Kill Bill and other Tarantino films aren't meant to be watched seriously. They're not like Goodfellas or The Godfather, they're action/wacky comedy. I guess he's the best in that genre of film, but personally I can't stand that genre. I like films that are saying something serious, or a serious action film, or a straight comedy like Ben Stiller movies. When you combine those genres and turn the comedy to a more wacky, subconscious version, you get a crappy results, like Kill Bill. That's my take on it.

Before D.W. Griffith and Charlie Chaplin changed this, movies were meant to be means of entertainment. Cinema is definitely an art-form, and movies like Citizen Kane, Nashville, and, of course, The Godfather prove this. But, it is still considered by many to be a means of entertainment. And, for my money, nobody currently working in the movies makes movies more entertaining than Tarantino does. That's my take on it.

Thug

I finally got to watch Kill Bill (vol. 1) yesterday, and I LOVED it! it's even better than I thought it would be. although my favorite Tarantino movie will always be Pulp Fiction (maybe my fave movie at all), I absolutely loved Kill Bill too. just can't wait to watch Vol. 2

I kinda missed the clever dialogues that Tarantino used to make, since Kill Bill is a lot more about action than dialogue, but who cares! and the soundtrack is so amazing that it matches any problem the movie could have.

after the post above I started reading the whole thread and I noticed the discussion about mixing comedy and drama in films, and well, all I can say is that this "mix" is the reason why I love movies.
most of my favorite movies come from this "genre", like The King of Comedy, Forrest Gump, Fargo, and the Tarantino's films.
in my opinion, when you say something serious in a funny way, and it still affects you seriously, it's gotta be great stuff.

I watched Pulp Fiction about 2 weeks ago or so after not having seen it in months and I loved it all over again (especially the dialogue) and I appreciated Vicent's character more (and I've always LOVED Jules), but the only thing about the movie that gets me is Butch's story. I love Bruce Willis, but I always find that when this story takes over the movie, I just become bored. I'm almost tempted to just skip over it completely. That's why it's #3 on my Tarantino list. Other than that, the movie is great!

I cannot fathom how the majority thinks Kill Bill 1 is better then Kill Bill 2. Tarantino's talent in dialogue is the weakest of all his movies in Kill Bill 1, however comes in at V2. Not to mention more of Carradine, who is the best actor in the film.

Kill Bill 1 - 8.5/10
Kill Bill 2 - 9/10

I agree DV. I personally wasnt too blown away by Kill Bill 1. I liked it a lot, but out of all Tarrentino's films, I like it the least. However, Kill Bill 2 is one of my favorites of all time. I liked the tone of the film which is much more gentle and epic as opposed to Vol 1. Most people only adored Kill Bill 1 for the immense ammounts of gore, and because Vol 2 didnt deliver the same ammount of violence, they dont think it was as good.

I couldn't agree more! I LOVE the development of Bill's & Budd's character's in Vol. 2. Sure it's more slow with a lot more dialogue, but that's what I LOVE. Pai Mei was also a funny character, but just seeing more of Bill was enough for me.

Plus I have great news, Quentin's next movie is gonna be another Kung Fu movie! I can't wait!! Although this one will have subtitles & one version will be dubbed. Oh well, it's Quentin!

"Tarantino's talent in dialogue is the weakest of all his movies in Kill Bill 1, however comes in at V2."

"Most people only adored Kill Bill 1 for the immense ammounts of gore, and because Vol 2 didnt deliver the same ammount of violence, they dont think it was as good."

"Sure it's more slow with a lot more dialogue, but that's what I LOVE."

now you guys let me crazy to watch Vol. 2.
I loved Vol. 1 but the only thing that I missed was the dialogues, and I do think a little less blood wouldn't be bad, so you just described the movie as I thought it would be perfect! I can't wait to watch

Kill Bill Volume 1 ***
(2003/Tarantino/US)
Four years after being left for dead, an ex-assassin avenges her betrayal.
Over the top entertainment which pays tribute to old martial arts movies. It's an obvious excuse for Tarantino to indulge in some homage-paying style.

Kill Bill Volume 2 ***
(2004/Tarantino/US)
The Bride continues her mission of revenge.
More cinematic tricks ooze out of the director's skillful sleeve; the narrative slows down in action and concentrates more on the characters and their motives.

I much prefer the first part as a means of entertainment. And as neither of the volumes count, for me, as art, I therefore think Volume 1 is the better film.

Mick

In the sound of the usual holy Hallelujah chant.

Kill Bill - "Overrated".

How can you say that Turi? What didn't you like about it?

As enjoyable as I found the film--and indeed it is a great film, in my opinion--it's been largely overrated. If Tarantino (whose justified reputation preceded him) hadn't done this, and it had been some debut feature with lack of funding to advertise, people wouldn't be making such a fuss over a messy bloodbath and a slow, dialogue-filled sequel.

Out of interest, who here has seen Shogun Assassin, the film featured in Kill Bill Volume 2? It's awful.

Mick

I couldn't agree more with what you said in the 1st paragraph. But because it is Quentin, it's great in a lot of people's eyes. Quentin just has that reputation (that he deserves & earns). It's like how people see Hitchcock or Kubrick. They're all "cult directors" as I call them. They have a certain group of people who follow them & think that everything they turn out is gold.

I have not seen Shogun Assassin, but I'd LOVE to. Also, has anyone seen The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly as well as Rio Bravo or Mad Max (these were named off by Clarence in True Romance, but I have yet to see any of them). Are they any good, and if so, which should I watch first??

The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly is the best western ever, and is also Tarantino's favorite movie. Good, Bad, Ugly music was used in KB2 (when the bride walks out the church to Bill). Rio Bravo isn't Wayne's best, but it's among the best westerns.

Don't watch Good, Bad, Ugly until you watch the other two movies in the trilogy.

Sergio Leone's The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is the third installment in an unofficial trilogy of spaghetti westerns (the others being A Fistful of Dollars and For a Few Dollars More). All three star Clint Eastwood as "The man with no name," and are highly recommended.

Rio Bravo I hear good and bad of--it's a Howard Hawks-directed picture with John Wayne, so can't be all that bad. Mad Max sounds and looks horrible, but one of those that gets cult followings.

Mick

I couldn't agree more with what you said in the 1st paragraph. But because it is Quentin, it's great in a lot of people's eyes. Quentin just has that reputation (that he deserves & earns). It's like how people see Hitchcock or Kubrick. They're all "cult directors" as I call them. They have a certain group of people who follow them & think that everything they turn out is gold.

I have not seen Shogun Assassin, but I'd LOVE to. Also, has anyone seen The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly as well as Rio Bravo or Mad Max (these were named off by Clarence in True Romance, but I have yet to see any of them). Are they any good, and if so, which should I watch first?? [/b][/quote]The good the bad and the ugly is one of my absolute favorites. Not only is it the best western ever, but its also probably the most entertaining movie I have ever seen. Like u mentioned, a couple parts in the score were from this movie, and I felt that that its use was very powerful.

What actual does the terms spaghetti western mean? I heard Quentin using it to describe the Kill Bill's, but I'm not sure what it means. Also, what's the order of the "unofficial" trilogy? For a Few Dollars, then For a Fistful of Dollars, and then the Good, The Bad and the Ugly??

Spaghetti western refers to the fact that they were filmed in Italy.

I don't know if they is a particular reccomended order to view. They each stand on there own especially TGTBANU.

I liked the film, I really did. Directionally in can be used as a tutorial to budding directors around the world. But as one peice Tarantino tries too hard. He uses far too many techniques that don't quite gel together. It's as if he's learned these new techniques and put them all together in a collage. Like the animated sequence, then to the black and white sequence (I don't believe the reason that that is too gory for western audiences) and then he had another fight scene using a silhouette technique. It was too much, it didn't blend and I was just waiting for the next cliche to occur - a slow motion sequence.

I think I can understand your point Turi. I LOVED the score & the anime sequence (it was my favorite part of the movie). But I think that's what he was trying to do (use different techniques). I mean, we know that they black & white sequences were flashbacks (except in The House of Blue Leaves), and the anime sequence was just a tribute to anime or something. But I can understand where you are coming from, I think.

The unofficial order of the trilogy is A Fistful of Dollars (1964), For a Few Dollars More (1965) and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966).

I recommend all three of course. Sergio Leone (the director, who also made Once Upon a Time in America also directed what I consider to be the best Western ever made: Once Upon a Time in the West. (Admittedly, I need to see more from the genre, especially those of John Ford.)

Enjoy.

Mick