Kill Bill Vol. I (2003) 4/10
Kill Bill Vol. II (2004) 6/10
An entire bridal party, including the pregnant bride (Uma Thurman) is brutally murdered. We learn that The Bride was a top assassain who left killing behind when she became pregnant, and that, although everyone was left for dead, she survived in a coma for four years. Now she’s out of her coma and looking to avenge herself on Bill (David Carradine) and the assassains who helped him destroy her. Directed by Quentin Tarantino.
Fairly early in Kill Bill Vol. I, the relentless, meaningless, over-the-top bloodshed stopped being watchable, and to the extent that I could still pay attention, I was watching color, composition, and cinematography without regard to the fact that the red was buckets of fake blood. KBI is a meaningless exercise in form over function. Sometimes it is kitch and even funny, but more often it is simply unpleasant.
In the “making of” feature on the DVD, Tarantino compares his film to Indiana Jones. Spielberg and Lucas, he says, were paying homage to 1930s serials, and he is paying homage in a similar manner to 1970s grindhouse. Set aside the obnoxious egoism of the comparison, Tarantino misses an important point. The Indiana Jones movies aren’t just a tribute to the serials, they are also movies in their own right. The Kill Bill movies, especially the first one, are just homage, with no substance of their own.
Tarantino is thrilled with the whizzbang coolness of it all, and watching KBI is an awful lot like watching a loudish kid play with his GI Joes. Smash! Boom! Rat-a-tat-a-tat! Mom, did you see that? Yeah, whatever. There’s no real movie here. I also think that Tarantino doesn’t know how to distinguish something that’s “great” because it’s outrageous and overblown and delightfully ridiculous, and something that’s “great” because it’s actually of high quality. He is willing to layer any version of “great” into this over the top tribute.
Kill Bill Vol. II fares better. Large parts of it were extremely watchable and entertaining, mostly because the second movie, unlike the first, has real characters and a real story to tell. There’s a scene between Bill’s brother Budd (Michael Madsen) and the Bride that is genuinely suspenseful and exciting. There’s a sense of substance in the flashbacks to the Bride’s relationship with Bill, and her apprenticeship to assassain master Pai Mei (Chia Hui Liu). But even here, Tarantino is having too much fun by half. There’s a “whoosh” sound effect every time Pai Mei moves his long beard. Once is kind of a giggle, but there were about ten and after a while you want to tell the kid to either put his GI Joes away or take them out in the yard and stop bothering the grown-ups.
There’s a scene at the end of Vol. II where the Bride is explaining why she decided to leave Bill. As she explains, a flashback to the moment begins. It’s a fairly long scene, with some comedy and a lot of violence. In the end, it says nothing about the Bride that she couldn’t have said in five words, with no flashback, no story, no “Allow me to explain” at all. The scene is there because Tarantino wanted that one more fight, that one more joke.
A lot of film buffs really distrust the term “self-indulgent” when applied to a film or a director, but in this case, I don’t know what else to call these movies. The Kill Bill films are Tarantino’s version of Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. These movies are about Tarantino. And after a while, that’s kind of dull.
You know, this is exactly what’s always bothered me about Tarantino’s work, except I could never quite explain it. For years, I’ve suspected that he casts himself in his films just so that he can curse in front of a camera.
I like Tarantino’s 3 earlier movies quite a lot. Yes, there was a quality of self-indulgence, especially with Pulp Fiction, but a filmmaker is supposed to mature, not get stupider.
I might rate the two slightly higher than you, but I agree with the overall criticism and with the relative ranking of the two. (The teahouse sequence in KBI was just interminable–Tarantino at his most self-indulgent.) Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown are Tarantino at his best, IMO.
Kill Bill lost me when she was functional so fast after getting out of a coma that long. Yes color is about all the movie had going for it.
However I do really like Jay & Silent Bob strike back.
Yes, they’re meaningless and over-the-top. There’s something I like about them, though. It’s probably the sensationalism of it… kind of like watching Entertainment Tonight (even though I hate that show and never watch it). ^_^ And I like the music (I’ve got both soundtracks). I don’t usually go for those kinds of films, with the gratuitous violence, but it’s too unreal in the Kill Bill movies. Surprisingly, my mom likes the movies, too. I wouldn’t compare them to Indiana Jones or anything (egotism) – they’re too flat for that – but I have to say that I liked them. ^_^
Tarantino is thrilled with the whizzbang coolness of it all, and watching KBI is an awful lot like watching a loudish kid play with his GI Joes. Smash! Boom! Rat-a-tat-a-tat! Mom, did you see that? Yeah, whatever.
Pauline Kael once wondered about male filmmakers who indulge their adolescent fantasies “Are these boys being naughty just because rhey’re old enough not to be scolded by their mothers?” LOL
When KB1 came out, I remember writing something like “it’s got all the depth of a thin-crust pizza, but it’s a pizza with everything on it.” It’s true that it’s decadent: the sequence at the teahouse exists solely to show creative ways of killing (there’s intentionally no suspense. We know The Bride wins, since the structure has already shown us what comes after). But I can’t say I didn’t enjoy it. I enjoyed it in the same way I enjoyed the Indiana Jones movies, which, to tell the truth, I also found rather flat, but fun.
a filmmaker is supposed to mature, not get stupider.
I can’t argue with you on this. I thought Tarantino’s most mature work involved the relationship between Pam Grier and Robert Forster in Jackie Brown. I also give him credit in KB2 for rescuing Michael Madsen from the self-parody that his career was becoming and getting a real performance out of him. But in his half of Grindhouse he seemed to be onto something with the Kurt Russell character, then abandoned it because he couldn’t resist doing a really bitchin’ car chase. And it was, I enjoyed it (just as I enjoyed the Robert Rodriguez half of the film, which was absolute over-the-top self-indulgent pastiche), but I’m still left wondering if he’s ever going to do his bar mitzvah movie and become an adult.
I liked them, even both of of them for different reasons. Uma was georgous and he actully got Carradine to act a little bit
I’ve always liked Carradine. That was one reason I wanted to see these films.
’ve always liked Carradine. That was one reason I wanted to see these films.
I wanted to see the KB films for Uma. I’ve always been a huge fan of hers… except for her getting cast in the movie version of The Producers musical, because no.
In my opinion, Pulp Fiction was a stroke of accidental genius. I think Tarantino sucks. The best of Kill Bill is in the visuals. It was totally self-indulgent and too damn long. I was stunned when Uma Thurman was nominated for an Oscar for it.