Kill Bill Series

Jeremy Ordan

Jeremy Ordan

Major Contributor
Tonight I watched Kill Bill (vol. 1) for the first time in about a year.

This movie has got to be considered one of the most absorbing films. From the moment it starts all the way up through the end it grabs onto you and doesn't let go. I forgot how brilliant it is, but this is almost second to how it is filmed. There are steadicam shots that boggle the mind, tons of jib movements, and the editing is nearly seamless throughout.

I completely forgot how brilliant this movie is.
 
I understand what he was doing here but the films just didn't grab me. Don't get me wrong, they were decent but for me they were a step down from his previous 3 films. Of course, I've never been a fan of the martial arts films. They just never caught on with me. I'm looking forward to his next film to see where he goes next. I would love to see him quit paying homage to others and give us a look at the real Tarantino. I don't think we've seen it yet.
 
This is probably blasphemy, but this was actually the first Tarantino film I saw. Kill Bill 1, that is. I watched it on opening night and was just amazed. I was freaking out for hours on end. I went to a football game afterwards at my HS, and the only thing I could talk about was how awesome the movie was. I was like a record on repeat.

I went back and watched Pulp and Reservoir completely (not just snippets from tv), and my life has never been the same ever since.

I dug 2 as much as I did 1. Definately different from QTs other movies, but in a very good way. It kinda did what Cabin Fever did in it's super homage style, but you know, with budget and a tarantino screenplay. I enjoyed it immensely.
 
Hudson will be here soon...

THere was lots of good stuff to watch, but only enough story for one film. Self indulgent with flashes of brilliance. Great directing, flawed writing.
 
See, I think there really is enough story for two films (I haven't seen part 2 in a year or so), but the thing about it that I remember is how different parts one and two are. Part one is like this long exposition and part two has the emotion. Part one has the action and part two has the resolution and depth.

From a simple, here is what we're going to shoot, here are the shots we're going to show, I have never seen better editing than part one. A few hours after seeing it again I am completely obsessing over it still in a good way.
 
vjbrennan said:
Hudson will be here soon...

THere was lots of good stuff to watch, but only enough story for one film. Self indulgent with flashes of brilliance. Great directing, flawed writing.
Click to expand...

I think the writing in the second was brilliant. The way it was structured as well was great. You're never sure of what Bill really is, until the second, and then the film takes a whole new meaning. I thought that was cool.
 
Ya know, I've never been that big of a fan of Tarantino. I never liked his thug violence. I was extremely skeptical of the Kill Bills. I finally saw Vol. 1 and it blew me away. Finally he had some discipline to back the violence up (martial arts). I loved Vol. 2 just as much.

If I had to pick one over the other I would have to go with Vol. 1. I think it flows much better. I like the 2nd one because it ties up loose ends.
 
I don't see how you need almost 4 hours to tell a story of betrayal and retribution. Ben Hur wasn't even that long.

I don't blame the guy for doing it. He did it because he could, but (as I have said before) if anybody else turns in that script it doesn't get made. It was Tarantino's direction that made the film work, IMHO. And I know I am in the minority thinking that it didn't really work all that well, but I prefer focus and the brevity of the essential in storytelling.
 
Amazing, brilliant movie for sure! :thumbsup:

[I call the two one movie]

I'm still very pissed at the money grab by making it two movies and will never forgive that. There was not one single reason to split it... other then money
:angry:

Now that said.... I'm watching it AGAIN this weekend in full. Been too long :)
 
Thanks Yankee man (my future NC brethren) for bringing up some Tarantino.

I have always been a fan of QT; from Dogs, to Pulp and the amazing Jackie Brown. The Four Room's segment with Bruce to Screenplay's like Natural Born, True Romance and From Dusk Till Dawn

When I first saw KIll Bill I was admittedly taken aback. I knew it was a homage to the martial arts films but I had no idea how quirky it would be (The Bernard Herrman score, the Animated sequence, the gushing (Splurting) blood scenes, the black and white opening, the 70's 'theatre' music.........

But, after seeing Kill Bill 2 and piecing it together I have become such a huge fan. Genius. Really.

Person's who don't get Tarantino I just don't understand how. (Not for vulgairty or violence cause i can dig that; but the art and craft of filmmaking)

People like to say 'He rips off'

I say bullshit. Homage central and in a way that is so complimentary. It takes mastery to do what QT does.

His films are an event and there ar eno other filmmkaers alive (if ever) that can claim that.

He truley is the bastard child of cinema.
 
And how about:

Francis Ford Coppola
Ridley Scott
Steven Spielberg (yes, there I said it)
John Huston
 
And he's got nothing on guys like Howard Hawkes and Billy Wilder who could make masterpieces in EVERY genre.

I like Tarantino, more for the way he shook things up than anything. But he doesn't show a lot of...range.
 
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan, especially the first three topped by Jackie Brown, but I just can't anoint him the best ever.
 
I dig it guys !

I don't know about the others (and Im not doubting their mastery) I'm only referencing my gene and what I know.

No. I dont think Scott nor Spielberg conjurs up an event vibe with new releases; The Terminal ? Kingdom of Heaven ? Matchstick Men ? Catch Me If You Can ? (I am in no way disrespecting Steve or Ridley)

I suppose Kubrick could generate some hype; I personally never got Kubrick.

Coppola? NO way ! Rainmmaker? Jack ? Tucker?
 
John_Hudson said:
I dig it guys !

I don't know about the others (and Im not doubting their mastery) I'm only referencing my gene and what I know.

No. I dont think Scott nor Spielberg conjurs up an event vibe with new releases; The Terminal ? Kingdom of Heaven ? Matchstick Men ? Catch Me If You Can ? (I am in no way disrespecting Steve or Ridley)

I suppose Kubrick could generate some hype; I personally never got Kubrick.

Coppola? NO way ! Rainmmaker? Jack ? Tucker?
Click to expand...

Cherry picker. :grin:
Coppola: The Godfather, Apocolypse Now, The Outsiders, Dracula
Spielberg: Jaws, Schindler's List, Munich, Saving Private Ryan, Raiders of the Lost Ark
Scott: Gladiator, Alien, Blade Runner and yes, Kingdom of Heaven :thumbsup:
 
LMAO Cherrypicker !

I friggin love Spielberg and Coppollas work that has been listed !

I just meant IMO Tarantino has a solid track record (No Catch me's or Jack's on his resume yet)
 
John_Hudson said:
LMAO Cherrypicker !

I friggin love Spielberg and Coppollas work that has been listed !

I just meant IMO Tarantino has a solid track record (No Catch me's or Jack's on his resume yet)
Click to expand...

Yes, but he's only done five movies. Well, really only four. :)
Like I said, I'm a fan but he needs to put together a substantial body of work to be compared to the greats. :thumbup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top