 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.129.64.11
In Reply to: Kill Bill Vol. 2.... what a waste of time posted by Victor Khomenko on August 25, 2005 at 05:42:17:
Victor,I was suprised how much I enjoyed "Kill Bill Vol.1". The extremity of the action in a kind of surreal pure warrior environment along with the wide-ranging locations became more engaging as it went along. I have to admit, I don't think I really understand- or probably accept the interactions of the assissins' team that caused them to nearly kill Uma on her wedding day***, but once Uma was in the "Pussy Wagon" staring at her big toe and saying "move", I was hooked. The back story was like Hitchcock, nobody really cares about the secrets or the "metal ore" in the wine bottles, it's the interaction of the characters and the journey.
***Homage to Truffaut's "The Bride wore Black"?
It's an aside, but I would've liked an extended portion where Uma goes to Okinawa and Hanzo makes the sword. I think scenes of Hanzo making the sword instersperdsed with Uma practicing would have added depth, because the sword she uses is so central to the story- like "Beowulf", Wagner, and Tolkien the sword is fundamental to the mythology. Notice in the final battle scene with that there are about 80 attackers and no one in that group thought to bring a gun which would have ended things in 5 seconds.- they all stayed "pure" in the combat. ALso, when Uma kills O-Ren Ishii her final words, "Thaty really was a Harrio Hanzo sword."
[Plus, I'd just love to see how they make those sword blades. I don't even know, are those blades like Damascus blades made with alternate steel and iron layers folded over again and again?}
Warning!>> The following paragraph reveals the ending !:
VOL 2: The second installtment didn't have any of the magic of the first- Thurman sems to be wandering around occasionally killing someone, but the mythology and details don't have any of the punch of the first. Even the action is much tamer and feels less precise. The actual killing of Bill- the climax of the whole story seems almost accidental, though of course the "5 finger palm exploding heart technoique" is symbolic of the way Bill had "expoloded" Uma heart emotionally- the manipulation. In the end VOL 2 Thurman is revealed as a drifter without inner life- a kind of machine and the sudden switching on of feeling for her daughter- finally an anchor in her drifting, ammoral life as a paid killer is just satisfying- the tenderness is not believable. Also, I have to say that the long exposition by Bill of why he's tried to have Uma killed throughout is the sorriest I heard in movies a long time. The way I heard it, Bill was jealous of Uma getting out the assasin biz and marrying someone and having a child,- he says simply, "I over-reacted." SO, that's the root of all this action and so many violent deaths! I was 1cm from turning the whole thing off at that point and turn to some intended comedy, but of course, by then I had to see how Uma would kill Bill. That was the missed opportunity of the whole movie- boring contrived, and over in five seconds.
Really too bad, as "Vol 1" had a lot of promise and engaging unconventional movie-making. In volume 1, I was thinking of a movie with a similar quirky mood, "Memento" and how that story revealed itself in such a fresh way. But sorry, "Vol 2" threw away almost all the promise of "Vol 1"- a missed opportunity.
Cheers,
Bam
Follow Ups:
Wandering around killing people? Bill's brother in the trailer... she was wandering around to kill him? Killing her one-eyed colleague in the trailer... wandering around to kill her?
You don't mention her brilliant escape from the grave, either.
Nor do you mention the shocking surprise of her daughter.
Bill's reason is perfect, and it's about the oldest motive in the book: jealousy driven revenge.
Re: the sword. There was plenty of discussion about it and probably a half an hour of the film discussing it, showing her with its creator, etc. Any more would have been the bore of the century (maybe even for Vic).
I can understand not liking it but not for the reasons you mention.
You seem to be exasperated it wasn't must more of KBI: that's the brilliance of Tarantino. He made a very different second piece, though it beautifully ties into the first.
Like I said, a perfect modern Western.
tinear,Well, I can't say that I disliked Vol 2- or was ever bored. I did appreaciate the items you mention, the grave escape and so on. My point- which wasn;t too clear- is that I was so inpressed by thr unconvenionality and surpreise of Vol.1 but Vol.2 did not expand the innovations, but I thought drifted along with the same pattern of scenes used again and again. I like the way Uma's character is revealed only gradually, but in the end I suppose I don't care for empty characters- so much was tried to give her depth, but this always seemed to me too contrived- the tenderness for her daughter in contrast to her vcold-blooded killing for example seemed tacked on to provide contrast.
Because of the long training scenes with the white bearded master, we knew of the "exploding heart" technique. As soon as I heard the long name for the exploding heart, I knew it would be important. Remember the old adage about seeing a gun in a movie- if you show it or mention it, it had better be used at some point! But, I thought a lot of Vol.2 was repetition, yet some things were left out that occurred n Vol.1. When Uma kills Darryl (one-eyed assasin) in the trailer, Uma had not one pinch of the flying and leaping she did in the final battle of Vol 1. Where were those skills? - Darryl was really winning until the last moment with the eye plucking.
Again, it is really by contrast with Vol.1 that I was hoping Vol.2 would have the same striking qualities that sustained Vol.1 so well. One thing that impressed me greatly in Vol.2 was the Carradine character -the Bill of the title. That was a subtle personality and Carradine is pretty amazing- that odd menacing calm. I shouldn't be surprised if "Kill Bill" does for him what "Pulp Fiction" did for Travolta. I still believe many opportunites were missed and the jealous revenge back story- to me- is still ridiculously thin.
This is the problem with this kind of movie. The movie-making is just wonderous, but when the level is so high to begin with, it's easy to heve too high an expectation later. I suppose I have too much of an automatic scrutiny of sequels!
Cheers,
Bambi B
on making the perfect hamburger. Think of it like this.
We disagree, again, on the motivation. Jeesh, the guy killed her husband (I don't remember exactly if the ceremony concluded?), shot her in the head, and (she thought) killed the fetus within her: that's THIN justification for revenge? Wow, what more do you want?
Regarding Uma's trailer technique: You're forgetting what she went through, right? Shot in the chest with a shotgun, beaten and buried, walking God knows how many miles. YOU try jumping around after that. Besides, she DID engage in a bit of the flying kicks.
Anyhow, I actually thought the second was a more powerful film, with more story and less "wow, look at that" stuff.
Still, I'll re-visit KBI just to be thrilled again and re-assess my opinion. These films pass my test of excellence: WITHIN their genre, they're great, and they're complex and interesting enough to stand up to multiple viewings.
tinear,I don't question Uma's derire for revenge due to the events of the wedding, it's the original motivation that Bill uses to kill Mr. Uma and injure Uma- and engaging the others of the assasins' group that I can't accept except in a kind of surreal, heightened way- but it's too cartoonish. Even given the loyalty to Bill, why would this group hunt her so intensively and be prepared to die to satisfy Bill's "over-reaction" ? It does function as a cartoon, but to be succesfful throughout, the emotional unreality need to be consistent, and the scenes at the end with the child and her obviously mixed feelings about Bill- break the suspension of disbelief- at least for me.
The trailer scene. I understand Uma's condition, but the techniques,- 30' vertical leaps, cutting off eight ankles in one sweep of the sword, and the super-human stamina of the final battles in Vol. 1 were on a completely different leval. Remember in Vol.1, an equivalent sequencce that Uma kills about 50 people and then immediately walks out into the snow and does the battle in the snow with O-ren Ishii.
I sense you are very, very positive on Vol. 2 and I think the pair of movies are excellent, only that Vol.2 does not sustain the energy, photographic level, emotional environment, and striking unconventionality of Vol 1.
I'll do likewise and see Vol. 2 again- I usually benefit from a sceond viewing as I don't have to focus on the story.
Cheers,
Bambi B
You are thinking way too much. These films were more about the joy of film making, and Tarantino's paying homage to two film genres he loves, karate and spaghetti western films, than about logic. The scene in KBI in which Thurman fights off what seems like hundreds of men is clearly his wink to the audience that any logic need not apply here. It was clearly his homage to those scenes in traditional karate films in which the hero fights off countless of bad guys, taken to the nth degree. If you did not smile, throw logic to the winds, then you took the film too seriously. Frankly, I would rather smile than think during a film, as I am busy thinking all day at work, and doing so again while watching, what it supposed to be entertainment, is not my first preference.KBII was more the western portion of the epic. These films were really designed as one story. How many theaters would book a five hour film? They make their money on concessions, and getting more butts in the seats makes for more popcorn sales. I suspect he broke one film into two largely for this reason. So I am not sure why Tarantino was supposed to do anything different in KBII than he did in KBI with respect to characters, stunts, etc, other than there were not that many karate chops in spaghetti westerns. Consider it one long film, with two acts. How many films, even great films, have such changes within the same film?
jamesgarvin,I don;t disagree that with this kind of movie, one should really sit back and ,let this kind of movie wash over us. And I suspend this kind of analytical (and you can't spell "analytical" without "anal") for certain movies- especially movies that are affectionate takes on other genres. I think of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" in this way- pure entertainment that anyone can understand, and if you can allow yuorself to just let it roll on by- enjoy.
However, my sense with "Kill Bill" is that it aspires to much more, there is so much attention to scenario, camera placement, dialogue and facial expression, and editing, and the interspered scenes, it calls attantion to the craft and philosophical aspects and -for me- triggers thinking about the structure and so on. The genres he wants to evoke do not have these sophistsicated structures for exposition - or not too often. There is a fine line too in "KB" as his homage reaches the level of satire often and satire has a slight condescending component.
I like yourr characterization of the two volumes and what makes the differences. As I say, I think these two are just amazing achievements- I only wanted a bit more consistency in maintaining the suspension of disbelief.
Yes, I smiled a lot through Kill Bill- the violence is just so extreme and palpably portrayed- like the closeup of Uma stepping on the eyeball she has just plucked out. Homage a la "Un chien andalou"?
Cheers,Bambi B
There are plenty of guys that take violent revenge on women; newspapers every week have stories of guys who shoot their wives, kids, and commit suicide.
Bill is a crime lord, with a violent streak of his own. As for his minions doing his bidding, there seems to have been some bad blood, some competitive thing between them before the wedding attack.
I agree with James G that these movies are fun but I think they DO hold together logically within the world they create.
I'm also going to re-visit Jackie Brown because I really need another "fix" of Sam Jackson and DeNiro's characters--- and Bridget Fonda's.
I hear he's trying to get his WWII epic going now but that SPR intimidated him for awhile.
You are right about Uma wondering aimlessle through the Vol. 2 - so much more ironic that she had that one aim in her. But you feel the director has exhausted himself by that time, just going from chiche to chiche, without creating any sparks or filling the scenes with some striking images, people, movements... whatever... that was present in good amount in the Vol. 1.That final killing of Bill looked like a cop out for everyone. They all got tired and were looking for any way out, however boring... and they made it.
I think the best moment in the film was actually what happened AFTER the credits started to roll, with Uma driving along, to a good tune... what was that tune, anyways?
Ironic...
And yes, the blades are made of folded steel, but not alternating layers of steel and iron - that is a miss-conception.
Memento was hectic and as you may says " just another word for -hot air -".
Why are our view so far away?
Patrick,I thought "Memento" was absolutely brilliant. It was amazing as the movie was constructed to resemble the fragmented chaos of Shelby, the main character's life. Because Shelby can't remember more than a few seconds, his life is a string of seemingly unrelated vignettes. The genius of Nolan- who I think shot this in less than one month- was the way he makes the audience assemble the pieces for Nolan- even though we're not sure at first what he's on about. We're intrigued by the events of a person for whom the World is almost entirely new every moment and want to finish the puzzle. By the time Shelby reveals his method of providing continuity to his life and this quest to find his wife' killer- that of tattoing clues on his body, I couldn't turn away!
I relate "Memento" to "Kill Bill" in the unconventionality of teh exposition, the sequencing of the scenes that alternately explain the history of each person Uma is after and also her own history. "KB" is extremely episodic, like "Mem" and I thought both are using a similar technique of sculpting the history out of the pieces so the "Current" action is clear. In both movies, important details are concealed to heighten the tension and make more dramatic revelations, but the skill of Nolan and Tarantino (and editing in both cases that should have important awards) is such we are completely drawn in and are willing to make the effort to figure it out.
Overall, I thought "Mem" was a bit more cohesive than both parts of "KB" considered together, as "Mem" was in one movie rather than two, did not use Chapter Titles, nor switching to a completely differnt form- Japanese-style animation- for a couple of chapters.
I'm sorry that tinear thinks I don't appreciate "KB" enough, when I do think these two (well, three) movies are really refreshing, bordering on genius and as tinear says, worth seeing again.
So effective, I lie awake at night worrying about evil Japanese schoolgirl killers and what I'd do if I met one and my memory was suddenly 5 seconds!
Cheers,Bambi B
Bam,Brillant, intellectual and....cold. This picture just let me out in the rain. It did do nothing emotionally to me. And never felt the urge to ever take it out of the bin for a second view.
And the next Nolan epic " Insomnia " as far I knows was not very good. I have always doubt when a much acclaimed artist is so unevent in his work, and Batman Return got very bad review too.
As for Kill Bill II I only saw a short preview ( the scene with the mother in her house ) and I found it lacking of everythiing who could possibly attract me, just naive and very well physically made.
And that is not enough...Patrick
PS: So why? It must be the differences of a certain background & experiences. As I would not put your or mine sensibility above the other one.
In the end time will tell.
Memento was a work of genius. It all hinged on the acting of the lead and he established a living-breathing character. His emotional journey anchored a chaotic film, at least until one could make some sense of it. It holds together well for me in many re-visits.
I wish you good luck....It was not. ( a work of a genius ) What was that guy next film?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
