Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

*** Official KILL BILL: VOLUME 2 Discussion Thread


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
381 replies to this topic

#1 of 382 OFFLINE   JonZ

JonZ

    Lead Actor



  • 7,793 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 28 1998

Posted April 13 2004 - 12:15 AM

James Bs review..........

http://movie-reviews....ill_bill2.html

And from DH....

"DavisDVD reports that filmmaker Quentin Tarantino has some major plans for his latest opus, Kill Bill. While promoting the second volume of the series, opening theatrically on April 16th, Tarantino revealed that he plans to recut both films together for a special theatrical release later in the year.

"We did a special version [of Volume 1] for Japan that's only been shown in Japan and Hong Kong, and I kept the rights to that," Tarantino said. "I'll put the Japanese version together [with Volume 2] like I would if it was one complete movie, and then I'll release that throughout America and Europe in arthouse engagements."

Tarantino also promises more extensive DVD plans for the revenge films. "I'm going to do a special collector's edition of both of them once I'm finished with both of them," he said. Also in the talking phase, Tarantino is considering the possibility of releasing stand-alone supplemental discs. "One of the things that I saw that I liked... was what the American Pie guys did with their 'Beneath the Crust' documentaries. I want to do the same thing [for Kill Bill]."

#2 of 382 OFFLINE   Lou Sytsma

Lou Sytsma

    Producer



  • 5,362 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 01 1998

Posted April 14 2004 - 02:54 AM

Poland over at the Hot Button really lays it on KB2 today.
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.

#3 of 382 OFFLINE   Chuck Mayer

Chuck Mayer

    Lead Actor



  • 7,996 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2001
  • Real Name:Chuck Mayer
  • LocationNorthern Virginia

Posted April 14 2004 - 03:05 AM

Lou,
I just read that. To be fair, he didn't like the first one much, but I give him the props for digging in on #2, in light of the overwhelming praise it's getting.

He certainly isn't gentle.

Take care,
Chuck
Hey buddy...did you just see a real bright light?

#4 of 382 OFFLINE   JonBoriss

JonBoriss

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 165 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2002

Posted April 14 2004 - 04:29 AM

Sounds like sour grapes to me. I don't think I have seen any proof of critics giving a good review to a film just so the director does more work. His comments about Carradine may be right but then I have heard countless reviews saying the contrary, that he should get oscar consideration. Is there a mass critic conspiracy of Kung Fu fans to get Carradine more work that he just wasn't apart of? It sounds like he just wants to go against the grain and get noticed. Its easy to critisize a film that everyone loves because you get more attention for it. He didn't like the film, thats fine, opinions, I respect his opinion. What I don't care for is when people write reviews of films and don't even talk about the film for half of the review. Reminds me of a time when I read a Return of the King review and about 80% of it was the reviewer critisizing New Line and Jackson for releasing multiple versions of the film

#5 of 382 OFFLINE   Chuck Mayer

Chuck Mayer

    Lead Actor



  • 7,996 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2001
  • Real Name:Chuck Mayer
  • LocationNorthern Virginia

Posted April 14 2004 - 04:34 AM

Jon,
Dave doesn't seem the kind of critic to be contrary just to be contrary.

That said, I do believe he has a real hard spot with splitting one film into two for profit, and he has that first and foremost on his mind when he watches the film. I feel it might color his opinion. As I stated, he disliked the first movie was well. And I loved the first film, so I'll be seeing the second regardless.

But based on his comments (putting all the action in #1 to establish a fanbase), and James B's review mentioning what should have been culled, I wonder it DP isn't right about Miramax's plan. No matter. I do think this could have been a legendary 3 hour film. Maybe it will be in one of it's DVD iterations.

Take care,
Chuck
Hey buddy...did you just see a real bright light?

#6 of 382 OFFLINE   JonBoriss

JonBoriss

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 165 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2002

Posted April 14 2004 - 04:40 AM

Well when I say contrary I guess I mean that a critic gets excited for a film and doesn't think its that good but then everyone else around him likes it and that makes him hate it even more. Like when I saw Donnie Darko I thought it was a pretty OK movie, nothing great. But all these people around me kept singing its praises like it was the best film of the last decade and that made me dislike the movie a little bit more. All the hype and reviews arond the Kill Bill franchise I'll bet affected his review in some way which turns into him critisizing other critics.

#7 of 382 OFFLINE   Quentin

Quentin

    Screenwriter



  • 2,512 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2002
  • Real Name:Quentin H
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted April 14 2004 - 06:39 AM

I think Poland's vehemence comes from two places - first of all, he is very pissed that QT and Miramax are taking us to the bank with two "volumes". It does smack of greed (or at least trying to best cash in on an overbudget film), and I see his problem. Didn't keep me from enjoying Vol. 1.

But, I think the other problem gnawing at Poland is that this FILM (that is, in one volume) should have been great. Like Chuck said, I think it would have been a LEGENDARY 3 hour vengeance/genre epic if the "volumes" had been combined and about an hour of garbage trimmed. I do believe him when he says he really wanted to like it. He's a big "Pulp Fiction" fan, and this film could have challenged PF as QT's best, if it had been one big badass.

#8 of 382 OFFLINE   Dennis Pagoulatos

Dennis Pagoulatos

    Supporting Actor



  • 867 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 03 1999

Posted April 14 2004 - 07:00 AM

I personally wouldn't have wanted anything in Vol.1 edited out, and I'm sure the same is true for Vol. 2, and it's LONGER than Vol.1 at over 2 hours...so we're actually talking about a 4 hour film when it's all stitched back together. NO WAY you can expect to release that and make any money, not even if it were called "Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship Kills Bill". Posted Image

I think 4 hour films are for hard core fans (very small %) and for DVD (regular fans and everybody else)

-Dennis
He must have died while carving it!...

#9 of 382 OFFLINE   JonBoriss

JonBoriss

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 165 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2002

Posted April 14 2004 - 05:50 PM

If anything I think that Miramax took a risk. There was no guaruntee that people would show up for vol 1, I thought it was gonna flop. He seems mad after the fact that vol 1 made money. Yeah it sucks but I would rather have it this way then 2 hours on the cutting room floor.

#10 of 382 OFFLINE   tyler payne

tyler payne

    Second Unit



  • 342 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 03 2004

Posted April 14 2004 - 10:52 PM

Something kind of interesting, I was going through some of my old Entertainment Weekly mags and... what? No I don't subscribe, really I don't, it got delivered to my house by accident, yeah, yeah that's the ticket. Anywho, they did a story on Kill Bill Vol. 1 on there October 3, 2003 issue. Here is an interesting blurb in the article...


Quote:
If you look at that script, it was massively overwritten, especially for a movie that he (Tarantino) said he wanted to be 90 minutes," says Thurman. "You suspect various things. Quentin had gone mad, or was playing with lives, or playing with money. It made no sense. Whether he had intentions to separate the movies from the begining or it was unconscious, I don't know. But it would have been difficult to include even half that material in one movie.

It's true. As production dragged on, it became clear that there was no way that what Tarantino had shot could be contained in a single film. Soon whispers started to be heard on the set that Kill Bill had actually been planned as a two-movie epic. Weinstein made an appearance in Los Angeles and suggested the idea himself- but really what could he do, having already gone on record saying that Tarantino built Miramax and could have whatever he wanted? And, besides, there was absolutely no way they could release Kill Bill at three-plus hours. It was too violent. To intense. To giddily over-the-top. (Weinstein declined to comment for this story, but it will be interesting to see what he will do if Tarantino returns to The Inglorious Bastards -- which would certainly have to be a two if not three movie venture as planned.)

"I didn't ever bring up splitting it up, because I had to wait for it to be Harvey's idea for it to ever work," remembers Tarantino. "But the minute it happened and Harvey suggested it, all right? It was, like, within an hour I had it all figured out. Literally an hour. It wasn't hard at all."


It doesn't really give any definite clarification as to who had the idea of splitting it up first. Tarantino, or Harvey? I just thought that is was an interesting blurb.

As for Inglorious Bastards ( I know it is off topic). It will be interesting to see if Harvey will greenlight a three picture deal for Tarantino, when they wanted to condense Lord of the Rings to one movie.

#11 of 382 OFFLINE   Lou Sytsma

Lou Sytsma

    Producer



  • 5,362 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 01 1998

Posted April 15 2004 - 12:05 AM

Quote:
I think it would have been a LEGENDARY 3 hour vengeance/genre epic if the "volumes" had been combined

Exactly so, Quentin.
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.

#12 of 382 OFFLINE   JonZ

JonZ

    Lead Actor



  • 7,793 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 28 1998

Posted April 15 2004 - 04:05 AM

Off topic....

"As for Inglorious Bastards....."

Tarantino over writes everything. I think both Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown would be tighter films if they trimmed about 10 minutes of each,especially in the Bruce Willis story in PF.

Anyway, QT has already said he had to throw Bastards in a drawer and forget about it because he couldnt stop writting it.Hes said he wanted to write a War Epic, and ended up writting enough for 3 movies.

If Kill Bill had to be split up for time, I can only imagine what theyll do with his 300+ page Blastards script (that isnt even finished yet)

#13 of 382 OFFLINE   Scott Weinberg

Scott Weinberg

    Lead Actor



  • 7,482 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2000

Posted April 15 2004 - 05:18 PM

To the 2.4 of those who were asking for it Posted Image here's my Kill Bill: Vol. 2 review.

Enjoy the movie, everyone!

#14 of 382 OFFLINE   Xenia Stathakopoulou

Xenia Stathakopoulou

    Screenwriter



  • 2,417 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2003

Posted April 15 2004 - 08:35 PM

Scott, nice review !I have 2 questions for you ,does this film start in the first 5 minutes with as big a bang as volume 1 ?Also my next question you might have to answer in spoiler tags, does the bride die ?
At last my body is reunited with my soul which was always feminine.

#15 of 382 OFFLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Studio Mogul



  • 25,080 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted April 15 2004 - 09:34 PM

This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "Kill Bill: Volume 2" please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.

All HTF member film reviews of "Kill Bill: Volume 2" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.


Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Listing

 


#16 of 382 OFFLINE   paul_v

paul_v

    Second Unit



  • 320 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 18 2000

Posted April 15 2004 - 11:58 PM

Ebert gave it 4 stars and said

"Of the original "Kill Bill," I wrote: "The movie is all storytelling and no story. The motivations have no psychological depth or resonance, but are simply plot markers. The characters consist of their characteristics." True, but one of the achievements of "Vol. 2" is that the story is filled in, the characters are developed, and they do begin to resonate, especially during the extraordinary final meeting between The Bride and Bill -- which consists not of nonstop action but of more hypnotic dialogue and ends in an event that is like a quiet, deadly punch line.

Put the two parts together, and Tarantino has made a masterful saga that celebrates the martial arts genre while kidding it, loving it, and transcending it. I confess I feared that "Vol. 2" would be like those sequels that lack the intensity of the original.

But this is all one film, and now that we see it whole, it's greater than its two parts; Tarantino remains the most brilliantly oddball filmmaker of his generation, and this is one of the best films of the year."


I can't wait to see it. I just watched vol 1 for the first time a couple of days ago and I've watched it two more times since.
Paul V

#17 of 382 OFFLINE   Lou Sytsma

Lou Sytsma

    Producer



  • 5,362 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 01 1998

Posted April 16 2004 - 12:29 AM

Good review Scott. One really good movie packaged into 2 average/good movies depending on your personal preferences.

I'd love to see that dream cut of the 2 volumes into 1 movie.
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.

#18 of 382 OFFLINE   Haggai

Haggai

    Producer



  • 3,883 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 03 2003

Posted April 16 2004 - 06:43 AM

Back from the first showing of the day, my butt was there at 11 AM. I agree with Scott W. that there's some stuff that could have been cut without losing much of anything, but I guess I didn't feel like there was as much of it as Scott did. The stuff with Budd at the bar/strip joint stands out as something that I wouldn't have missed, although it was somewhat entertaining. But there's not much stuff I would have cut, nor did I think there was in Vol. 1 either.

Anyway, on to some of my favorite details. The whole climax with The Bride, Bill, and the kid was really awesome, even better than I could have hoped for. I absolutely identified with a lot of what Bill was saying as he explained his actions to her. And all the re-union moments with Beatrix and B.B. were great, I was completely moved by that.

Several great touches in the final credits, which were very long, but well worth it. Bill's operational nickname (like Cottonmouth for O-Ren, Copperhead for Vernita) is revealed as "Snake Charmer," which certainly makes sense! And I was wondering what happened to Elle Driver--was she dead, just blinded with no eyes, what? When the names of the actors come up in the black-and-white part of the credits, over the image of Uma in the car, the other actors' names (Lucy, Vivica, Madsen) are crossed off as they come up, but Daryl Hannah gets a big question mark! So it really is a mystery. Posted Image And I loved the last little bit with Uma's credit--aka The Bride, aka Beatrix Kiddo, aka Black Mamba, and...aka Mommy. Very nice touch.

#19 of 382 OFFLINE   Haggai

Haggai

    Producer



  • 3,883 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 03 2003

Posted April 16 2004 - 09:00 AM

Another funny bit was Budd saying, "She cut through 88 bodyguards with that sword?" and Bill answering, "there aren't really 88 of them, they just use that name because they think it sounds cool." Posted Image

#20 of 382 OFFLINE   Richard_D_Ramirez

Richard_D_Ramirez

    Second Unit



  • 439 posts
  • Join Date: May 21 2001

Posted April 16 2004 - 09:17 AM

Quote:
Several great touches in the final credits, which were very long, but well worth it.

Yes, worth it. The best bit was David Carradine's credit as Bill. While everyone else's credit showed nice flashback moments, Carradine's credit showed only his corpse! Posted Image

And wow, what a way for Bill to "exit stage left...." Posted Image

8^B
A Casualty of Casual Causality: My casual blog on the 'net.





Forum Nav Content I Follow