free counter with statistics Kill Bill: Vols. 1-2 | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

Kill_Bill_I.jpg
Revenge is a Dish Served Cold Because it Took Over Four Hours to Get Out of the Kitchen


Kill Bill: Vols. 1-2 / Drew Morton

Pajiba Blockbusters | August 17, 2009 | Comments (45)


In my younger days as a film critic for both the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and the UWM Post, I once gave glowing reviews to writer/director Quentin Tarantino’s fourth and fifth films (which I will review as one text for the sake of simplicity) Kill Bill: Vols. 1-2 (2003-2004). Re-watching the films over the past five years, particularly in the wake of Tarantino’s Grindhouse entry Death Proof (2007), my original impression has begun to diminish. While I admittedly enjoy myself for the bulk of those four-plus hours, I’ve found that the film’s excesses (temporal length, graphic violence, style more generally) grow thin after awhile. While I don’t despise Kill Bill as I do Death Proof, I don’t have the affection for it that I do for his first three films. At least, from my present perspective as a more seasoned film scholar and critic, not as deeply as I once did.

While Reservoir Dogs (1992) and Pulp Fiction (1994) held a candle for the crime genre and Jackie Brown (1997) kept one burning for blaxploitation, Kill Bill (henceforth KB) takes its inspiration from just about every other “low” genre you can think of: kung-fu, samurai, spaghetti western, even anime. That, I feel, is ultimately a factor in its failure. If you recall, in my retrospective review of Pulp Fiction, I described how Tarantino’s preference for the postmodern, specifically cinematic homage, held the possibility of becoming pure spectacle. As I noted, film critic James Wood wrote in his review of Pulp in The Guardian that Tarantino’s postmodernism created a film “stripped of any politics, metaphysics, or moral interest.” While I disagreed with Wood’s argument in the case of Pulp, I began to sympathize with his observation while re-watching KB but we’ll get to that shortly.

As many of you are no doubt aware, both those who have and those who haven’t watched KB, the story is, at its most basic, a revenge tale. The saga begins with a stark black and white image of the Bride’s (Uma Thuman) battered and beaten face as we hear the voice of the off-screen Bill (David Carradine), who relays to the pregnant Bride a simple statement: “Do you find me sadistic?…No Kiddo, at this moment, this is me at my most masochistic.” We hear Bill cock of a pistol and, just as the Bride utters, “Bill, it’s your baby,” she is shot in the face. Yet, Bill’s bullet did not kill the Bride; it just placed her in a coma, leading her to believe she lost her unborn child, which, of course, only multiplies her desire for a vengeance quest. This is what the bulk of the films’ four-hours are spent on; the quest to, as the title suggests, eliminate Bill along with his team of assassins: O-Ren Ishii (Lucy Liu), Vernita Green (Vivica A. Fox), Elle Driver (Daryl Hannah), and Bill’s brother, Budd (Michael Madsen). Of course, it doesn’t hold well for Bill and his team that the estranged Bride was formally his best assassin, provided with both extensive martial arts training by Chinese master Pai Mei (Gordon Liu) and killing steel by Japanese swordsmith Hattori Hanzo (Sonny Chiba).

The film’s revenge plot finds its main source of existence in the aestheticization of violence. We watch as the various characters slice off one another’s limbs with samurai swords, gauge out one another’s eyeballs, turn each other into human Pez machines, shoot one another with shotguns and, in one case, utilize the “Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique.” Tarantino delivers this violence in an over-the-top, cartoonish fashion (sometimes literally, as is the case with O-Ren Ishii’s background) by pumping up the gore, flipping to black and white, using backlit silhouettes, etc. As this description suggests, KB is, for the most part, a collage of carnage, cinematically rendered with as much stylistic variety as the kills themselves. Sure, there’s a tonal balancing act going on: Volume 1 trades in characterization for action set pieces while Volume 2 trades set pieces for characterization. Yet, I’ve begun to find Tarantino’s motivation for this break, specifically the use of two films, suspect.

Re-watching KB, I couldn’t help but ask myself why the story needed to be told in two films, over the course of over four hours. I like the film’s epic quality, I even like the tonal shift from the first film to the second, but couldn’t these qualities have been achieved in roughly three hours, maybe three and half, consolidating two films into one? Personally, I find the split seemed much more like a technique on behalf of the film’s producers and distributors, Bob and Harvey Weinstein, to maximize profit. In this move towards commercial success, Tarantino sacrificed artistic potency. For instance, why have the Bride fight the Crazy 88s at the House of Blue Leaves? The sequence isn’t nearly as surprising or engaging as her battle with Vernita Green and its excessive length not only diminishes the affective power of the violence but also undermines the anti-climactic duel between the Bride and O-Ren. Do we need to see Budd’s interactions with his boss? Couldn’t the background of O-Ren in the animated sequence have been shortened? Why do we really need the scene with Esteban Vihaio (Michael Parks)? Given all these shaggy ends, I have no reason to believe that KB needed to both to be four plus hours and separated into two films. Tarantino could have condensed and the result would have been more powerful and effective in nearly every respect. He could have even kept the severe shift in tone, executing it in a more economical way as Stanley Kubrick (Full Metal Jacket) often did.

I also take issue with some of the moments of characterization in the film. While I find the relationship between Bill and the Bride, particularly as portrayed by Carradine and Thurman, quite emotional, perhaps even standing in second-place to the relationship between Max and Jackie in Jackie Brown, the one character who always confused me was Elle Driver. In particular, her betrayal of Budd always strikes me as a misstep; completely out of line with her other actions throughout the film. As you might remember, Elle betrays Budd after learning that he has buried the Bride alive. Her reasoning? “The biggest “R” I feel is Regret. Regret that maybe the greatest warrior I have ever known, met her end at the hands of a bushwhackin’, scrub, alky piece of shit like you. That woman deserved better.” Yet, if you recall, this is coming from the same woman who was furious when Bill told her not to euthanize the comatose Bride with a Kevorkian cocktail in the first film because, as Bill says, “We owe her better than that.” Did Tarantino get confused somewhere in the creation of his gargantuan (I always liked that word too) epic, jumbling the motivations for one character with another?

Criticisms aside, as I stated at the beginning of this endeavor, I do enjoy watching KB. It’s a mess, one of Tarantino’s weakest, but still has some intoxicating moments such as the suburban fight with Vernita Green, the trailer duel, and the touching final moments between Bill and the Bride. Yet, Tarantino’s ability to supply us with strong characterization, as seen in Jackie Brown, is lost in the excessive spectacle and running length of KB. KB marks the beginning of a Tarantino who has become lost in the vortex of his own obsessions, providing surface with few moments of depth, films stripped of any politics, metaphysics, or moral interest. While Andrew Sarris’ auteur theory posited that a director’s preoccupations mark the presence of a unique voice, Kill Bill only aids Pauline Kael’s rebuttal that sometimes these preoccupations can become the mark not of a unique voice, but of a director’s limitations.

Drew Morton is a Ph.D. student in Cinema and Media Studies at the University of California-Los Angeles. He has previously written for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and UWM Post and is the 2008 recipient of the Otis Ferguson Award for Critical Writing in Film Studies.


Bowfinger Review | Brewster's Millions Being Remade



Comments

i was just scrolling down to see how length-y this was gonna be.
i'm sure to enjoy it, so an early Thank You to drew.
now to scroll back to the top.
(deep cleansing breath)

Posted by: gp at August 17, 2009 5:05 PM

Eh, so it takes inspiration from a lot of different things. You only need to watch 30 minutes to get that. So what?

I still say it's an incredibly enjoyable ride. It's one of the few films (or sets of films?) that the mister and I both totally enjoy and can watch over and over again.

That and The Fifth Element.

Anyway, sometimes I'm glad I can just watch a flick (or set of flicks) and enjoy it for what it is--a good time.


Posted by: Snuggiepants the Deathbringer at August 17, 2009 5:10 PM

Tell you what, if you REALLY want to make these look bloated and self-important, watch them back to back with Kung Fu Hustle. I haven't tried it, but I bet Kill Bills look embarrassing next to it.

I liked the second one a lot better than the first, but I couldn't really tell you exactly why, other than that the first one was so goddamn slow.

Posted by: Eep at August 17, 2009 5:11 PM

"Elle betrays Budd after learning that he has buried the Bride alive. Her reasoning? “The biggest “R” I feel is Regret. Regret that maybe the greatest warrior I have ever known, met her end at the hands of a bushwhackin’, scrub, alky piece of shit like you. That woman deserved better.” Yet, if you recall, this is coming from the same woman who was furious when Bill told her not to euthanize the comatose Bride with a Kevorkian cocktail in the first film because, as Bill says, “We owe her better than that.” Did Tarantino get confused somewhere in the creation of his gargantuan (I always liked that word too) epic, jumbling the motivations for one character with another."

The non-killing in the hospital meant she should be able to die defending herself. What Elle meant with Bud, was to prove her worthiness to Bill by killing his favorite, Kiddo, and that someone gone to seed (Bud) was a waste of her chance.

This is not rocket science PHD boy, it is just a movie that was fun and still is.

Posted by: richmac at August 17, 2009 5:38 PM

I always thought Ellie's character was just a selfish person. She wanted to be the one to kill the Bride. She was also impetuous and not very smart. She'd gotten away with a huge betrayal early in her career during her training as an assassin, so it makes sense that she would be cocky enough to think she could do it again.

Posted by: ecp at August 17, 2009 5:45 PM

I kinda feel like there's taking inspiration from your favorite films and creating a movie that is both a wonderful standalone ride AND a great homage to the films the scenes come from, and then there's just kind of scene-for-scene splicing scenes from far better films together and calling it an homage.

KB, for me, turned into the latter pretty quickly. Volume 1 was enjoyable enough in the theatre, but then I kinda came out of it going "Eh, it was cool, but I liked it better when it was in Lady Snowblood/Lone Wolf and Cub/Zatoichi/[insert movie here]." I didn't bother going to see Vol. 2 in theatres, and to this day I barely remember anything about either movie, except all the movies it took its scenes from.

On the other hand, I got equally frustrated with people who got off on sounding intellectual and indie by playing the "Oh yeah, Tarantino ripped off all these movies you COMMONERS have never heard of, and that's why you're enjoying Kill Bill, because you're UNCULTURED." What the fuck ever, guys. Take the movie for what it is and enjoy it or don't. I just happened not to - to me, it was more like Tarantino's YouTube fan video montage spliced together from his favorite movies than any kind of artistic homage, but that sure as hell doesn't make me intellectually superior to someone who never saw the movies KB borrowed from.

Posted by: Nat at August 17, 2009 5:45 PM

I've always thought that putting the Crazy 88 battle & the showdown with O-Ren so close to one another was a bad idea. (Not that I know anything about filmmaking, but bear with me.) "Anti-climatic" barely begins to cover how much of a letdown the showdown between O-Ren and Bebe is.

If nothing else, the first movie does contain one of my favorite speeches ever. It's delivered by O-Ren after she chops off a gang lord's head. You know, the one that culminates in "... if any of you sons of bitches got anything else to say, NOW'S the FUCKING TIME!." It's on my iPod... I find it comforting after a tough day at work.

Posted by: MelBivDevoe at August 17, 2009 5:46 PM

Eh, screw you. I enjoyed the split. The all those items you talked about shortening I felt were what gave the film and the characters some depth.

Also, the lengthening to 2 films (I do agree profit played a motive. No argument there) I feel was a good move. Three hours or more for one film is just (as a general rule) is too long (Anyone else remember trying to make it to the end of Gods and Generals?). If KB had been compressed to one film, it would feel way, way too long.The break is nice.

Also, it allows me to pick whichever part I am feeling that particular day. If I want a rough tough shoot'em up, I'll go with Volume 1. If I want a more reflective feeling film, I'll choose Volume 2.

Posted by: alphawhiskey at August 17, 2009 5:52 PM

That's a fair point about Elle and her feelings about the potential end of Beatrix. I'd theorize a few possible ways that it makes sense.

1) Elle herself is a villain among villains with shifting loyalties and thought processes as meet convenience. Regretting the nature of Beatrix's end at Budd's hands could very well just be a case of her having reevaluated her own motives based on what Bill told her at the hospital, or she could be spitefully parroting Bill's philosophy that his own brother should have respected. Given that she was framing Beatrix for Budd's death, her loyalty to Bill is not absolute.

2) At the hospital, Beatrix was in a coma. She already had her chance at a fight at the church, even if the odds were unfairly in her favor. Elle and Bill at that point could have had different views of whether a coma-induced death "counts" as a sufficiently noble end. The fact that he convinces her that it's not the correct course of action and she acknowledges that he's right could be sufficient to support her change of heart in Part Two.

3) Once Beatrix was back on her feet, Elle's warrior spirit in opposition to her rival was reinvigorated. She wanted that fight to prove once and for all her superiority, and she was bitter that she was robbed of it.


Anyway, I love both parts, and I don't see these films as a sign of Quentin's having devolved. He probably could have trimmed them a little, but very little of what Kill Bill has seems extraneous or belabored to me. As I mentioned on the Reservoir Dogs thread, I think Quentin is very conscious of the differing referential degrees between Dogs, Pulp, and Jackie, as opposed to Bill and Deathproof. They are different animals.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at August 17, 2009 5:55 PM

I always felt Elle had kind of co opted what Bill said because he seems to be the only person she actually respects, and that she also wanted to kill Beatrix herself since she knew how much Bill cared for Beatrix--as Elle, being Bill's second choice and his second best assassin, would always be in Beatrix's shadow.

Volume 2 is also my favorite of the two, though I couldn't tell you why, either. Maybe it's that we both learn the back story of her training and see the conclusion in the second part. The cramped trailer fight and plucking of Elle's remaining eye are particularly satisfying to me, and Beatrix fighting her way out of the coffin provides the most personally horrifying image. Actually, now that I've written out these thoughts, I realize the the second volume ultimately feels more personal and provides all the payoff.

I do love the Vernita Green fight and everything with O-ren Ishii, but do think the fight with the 88s is overly long. And while I agree the whole Esteban Vihaio plot line could be excised, Bud's story is relevant. He's left his entire life behind now, instead of living in luxury and being a renown assassin, he's working the door of a shitty, depressing as fuck strip club out in the middle of nowhere, where's resigned mostly to cleaning up backed up toilets while being a virtual hermit. He realizes he's done wrong, not just in the big sense, but specifically to Beatrix, and it seems like he's made a personal purgatory for himself. He's also willing to face the judgment/showdown he knows he deserves, but he's not going to lay down and just take it.

Thanks for all of your retrospectives, Drew, I've really enjoyed them. This is the only one (of the movies I've seen) where my opinion has greatly differed from yours.

Posted by: Christina at August 17, 2009 5:57 PM

i'm biased because i love tarantino movies. i like the first kill bill better than the second; i've watched it a dozen times. but something has always bothered me about it, and i know i'm just obsessing about a minor detail seeing as she punches and claws her way out of a buried coffin, but when you're in a coma, don't you have a catheter? and why could she move her arms and not her legs? am i just over-thinking this? yes. i probably am.

Posted by: kelley at August 17, 2009 6:00 PM

I enjoy KB, but I think Vol 2 is much "talkier" and is a slight letdown from the first. There are some things that seem implausible but I go along with (the Bride coming out of a severe coma after wiggling her toes for several hours, BB just casually leaving with her mother, not asking at all if Daddy was coming with them) but something that bothered me was the exploding heart technique thing.

***SPOILERS***The moment it was mentioned, I knew it would be Bill's downfall, especially with the "Pai Mei teaches it to no one" bullshit. All that foreshadowing and it just clicked. It was too easy, and I expected more from Tarantino.

The fight between Kiddo & Bill was by far the weakest moment in the whole saga, and while I wasn't expecting a serious beatdown, a 30 second fight and some hand motions was disappointing.

As for Elle, I thought her betrayal of Budd made sense. From the beginning, she had an air of disloyalty about her, and she answered to no one but Bill. I could easily see her screwing over Budd to get her own way.

Posted by: Brie at August 17, 2009 6:02 PM

I'm sorry, I have to do this. It's:

"Revenge is a dish BEST served cold"

Leaving out the "best" really changes the meaning. Not to mention the fact that the Klingons will kick your ass for mis-quoting their proverb.

Posted by: PaddyDog at August 17, 2009 6:04 PM

Well, I do agree that the movie's length is it's biggest problem. A lot could have been saved for the DVD (like Bill's marketplace fight was removed), and the movie could have easily been combined into one cohesive whole. One scene that could have been cut was the pregnancy test scene. It was overly long and really didn't add much to the movie, since we are already aware that the kid changed everything.

And while I loved it, I thought it was weird that O-Ren's backstory was given so much attention. Even after seeing Vol. 2, the Bride still didn't have as much revealed as O-Ren did.

But I disagree with some parts. I think the Vihaio scene was to highlight Bill's issues with women, especially his violently possessive nature, which coincided with the subsequent Superman monologue that revealed his view of humanity compared to himself.

As far as Elle's sudden motivation shift, st first I thought it was simply a change in demeanor. It was some years between the hospital and the trailer, and she may have honestly believed that Kiddo deserved better (especially if Bill said it).

But rethinking it, it could be that she was just extremely narcissistic and self-serving. She knew Bill was, in his twisted way, still in love with her, and she felt that she had to be the one to take her life in order to replace her in his heart. And like someone said, she already got away with a reckless murder before, so why would she think she couldn't do it again?

Another theory is that she hates those who disrespect her or Bill; Pai Mei, Budd (by squandering his talents as a drunkard bouncer), and Kiddo (by walking away). She felt like they were spitting in her face, especially since it is obvious that she felt nothing she did would be good enough for Bill. When Kiddo was laid up, she was ready to kill her then, but Bill stopped her. After hearing about her return to murderous form, she may have thought that Kiddo was again respecting her gifts, until Budd outright cheated.

God I hope that makes as much sense as it did in my head.

Posted by: Vermillion at August 17, 2009 6:13 PM

Richmac,
Your retort would make sense had Elle not been upset about being told NOT to kill her.

Alpha,

I like the tonal shift, I don't like the "need" for two movies. "The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly" is a long film, which Tarantino is aspiring to, why not mimic it more fully by turning out one long epic?

Posted by: Drew Morton at August 17, 2009 6:13 PM

This is not rocket science PHD boy, it is just a movie that was fun and still is.

Posted by: richmac at August 17, 2009 5:38 PM

Richmac, my thoughts exactly.

Posted by: alphawhiskey at August 17, 2009 6:14 PM

I like it too, but I think the split works because it's not just a tonal shift. I enjoy the abrupt shifts in FMJ and I agree that TGTB&TU is a perfectly timed epic. My particular feeling is that since it changes pacing so dramatically between parts one and two, they work better as two separate films.

Posted by: alphawhiskey at August 17, 2009 6:19 PM

i've only ever seen pulp fiction, not because of any bias against tarantino, but just because i'd never gotten around to seeing the others. but after your series of reviews i think i may have to go find and watch all of them, they all sound pretty good. thanks for the heads up.

Posted by: memily at August 17, 2009 6:23 PM

"He could have even kept the severe shift in tone, executing it in a more economical way as Stanley Kubrick (Full Metal Jacket) often did ..."


This, right here, would have been a problem for me. FMJ's shift in tone is not only jarring, it slaps you in the face with the realization that you are watching two different films.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 17, 2009 6:28 PM

1. The Crazy 88s fight is awesome, hardly a "shaggy end."
2. Several years passed and Elle Driver, Bill's sycophant, might have come to hold his same belief, re: "that woman deserved better."

Posted by: Max at August 17, 2009 6:28 PM

KB (vol II) could have been trimmed; but overall, I had fun watching both vols I and II. But they are not in the same league with Tarantino's earlier works.

Speaking of samurai movies, has anybody here seen "Harakiri" by Masaki Kobayashi? It's one of the best samurai movies, with great story and character development, but little action. The last time I checked, it's actually free to watch on theautuers.com. I strongly recommend it.

Posted by: Emran at August 17, 2009 6:30 PM

I'm with Brie - my biggest problem is the final fight between Bill and Kiddo. However anti-climactic the O-Ren fight is (and while I agree that it suffers from following the Crazy 88 fight so closely, I wouldn't cut the Crazy 88 fight for anything and I reckon seperating them any more would make the interim period drag and make it even less satisfying when it finally happened) I think the final showdown with Bill leaves it in the dust. A 4 hour epic journey for revenge ends in...some talking, and a two-move fight. I mean, I don't know what I was expecting; I can see how a huge, drawn-out fight sequence there could never be *quite* satisfying enough, but at least it wouldn't feel quite so useless as an ending.

Posted by: Shay at August 17, 2009 6:39 PM

Some other musings:

1. I know Uma is supposed to be Tarantino's muse and all but I feel it was quite a stretch for me to *buy* Thurman as some sort of elite assassin. It has a lot to do with Thurman's lack of physicality for the role as well as her portrayal.

2. O-Ren Ishii's story doesn't make sense to me AT ALL. Let's see: she went through childhood trauma, then she (somehow) hooks up with an American's assassinatin' squad while ...simultaneously?...climbing to the top of the Yakuza? ah, okay.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 17, 2009 6:41 PM

Are you misspelling fourth just to get me to comment?

Mission accomplished.

Posted by: Recondite at August 17, 2009 7:56 PM

Slim >> I think the point is that - as implausible as it is (and this is supposed to be hyper-realistic movie in which people are allowed to freely carry swords on planes) - that O-Ren is simply so badass that she could do both. Structurally, it makes sense to me to have her be the hardest climb for Beatrix in terms of the effort required to prevail. And as Quentin's usual time-shifts go, it thus makes sense to make that battle the climax of Part 1.

As for those complaining that the battle with Bill is anticlimactic, I disagree. I can see your point; I simply feel that the defeat - predetermined by the title - was much more of an emotional payoff than a logistical one. It truly would have seemed redundant and watered down next to the other outstanding fight scenes up to that point. It's distinguished and elevated by its simplicity, as it is much more about the relationship between Beatrix and Bill.

Maybe making the focus emotional did not work for some, since the movie itself is so much of a genre homage as opposed to a serious drama, but I found myself surprised and satisfied that at the end of the journey I truly did give a damn about Beatrix and B.B. That last scene of her crying/laughing in the bathroom - caught between distress over killing her former lover and happiness over having her daughter and the sheer unbelievable scope of what she has accomplished to get her back - floored me.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at August 17, 2009 7:58 PM

Recondite,

Congrats! You've won the scavenger hunt. Unfortunately, first prize was a set of steak knives but Ricky Roma already walked away with them.

Posted by: Drew Morton at August 17, 2009 8:04 PM

I absolutely love Kill Bill 1 & 2. While I might like 1 more than 2, I think both are excellent. The use of color, the sparse but effective dialogue, the cartoonish violence (which is a good effect/style in my opinion), and the music (particularly that siren that plays when the Bride sees a target).... just great. I could watch it over and over and over...

Posted by: tracey at August 17, 2009 8:05 PM

One more for the scavenger hunt, “gouge”, not “gauge”? I don't care much, just playing along :-)

Elle:
Whether it happened in battle or via a poison injection while comatose, in Elle’s mind Bea should die at the hands of someone worthy of the task, not an “alky piece of shit”. Elle’s statement is one of both respect and grand ego.

Cheers Drew, I'm enjoying the retrospective and mostly agree on this one. While I loved the Kill Bill’s at first and to a degree still do, it has waned. Both films are loaded with moments that win marks for style but lack satisfactory weight. The energy that propels the story from one plot development to the next seems barely enough to cover the distance between points.

For example: the long tracking shot of Butch walking to his apartment in Pulp Fiction suited the tension of the situation. By comparison, what was the point of following Budd from the parking lot into the strip club? It works first time when you don’t know where he is going, but when you know it leads to a blocked toilet and an argument with the boss, it feels more like wasted screen time for the sake of affectation. I understand the notion of presenting the shell of a bum to conceal the shocking violence of which he is still capable, but surely there was a more economical way to establish it?

As for Esteban, it seems more of an excuse to shoehorn Michael Parks into another QT film. Bill’s relationship with women was pretty well established by that point so it was a minor point to linger on. I liked the pregnancy scene. Even though it felt tacked on, it was a welcome moment of absurd humour to leaven the ponderousness around it.

This was also the movie that nudged Tarantino towards needlessly excessive violence, (his subsequent pseudo-apprenticeship of Eli Roth came as no surprise). I get the cartoonish, kung fu aspect of volume 1- much of which was fun- but even that violence had a callous, sadistic edge that came through more strongly in volume 2. The lingering on Bea being choked, the nailboard to the head, the plucking of the eyeball etc etc etc. All striking images, but for what? Looking back of the previous QT films, short, sharp acts of memorable violence punctuated the story and created an unnerving sense of threat, but in KB it just felt like doing it because he could. Even if it was a depiction inherent in the genres he cribbed from, the overall effect had a torture porn-esque tinge. It didn’t overwhelm the film, nor was it anywhere near his protégé’s level of depravity, but the aftertaste was a little sour.

Posted by: RandyPanTheGoatboy at August 17, 2009 10:20 PM

Just want to say a big thank-you to Drew for writing these great reviews. They're always a pleasure to read and I can't wait to read you tearing Death Proof a new one.

Posted by: Peyton Caldrich at August 17, 2009 10:22 PM

I love both volumes. I would have loved them as a single film as well. There are a few things that could have been cut, but overall they didn't take away from my enjoyment of the movies as a whole.

Since my film experience does not include much foreign material, QT can steal from all kinds of Eastern films and it's still fresh for me.

Finally, I think the climax of KB occurs before the final fight with Bill, so the fact that it isn't mind-blowing didn't bother me at all.

Posted by: ed newman at August 17, 2009 10:47 PM

Always should have been one movie. One day I hope to watch it as QT intended. I recall reading around the time of the release(s) that Miramax made him turn it into two.

Or maybe that was my own wishful thinking.

Posted by: icecreammang at August 17, 2009 11:38 PM

I feel like KB 1&2 were very much a Tarantino ass-kissing festival. And that's just fine, he did a great, visceral, visually engaging job of it. All homage was paid, dutifully and in detail.

A lot of the above mentioned plot issues (O-Ren, Budd, Elle, etc) I think can be explained if you look at it through the viewpoint of the director's affection for the actors - creating characterizations for them that made the most of them and lovingly transcribing them onto screen. Even if it added an extra four minutes - he worked them and granted them fun work. Who wouldn't want to repay Mr. Blonde in kind?

Sometimes Tarantino reminds me of a fevered fourteen year old boy sweating his fantasies down in his journal, his bed next to his VCR, bottle of Vick's and his box of tissues. Then - the genie arrives and lets him do whatever the hell he pleases. In fact, after his initial work, he can't be blamed for indulging himself a bit. We all seem to like that aspect of him too. All good.

Posted by: replica at August 18, 2009 2:08 AM

How many reviews has this been so far that Drew's mentioned he's a ph.D? ffs, get a new schtick.

Posted by: duckandcover at August 18, 2009 5:17 AM

Dr. Drew Morton, you posed the question about the fight with the Crazy 88's in the House of Blue Leaves and why that had to happen. Might I suggest that you take a look at two films from China: The One-Armed Swordsman and the One-Armed Swordsman Returns.

Both of these films are prime examples of the "Unstoppable Hero" trope in martial arts films, which Quentin was paying homage to with KB Vol. 1. In those films I mentioned, as well as many others, there is simply put: A seemingly insurmountable number of minions between the Hero (or Heroine) and their intended target. An excellent example would be from One-Armed Swordsman Returns, when the titular character must cross a bridge literally swarming with foes.

As for Elle Driver's actions from Vol. 1 to Vol. 2, in the film there is a four year gap between those two events. We know why Bill ordered her to stop from committing euthanasia, because he recalled The Bride's last words about his child. Kiddo may have earned the fate she received, but his child had not. It's possible that Elle may have put two and two together and realized who B.B. is. This, along with the fact the Bill still keeps a very special place in his heart for Kiddo, could have driven Elle to want to kill Kiddo.

Again, the trope in use here by Quentin is the "Mirror Opposite", which can be found in any number of movie genres and films. Beatrix and Elle are both deadly fighters, perhaps not on the same level but close enough for their to be a sense of embitterment from the lesser of the two, in this case Elle Driver. Couple this fact with the one I mentioned above: no matter what Elle does to satisfy Bill, Bill will always care more for the memory of what he had with Beatrix that what he has with Elle.

Posted by: bignick at August 18, 2009 5:44 AM

Speaking of samurai movies, has anybody here seen "Harakiri" by Masaki Kobayashi?

One of my top-five movies of all time, and I have it on DVD. A masterpiece.

Personally, I find the split seemed much more like a technique on behalf of the film’s producers and distributors, Bob and Harvey Weinstein, to maximize profit.

I always thought that was pretty much established fact. It's not like they gave away a coupon for Vol. 2 to everyone who saw Vol. 1.

Posted by: Todd at August 18, 2009 9:27 AM

I really don't mind the excessive length of "Kill Bill". I like movies that tend to wander around as this one does. As long as I am interested in the universe of the movie, I will go along with it. Probably why I'm an apologist for the "Pirates of the Carribean" movies. Long, winding, contradictory, partially incomprehensible, but also full of life and energy with a bizarre mythology all their own. "Kill Bill" is kind of the same thing.

I doubt Tarantino ever meant for everything to be spelled out, he seems to like leaving some questions in his movies. As for Elle's "reversal" I took it to be in line with her character as a sycophant to Bill, especially repeating his own line to her "She deserves better.", to Budd.

Interesting review on this one, but I think you are looking at it too hard. It just isn't really a movie that needs to stand up to intense scrutiny, it's just a well made revenge epic with lots of flourishes to keep things interesting.

I am surprised there was no mention of the freaking excellent fight between Go-Go and the Bride. Or the introduction of O-Ren's crew to the song "Battle without Honor or Humanity". I would say those were 2 of the most memorable scenes in the whole thing.

Posted by: TylerDFC at August 18, 2009 10:51 AM

Duck,
That's the author bio. All the Pajiba writers get one, mine happens to mention I'm a Ph.D. I said "film scholar" in the piece, which any person who has seen his weight in film and read a lot of books could pass themselves off as. ;)

Regarding Elle,

A lot of readers as positing theories as to why she changed her mind. While some of them may be correct, let me ask a simple question: Wouldn't it have been more productive for Tarantino to spend a line or two on her change rather than have her recite, from a notepad even, the medical entry for a Black Mamba snake?

Posted by: Drew Morton at August 18, 2009 12:12 PM

@Drew

A simpler explanation is that Tarantino didn't feel he needed to explain. Which an be interpreted as: he didn't for there to be any change in her attitude, and that she just felt Budd was not worthy of killing her by ANY means.

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 18, 2009 12:45 PM

*can

*mean for there

Posted by: BarbadoSlim at August 18, 2009 12:46 PM

Drew >> I guess I just don't think it was a big enough reversal to require explanation, particularly given the passage of time and that many of these explanations render not a "reversal." So, no, I wouldn't remove the black mamba dialogue, particularly given the fact that it's driving home the point that Elle is lying to Bill about Budd's end.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at August 18, 2009 1:04 PM

render "it" not a reversal, that is.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at August 18, 2009 1:07 PM

I also think about five minutes could have been shaved off the fight with the 88s, BUT the fight scene with O-Ren Ishii in the courtyard was awesome. The fountain, the snow, her feet moving in the snow, the fights and then resting, fights and then resting, O-Ren insulting Kiddo then apologizing just before she collapses and of course, the scalp.

"That really was a Hattori Hanzo sword."

Posted by: Snuggiepants the Deathbringer at August 18, 2009 7:57 PM

"Personally, I find the split seemed much more like a technique on behalf of the film’s producers and distributors, Bob and Harvey Weinstein, to maximize profit."

Are you joking? You call yourself a film student??

1) In case you haven't noticed, Tarantino has no problems borrowing from "low" genres. And any director can choose whatever subject they wish, as their rendering of it has class.

2) If you wanna complain about the Crazy 88 fight, stop watching Tarantino movies.

3) Lacking patience, you might find kill bill being shot in two volumes as a drag, but dragging is Tarantino's style, and long drags of dialogue add to the beauty: their purpose is precisely to draw the viewer away from climactic moments. Budd's interactions with his boss are not at all pointless. They serve the following purpose: to show that he is beyond a simple hired assassin, and now that he's retired, what sort of humiliations he is being subjected to, and he's gotta learn to digest it quietly and try and fit in with the rest. It's called character building.

4) Before you start complaining about the "cartoonish violence" , you need to familiarize yourself with Japanese anime, and the Japanese way of storytelling in general. The violence is a homage to them, and the animated rendering of O-Ren's background is the most poetic anime ever made.

5) California Moutain Snake's so called contradictions are a perfectly normal part of being human. And in case you forgot, in the hospital scene, before she uses the syringe, she also says to the comatose bride the following :
"I may never have liked you, when in truth I despise you. But that doesn't mean I don't respect you......." And you said you watched the whole thing twice....( And for the record, her reason for betraying Budd has nothing to do with her regret. She's just a bitch who didn't wanna pay for the Hanzo sword. Or didn't you notice that?)

6)"KB marks the beginning of a Tarantino who has become lost in the vortex of his own obsessions, providing surface with few moments of depth, films stripped of any politics, metaphysics, or moral interest." Shut.Your.Trap.

Haven't seen Inglourious Basterds yet, but the Kill Bill saga is Tarantino's best work by far.

Posted by: guybrush threepwood at August 24, 2009 12:55 PM

Guybrush,

You might want to read the whole review before commenting.

1. I noted Tarantino's borrowing in the first paragraph and throughout the retrospective. He simply puts too much in the blender here.

2. Actually, I'd prefer to keep watching them. Just because a director makes a misstep here and there, doesn't mean I don't admire the work.

3. Dragging across 2 1/2 hours, as Basterds does, works. Dragging across 4 hours and two films is overindulgent. Moreover, it is pretty much common knowledge that the films were elongated for marketing and profit reasons (AS IN NOT FOR THE SAKE OF STORYTELLING).

4. See first paragraph again dude.

5. The Elle reversal may have all sorts of implied motivations (as other comments have alluded to) but they simply are not presented in a coherent fashion. In order words, they're not in the friggin' movie, so you can make up what ever you want. It's sloppy storytelling. I'd rather see why she changed her tune than listen to her drone on about the potency of venom.

6. Read.The.Entire.Review.Before.Commenting.

Finally, Basterds is better than KB.

Posted by: Drew Morton at August 24, 2009 1:09 PM

If I had put in the incredible amount of work, time, and money required to achieve a PhD, you better believe I'd bring it up every chance I got. Shit, I'd make my mom call me "Dr." (though, honestly, I wouldn't have to make her. I'm sure she'd call me it every chance *she* got).

I am going to disagree ever so slightly about the O-ren/Beatrix fight being "anti-climactic". I thought it was the perfect climax to the Crazy 88s fight. I liked the juxtaposition of the quiet, more subtle duel to the insanity that had happened immediately before. Not to mention the visual beauty of both scenes. Was the fight with the 88s too long? It's been a while since I watched these movies, so I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think so. I seem to recall on a re-watch thinking that it was shorter than I remembered, so perhaps it's just another of his films that benefits from multiple viewings. I never did pick these up on DVD, because there was a rumor that he was going to issue a re-worked single-volume version, so I was waiting for that. However, it's been... what, 6 years? I guess I can stop waiting.

I like the thoughtfulness of your work, Drew. I'm glad I'm on vacation this week so I can catch up... As with Steven Lloyd Wilson, I like to wait to read your stuff so I can savor it slowly at home.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at August 24, 2009 2:49 PM