasy movies. The signal fire scene is a favorite of mine. I'm not as crazy about Braveheart as my friends and I couldn't get into L.A. Confidential.
 

Well, Abraxas, we disagree. Sounds to me like you're dismissing people as plot points because that's the only way you consider them -- but you probably think I'm reading way too much into the script, huh? Oh well.

Daryl Hannah's performance demonstrated far more than just "hate", however. I don't think you can deny she displayed petulance, grudging respect, jealousy, envy, satisfaction, frustration, bitterness and plain old fury. You can say it was all hate if you like, but I found just her conversation on the telephone in the hospital contained half-a-dozen poignant transitions that were beautifully handled.

And to me, a good character is one that goes through transitions. That changes.

Which lines of Bill's do you think were mystic psychobabble?

I also find Thomas Covenant a character not very much worth my effort -- I don't want to read about him because I just don't like. Or at least I didn't when I first read those books -- twenty years ago or more now. I might like them better, now.

But I don't see that the Bride had much to do with him. To me, Covenant's primary characteristic is his constant whining and complaining and weaselling out of what needs to be done. In contrast, I found the Bride was direct and without excuses -- she let you know what she wanted and she went after it. As unlike Covenant as I could imagine, frankly.

For myself, I had no idea how it was going to end. I couldn't conceive of what was going to happen next. When Bill shot her, I didn't see that coming. When he told BB that he'd killed Beatrix -- I didn't see that coming. When Elle killed Budd -- I didn't see that coming.

And I read the screenplay a year ago, so I SHOULD have known. But I'm notoriously poor at guessing how stories turn out. Except for The Sixth Sense. Got that one.
 

barsoomcore said:
Kai Lord: If you think the Bride that tearfully sends the man she loves to the death he must have is the same woman that callously cut off Sofie Fatale's arm, then, well, we disagree on that.
I do think she's the same person, albeit at the end of her emotional and physical rope. Sure, the proximity of her just revealed daughter, the freshness of holding her in her arms, and looking into the eyes of the man who she never believed would or could ever betray her opens up the emotional floodgates in those final moments, but she chooses the exact same course of action as when she began her bloody rampage. Murder. And not in self defense as she ran for his sword before she realized he was armed.

I think her character did go through a transformation within the context of the story as a whole, but we disagree on where it occurred and how long it lasted. I believe she changed when she learned she was pregnant, and this was perfectly depicted in the actual scene in which she first learns she'll be a mom and let's the Asian woman sent to kill her walk away. Was it logically "smart" from her point of view? Probably not. Who can really trust the morality and compassion of a professional killer? The assassin could have easily gotten over her initial reaction to Beatrix's pregnancy and come after her five minutes later or five days later. But this was a new Beatrix, and that Beatrix lived until the Wedding Chapel Massacre, where she was killed with the rest of the party.

The Bride who emerged was vengeful, murderous, and would never go back to being the person who let the first assassin go. Nope, even if it meant killing a man she once loved and deeply trusted. Even after realizing that her daughter hadn't really been lost, or even significantly damaged.

barsoomcore said:
That look is long gone by the time she confronts Bill on the patio. As is her rage.
Because at this point in the story, after so many killings, she's so far into her routine she's basically on autopilot.
barsoomcore said:
You'll note that we do NOT get the "Here goes the crazy Bride" music at that point. As in fact we don't get when she FIRST goes in to kill Budd -- it's only after Budd has buried her alive that he warrants the "close-up siren craziness" treatment.
Yep! And that's the thing. Try to kill her, you get the "close-up siren crazy treatment." Same old Beatrix. I'm not saying its odd for someone to be pissed when someone royally screws them over in such a morbid fashion, but it isn't exactly commendable behavior, and in Beatrix's case, no different at the end than when she started.

barsoomcore said:
Note that she does not kill Elle Driver, when she so easily could have. She renders the woman helpless and then leaves.
Eh, so she allowed her to live with her grotesque deformity just as she did with Sophie. Kind of an "enjoy your life now, b***ch". Not exactly merciful.

barsoomcore said:
What I really object to is the notion that stories of murderous revenge cannot be rich in value, simply by virtue of being stories of murderous revenge.
Its not that it features "murderous revenge," but that's *all* that it is. You might believe that a tale showcasing nothing more someone's homicidal drive for revenge can, in the right hands, be rich in value but I simply don't. The whole "in the right hands" for me would imply that something *more* would be added to story to make it worthwhile. Revenge that leads to redemption, or that serves as a cautionary tale. But then it wouldn't be a film like Kill Bill. And it still wouldn't offer as much as LOTR or The Passion. IMO.

Now, a couple of asides. I think its cool that you're so enthusiastic about a movie. There have been a number of times I've enjoyed parrying and jousting about different points in films just because I love talking about movies I love, whether others share that same affinity or not. Its just fun to get behind a story you love. :cool:

Aside #2: This is probably me reading *way* to much into things but something that made me curious after watching KB1 on DVD again. During the exchange between Beatrix and O-Ren when they say, "Silly Rabbit, Trix are for kids...." does anyone think that was Quentin hinting at the Bride's name? Or possibly where he got the idea for her name?

Rabbit Trix. Beatrix. Kids. Kiddo. *shrugs*

Just a random thought. ;)
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top