11 replies on ““Kill Bill Vol. 2” Discussion”

  1. is says:

    saw it friday
    It was better than the first, probably because the characters had more substance and history behind them.

    The flashback to Beatrix’s training with her master was excellent, very reminiscent of classic kung fu movies.

    I loved final scene between Beatrix and Bill.

    • Timeshredder says:

      Re: saw it friday

      I just assumed it was spoken for. I intend to see it next week. If no one else has watched it by then, I could do a review.

    • y42 says:

      Re: saw it friday

      It was better than the first, probably because the characters had more
      substance and history behind them.

      The flashback to Beatrix’s training with her master was excellent, very
      reminiscent of classic kung fu movies.

      I loved final scene between
      Beatrix and Bill.

      Is it fucking to much to ask for you to warn when you put in SPOILERS, you
      jerk?

      Grrrrr

      • Boglin says:

        Re: saw it friday

        Is it fucking to much to ask for you to warn when you put in SPOILERS, you
        jerk?

        Grrrrr

        Like you, I haven’t seen the movie yet. In fact, I haven’t even seen the first one (I’m too cheap to go to the theater). However, I can’t see how this post has spoiled anything. There’s only three sentences in the entire post.

        The first one is extremely vague and could be said about just about any movie (well, any good one). The second sentence does give information about a scene in the movie, but doesn’t say what happens in that scene. Unless there’s some great mystery about whether or not Beatrix trained with a master, I don’t see what was spoiled. Finally, he said the the final scene had Beatrix and Bill. Considering that the name of the movie is “Kill Bill”, I somewhat took it as a given that there would be a climactic battle with Bill. You might as well have complained that he spoiled that there’s a fight scene between Godzilla and Mothra in Godzilla vs. Mothra.

        Perhaps there’s something I’ve missed here, but I don’t think this post deserved such a vitrolic reply.

        • Insomniac says:

          Re: saw it friday
          The spoiler is the fact that the brides name has been revealed. You don’t learn her name in the first one. In fact QT goes to great length to keep you from learning it, like beeping it out when its spoken.

          It sort of gets you wondering why? Now I know, Beatrix is a crappy name. I’d want it beeped out too.
          (no offence intended to all you Beatrixes out there)

          • mbourgon says:

            Re: saw it friday
            SPOILER

            QT goes to great length to keep you from learning it, like beeping it out when its spoken.

            It sort of gets you wondering why? […]

            Easy. I had an epiphany when I discovered that. Think back to her talking to Bill. Each time, he’s calling her by her last name. He’s not using an epithet, he’s not trying to be more human – he’s simply calling her by her last name. We’ve been assuming, thus far, that him calling her that is a sign of endearment. It’s not.

            So, can anyone lipread and say whether everyone’s saying her first name or last name?

          • GitOffMaJock says:

            Re: saw it friday

            The spoiler is the fact that the brides name has been revealed. You don’t learn her name in the first one. In fact QT goes to great length to keep you from learning it, like beeping it out when its spoken.

            It sort of gets you wondering why? Now I know, Beatrix is a crappy name. I’d want it beeped out too.
            (no offence intended to all you Beatrixes out there)

            Actualy there are a few subtle clues in the first movie that reveale her name. 1. bill calls B. by her last name,leaving the audience to believe it as a term of endearment “Hey kiddo…” but it is just business as usual. 2. O-Ren and B. do a little “silly rabbit TRIX are for KIDs.” I know that one is small but there. 3. finally her full name Beatrix Kiddo is on the plane ticket when she is traveling to Okinawa.

  2. jayhawk88 says:

    Saw it Friday too (spoilers)
    Definitely a way different movie from the first, but still excellent.

    A few gripes though: *Spoilers*

    – Bud getting killed by the snake instead of at The Bride’s hand seemed to ruin a little bit of the “Coming for Vengance” theme, especially after what Bud did to The Bride.

    – The Bride finding her child and living happily ever after also seemed a bit hokey given the rest of the movie. I would have rather seen a “Walk lonely into the sunset” or a good old fashioned sepiku.

    – The final showdown between Bill and the Bride, while great from a dialog standpoint, needed a bit more action I thought. Didn’t have to be O-Ren-Ishi over the top or anything, just a little bit more than a few thrusts at the patio table.

    Minor nits from an ametuer who knows nothing about movie making though. It was worth the price of admission just for Pai Mei.

    • dubbayoo42 says:

      Re: Saw it Friday too (spoilers)

      Definitely a way different movie from the first, but still excellent.

      A few gripes though: *Spoilers*

      – Bud getting killed by the snake instead of at The Bride’s hand seemed to ruin a little bit of the “Coming for Vengance” theme, especially after what Bud did to The Bride.

      – The Bride finding her child and living happily ever after also seemed a bit hokey given the rest of the movie. I would have rather seen a “Walk lonely into the sunset” or a good old fashioned sepiku.

      – The final showdown between Bill and the Bride, while great from a dialog standpoint, needed a bit more action I thought. Didn’t have to be O-Ren-Ishi over the top or anything, just a little bit more than a few thrusts at the patio table.

      Minor nits from an ametuer who knows nothing about movie making though. It was worth the price of admission just for Pai Mei.

      – Bud was killed by the Bride in a metaphorical manner as the snake was a black mamba (the Bride’s code name as you’ll recall). What bothered me was you don’t know if Elle was killed or not… although what happened to her keeps well with the vengeance theme.

      – I didn’t like the idea of the child surviving after seeing the first film, but it was a necessary (and very, very obvious) plot point to help tie things together. Bill needed a wild card and that was the kid.

      – The final battle was adequate. Carradine isn’t a terribly nimble person any more so it’s understandable that the fight was somewhat brief. The ending was again very obvious.

      Overall I didn’t mind the film but it was such a letdown when you look at the big picture. It wasn’t much of a stretch to figure out what would happen to either Bill or Elle, or to realize how the child would be used. The dialogue was fantastic , despite it being typical Tarantino (during a lot of the scenes with Bill you could easily close your eyes and imagine the character’s words coming out of Tarantino’s mouth… Tarantino has a unique style, I’ll grant him that much, but it would be nice to not hear the same tone every single picture he makes). It would have been nice to see some more action in the second film given the pace the first one set, but I did appreciate the character development (namely the Bride’s history with Bill as well as her training). Pai Mei ruled. :)

      This makes three Tarantino films (Kill Bill, Jackie Brown and Pulp Fiction) in a row which I really didn’t enjoy… four if you include Four Rooms; five if you count Kill Bill as two films. His best work was still from a decade or more ago when he was fresh (Natural Born Killers [despite Stone’s changes], True Romance, Reservoir Dogs). The guy’s ego controls him far too much these days, he needs to get back to his roots as a writer.

  3. Daemonik says:

    S’Okay
    *** Spoilers Warning ***

    Vol 2 was good, and as others have noted, Pai Mei rocked and I could have seen more of him. Those scenes were lovingly reminiscent of 70’s kung fu pictures.

    I was surpised to see that Tarantino blew his entire blood budget on the first movie. While the second part displayed more of the characters stories, I don’t really think it was necessary and if he had kept his original intention to release the movie as a single feature it would have been a jarring a departure from the ultra violent first half. As it was, the movie felt like they were stealing from the action rather than enhancing it.

    The musical score was fun but the volume could have been cranked down in places. What would have been pleasant background music quickly became brain piercingly annoying when boosted up to 11.

    I was disappointed as well in the lack of resolution for Elle Driver and Sofie Fatale. This was the most that I’ve enjoyed Darryl Hannah in a movie for quite some time and I would have been very happy if they’d provided her with even more scenes. As for Sofie Fatale, we were tantalized in Vol 1 with her mutilation at the hands of Beatrix yet never got to see just how far B took her interrogation.

    I also feel fairly certain that Tarantino has a major foot fetish. I have never seen so much concentration on women’s feet in a movie in my memory. The scene where Beatrix squishes Elle’s eye between her toes was classic fetishist imagery.

    Overall, Vol 2 by itself was a good movie and worth the time spent with it. However, standing beside Vol 1, it left me with the feeling that two different people had directed the films.

    • mbourgon says:

      Re: S’Okay
      No spoilers from me. At least nothing big.

      Those scenes were lovingly reminiscent of 70’s kung fu pictures.

      And very deliberately – I kept trying to figure out why he’d gone to such a grainy film… then saw them pan up at the top of the stairs. Instantly recognizable from any number of Shaw Bros. movies. Note who they had playing the role – very cool.

      I was surpised to see that Tarantino blew his entire blood budget on the first movie.

      I think it let Tarantino change genres more easily. The first was definitely a chop-socky kung-fu action flick, while the second was a western. If Lee Van Cleef was still alive, Tarantino would’ve cast him in it.

      The musical score was fun but the volume could have been cranked down in places.

      I disliked it as well, but it goes with the style, just like bleeping out the bride’s name.

Comments are closed.