Kill Bill Vol. 3, Oh Noes!

SuperH · Post by **SuperH** » Sun Apr 11, 2004 4:42 pm

That there is, but Kill Bill is without a doubt a homage, not a rip off. If it were a rip off, it wouldn't have references to the very movies that it was copying. Like, oh, the yellow outfit for example.

Killzig · Post by **Killzig** » Sun Apr 11, 2004 7:29 pm

SuperH wrote:That there is, but Kill Bill is without a doubt a homage, not a rip off. If it were a rip off, it wouldn't have references to the very movies that it was copying. Like, oh, the yellow outfit for example.

Maybe in your mind. See, to me an homage would be more along the lines of her donning the yellow jump suit for maybe a scene but this is just overkill and that's the point. Isn't that the big fucking joke? he took a huge budget and got a bunch of dumb assholes to pay money to see him jerk off over all his favorite 70s kung fu flicks. OMG GENIUS!

Brother None · Post by **Brother None** » Sun Apr 11, 2004 9:22 pm

atoga wrote:Tarantino is pretty good. He's overrated, yes, but that's just because he has a bunch of imitators who make bad crime movies (Guy Ritchie, for example)

Excuse me? Guy Ritchie is an imitator of the old-style British maffia classics of the late 70's and early 80's, like the Long Good Friday and Get Carter. He does a pretty shitty job mixing elements from these greats, which are the larger part of his inspiration, with elements of Tarantino's hip shit, which is the lesser part of the movie, but stands out more because it is on one hand more on the surface (dialogue vs. camerawork, first is easier to notice) and on the other hand Quentin's movies, while inferior to both Get Carter and the Long Good Friday, are more popular (lewl)

Franz wrote:This is common knowledge. Miramax didn't want to distribute a 3-hour gore fest, so they split it into bite sized segments. It wasn't QT's decision.

Produced by
Lawrence Bender .... producer
Koko Maeda .... associate producer
Kwame Parker .... assistant producer
Quentin Tarantino .... producer

So what you're saying is that Tarantino is both the director and the producer (and hey, "there's only one Tarantino"), and yet has *no* influence on how the film is released?

Tchyeah. I bet it's easy for him to shove the blame with Miramax, and easy for the fanbois to accept, but I don't see him putting up much of a fight against it.

This whole "part 3" thing only proves further that he is part of this money-whoring, not a valiant hero taken advantage of by dirty capitalists.

Franz wrote:HE DIDN'T RIP THEM OFF! IT'S CALLED A "HOMAGE"!!!!

Kill Bill is a, rather bad, homage to the old classics, yes, though why anyone thinks a homage to Hong Kong classics is anything new is beyond me. And jeesh, I'd rather have Walter Hill's version of the Killer seen brough to life than to watch more of this Kill Bill crap. Bad homage, BAD BAD...in fact, so bad that it is no longer a homage but a cheezy rip-fest? One could argue as much. I personally don't care, the movie was pretty terrible either way.

I hate Japophilia anyway.

Jackie Crapfest...uhm...Brown was also a homage, to another type of movie. Tarantino sure seems to have run out of fuel, hasn't he? Can't do anything aside from homages?

But this leaves out Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. "But those were totally original lewl" Sure thing, maybe in a world where the cinematic industry existed solely in the US and there was no cinema before the 80's.

Were they blatant rip-offs? No. Were they unique? No. Asian influences are heavy in both films, and that's not even the limit of the thing. Camera styles and that oh-so-unique OMG he fucked up the timeline thing are old-timer from French and Italian cinema, and much of the character styles can be seen in older American movies.

So we end up with Tarantino's directing skills, which are pretty bad. The guy seriously needs to leave the director's chair. Best film ever written by Tarantino? True Romance, hands down. The directing in the film is so infinitely superior to that of Tarantino's it's not even funny.

Tarantino should have been on a down-slope long ago. It's a terrible thing that a man like Kubrick (no, not the best director ever, yeesh) gets ripped to shred because Full Metal Jacket was slightly less good than people expected, while people fellate Tarantino for making crappy movies like Jackie Brown and Kill Bill because, hey, it's Quentin. Jesus Christ, people, grow some taste. But hey, I guess that's just the child of its time.

So he continues to ride the wave of his own popularity. It is so not going to hold up. People didn't excuse the Wachowski brothers for the Matrix 2 and 3 either (oh wait, those were supposed to be a trilogy too, LEWL) and they shouldn't excuse Tarantino for spewing up this crap.

The fact that he has the audacity to compare himself to Sergio Leone, without a doubt one of the most brilliant directors of all time, certainly in the cinematographical sense, angers me to no end.

In a way, though, Kill Bill is perfect for this time. "Hey, what did you think of Kill Bill?" "Oh, it was fun"

Yes it was, but fun doesn't a good movie make. Anyone could fart out a fun movie. What happened to the time when things had to be challenging, original, thought-out, well-done? No! No longer, now it's okay for movies to be *fun* to be considered classics. Please, at least pick a fun movie with some skills behind it, like Terminator 3. Christ almighty, it's like the Western world's attention span shrunk to a minimum and we need either the shock-factor of the Passion of Piss or the sword-slinging battle action of Kill Bill to keep audiences in the room.

Lost In Translation, probably one of the only good movies of 2003...passed over. Why? "Oh, it isn't fun"

Ugh.

Also, the soundtrack of Kill Bill sucked. Live with it.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Sun Apr 11, 2004 11:03 pm

Killzig wrote:No, I think what SDM is trying to establish is that there's a different between a cheezy rip off and an homage.

Well if thats where he's getting at, I'm more inclined to agree, just when you say "Its not a homage" and leave at that, it makes me think you've been locked in a cave for awhile.

Killzig · Post by **Killzig** » Sun Apr 11, 2004 11:31 pm

So we end up with Tarantino's directing skills, which are pretty bad. The guy seriously needs to leave the director's chair. Best film ever written by Tarantino? True Romance, hands down. The directing in the film is so infinitely superior to that of Tarantino's it's not even funny.

$ Totally agree with that there, and he still managed to work in his Sonny Chiba references and whatnot.

You lost me when you mention Lost in Translation though. I thought The Virgin Suicides was better and the critics were reacting to Lost in Translation in a way that was kind of like "oh we missed the boat on virgin suicides better lavish LiT with lots of praise!" Not that it was a bad movie, I just couldn't care less about the characters and didn't feel impacted in any way. I understood but I just couldn't make the connection. Maybe that's my failing but I found it to be a hollow experience.

bubba hotep and american splendor were good films last year, though all-in-all it was pretty disappointing. Nothing that really interested me.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Sun Apr 11, 2004 11:35 pm

I have yet to see "21 Grams" or "Mystic River" but I heard they were pretty good. I personally thought that "Open Range" was a good movie. Ofcourse, I like westerns, so that could be why.

So far this year I'm really looking forward to "The Twilight Samurai", its won all kinds of interational awards and looks to be alot better then that "Last Samurai" rubbish. Although I think it was a pretty good movie, Tom Cruise saving Asia isn't exactly the best plot I can think of. The movie would have been better if they cut out the Tom Cruise element and just made Ken Watanabe the star.

Killzig · Post by **Killzig** » Sun Apr 11, 2004 11:36 pm

I saw Mystic River, I liked it but I forgot all about it already. Wasn't anything spectacular. Like I said, a subpar year in film.

Megatron · Post by **Megatron** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 12:13 am

2003 was a sucky year all round I reckon. No decent games or movies. I don't follow muzak much but the mainstream seemed to get even more saturated with crap and pull other stuff with it.

2004 will probably seem better because last year was the worst this century lolololol

something something

I don't mind references too shit, so long as the director doesnt just rip off a scene from another movie. Having a poster in the background or something is paying homage, directly taking scenes or characters is teh suck.

It's pretty hard to be original anyway. I reckon it would just be better too not worry about making references or cliches and shit and just make a fucking movie or book or game.

dig

?

jetbaby · Post by **jetbaby** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:59 am

You want to talk about leaving the directors chair? Talk to Lucas first.

atoga · Post by **atoga** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 3:10 am

Kharn wrote: (lewl)

Uh, that was kind of my whole point. Crime movies on the whole are pretty superficial, which makes things like dialogue important. Say hello to my little friend? Tarantino is known for his dialogue, and he's spawned a million imitators. As you said rather angrily, hip shit. I'm not disagreeing with you on the whole. Anyway, curb your hostility, dude. In all fairness, I'm not really a Tarantino fanboy, I just find his movies entertaining and I'm not going to mindlessly dish on him because he's a media whore and people keep referring to him as a genius. And, references and random erudite lore like that turn me on.

If anything, I'm a David Cronenberg fanboy. Your cum sure tastes good, Mr. Cronenberg.

Kharn wrote:ost In Translation, probably one of the only good movies of 2003...passed over. Why? "Oh, it isn't fun"

Yeah, it was. As a little rant about being alienated, it's good, but doesn't stand up that well. Bill Murray made it fun, because his character in that flick was done near perfectly. Scarlett Johannson was pretty decent too. Okay film as underlying meaning goes, but - HA! Good fun? Anyhow, good films last year would be like... Lost in Translation, Master and Commander, Spider, American Splendor...? And some other shit I can't recall.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 4:29 am

Volume 1 ruled, Volume 2 will follow suit. But it says right there in the story that if he ever does do a third film, it'd be a long time from now. Something similar was said in the Vol. 2 issue of Maxim Movies magazine. So basically, it ain't gonna happen. And thank God, because anything more than two movies would be overkill. It's a fun, trashy pair of movies; let's just leave it at that and call it a night.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 4:31 am

Did Maxim say it or did Tarrantino say it in Maxim? Theres abit of a differance as her he says it himself.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 4:34 am

Tarantino, in the Maxim interview. I could get you a quote but I'm very, very lazy.

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 4:50 am

Wait, so are you saying that after 15 or so years you can't do a sequal? Someone should have told Lucas that.

Lunchmeat · Post by **Lunchmeat** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 4:50 am

He said the same thing in Entertainment Weekly. If he does a third Kill Bill it'll be in 10-15 years or so he says.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:19 am

Yeah, but by that point Uma will be in her forties somewhere. No offense to over-the-hill broads, but they don't exactly make the best assassins.

Lunchmeat · Post by **Lunchmeat** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:37 am

It's not going to be about the bride, it'll be about the black chick's daughter. He also mentioned shooting some scenes now because of the whole aging thing.

Isn't Uma already over-the-hill-ish, anyway?

Wolfman Walt · Post by **Wolfman Walt** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:43 am

She's 34 this month (April 29th). Where is the point where you become over the hill?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:44 am

She's 35-ish. So, close.

Ernesto · Post by **Ernesto** » Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:52 am

Kharn wrote:Kill Bill is a, rather bad, homage to the old classics, yes, though why anyone thinks a homage to Hong Kong classics is anything new is beyond me.

Kill Bill's a love/hate movie, not a fucking lifestyle. He made some references, okay a lot of them. Most of them I don't fucking know being born in the late '80s. People either find this movie the biggest act of plagerism and a rip-off or TEH MATRIX KILLA. You, Sir Kharn, are failing to realize that this is just a movie. The pretty images of blood and Onitsuka shoes stimulate our brain.

Regardless of what you think, you gotta admit Kill Bill makes guns look like fucking pussies compared to swords. - In a funny unrealistic way.

So we end up with Tarantino's directing skills, which are pretty bad. The guy seriously needs to leave the director's chair. Best film ever written by Tarantino? True Romance, hands down. The directing in the film is so infinitely superior to that of Tarantino's it's not even funny.

Any movie with Dennis Hopper should be burned, saving Apocalypse Now of course.

Tarantino should have been on a down-slope long ago. It's a terrible thing that a man like Kubrick (no, not the best director ever, yeesh) gets ripped to shred because Full Metal Jacket was slightly less good than people expected, while people fellate Tarantino for making crappy movies like Jackie Brown and Kill Bill because, hey, it's Quentin.

Okay, Full Metal Jacket was a 'Nam film that should have been made at least 5 years earlier. It says nothing new about Vietnam compared to the utter brilliance of Apocalypse Now. There's hardly any characters worth paying attention to after Training. Hartman and Gomer Pyle were so fucking cool in that movie.

And most of the characters in the Vietnam half are introduced into the story so late into the movie, I don't give a fuck. Cowboy's good and all, but he has no depth. Rafterman's a pussy, a 'Nam Wigger if you will. (As since in the interviews with the news after the City Assault.)

It's like I'm supposed to be proud of teh troops when Animal Mother says "LET'S GO KILL THAT SNIPER. FOR COWBOY!" or some other shit. It seems so fake compared to the adventures of Kurtz and Co.

Even better, the Vietnam half almost has no point. They don't complete the mission, they don't get out of 'Nam. They don't finish the story assignment. It's battle to battle to sniper fight to walking in the city to them walking around. It could be symbolic to a never-ending feel of 'Nam, but most people don't want to think that much at movies I guess.

Jackie Brown rocked, it's just that there was too much talking for most people. They want fucking hitmen shooting the breeze about Royale with Cheeses, $5.00 Shakes and Gourmet Coffee.

The reason why Tarantino is so popular with "TEH MAINSTREAM," is because he makes crime seem so fucking cool with all his 70's music, ear-chopping and witty writing. Tarantino's a writer, not a director. David Fincher's much more hardcore when it comes to doing both.

Kubrick = God
Francis Coppola = God's Right Hand

Also, the soundtrack of Kill Bill sucked. Live with it.

Wha? Too much rap, sound effects and techno? Battle Without Honor Or Humanity fucking owns.