OrangeSoul Posted October 6, 2003 Share Posted October 6, 2003 First the Praise: Welcome to Kill Bill, the gore-splattered fourth feature from Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction director Quentin Tarantino that marks his return to the limelight after six years. And what a return it is. Tarantino - the ultimate "movie geek" - has subsumed his love of martial arts flicks, Japanese animation and the TV show Kung Fu into an irreverent, lurid and visceral assault on the senses. All the trademarks of a QT work are here: an erratic, jumbled-up chronology, a superb soundtrack of forgotten retro classics, and an eccentric cast that combines hot stars du jour with familiar old faces. The result will leave even hardened fans agog, though sceptics will no doubt feel that this most referential of filmmakers has now begun parodying himself. In a film where style so shamelessly supersedes substance, it is fitting that the plot is as straightforward as its title. It sounds simple, but the first part of Kill Bill - originally conceived as one film, but cannily split into two "volumes" by producers Miramax - is almost over by the time The Bride confronts O-Ren. The movie climaxes in a staggering set-piece battle - staged in a Japanese restaurant and lasting some 40 minutes - that sees Thurman confront a hundred masked assailants, all of whom spurt geysers of blood as their arms/legs/heads are hacked off. Indeed, Kill Bill could easily be the bloodiest movie ever made - though the violence is so extravagant and stylised it is pointless to take offence. You only have to look at the way Thurman shrugs off her multiple injuries to realise this is, in essence, a live-action comic book. The mayhem is so prevalent that there are few of the throwaway one-liners that made Tarantino's earlier movies so quotable. And though Thurman, Liu and an eyepatch-sporting Daryl Hannah make dynamic and forceful contributions, it is hard to judge their performances before the next instalment. This is probably the biggest problem with Kill Bill: it feels like an extended trailer for a second film in which all the questions left so tantalisingly unresolved will hopefully be answered. It is a daring gambit, but such is our craving for Tarantino's trademark brand of instant cool it is sure to be a hugely lucrative one. Now its Damning Kill Bill is an absolute mess of a film made worse by a lack of plot and any semblance of characterisation. As a work of film student fan-dom it is unparalleled. Tarantino apes more film styles, references more movies and gives more nods and winks to pulp film history than any other film released. But such cleverness, such unquestionable filmic intelligence, does not make Kill Bill a good film. It is a bit like Charlie's Angels, except Farrah Fawcett murders her fellow agents, Bosley and Charlie himself, in an orgy of blood. But for a revenge movie to work the audience has to care about the central character and feel something of his or her pain. Unfortunately Tarantino is too busy winking to the camera and splicing his film up into out-of-synch sections to care about the audience. While we are all used to Tarantino's habit of chopping up his films into different segments, it just feels totally unnecessary in Kill Bill. In places the non-linear narrative undermines the film but most often it feels merely superfluous. One would expect the usual Tarantino trademarks of snappy dialogue and funky unearthed musical gems. But too often the dialogue, what little there is of it, is woefully ham-fisted and even Tarantino's famed ear for a classic tune seems impaired. In place of dialogue the film serves up violence - and lots of it. Severed limbs, heads, torsos accompanied by lurid spurts of blood are spattered throughout the film. The violence is rarely offensive due to the cartoonish nature of the film but this again serves to disconnect the audience from what is happening on screen. As the film has been split into two the film's final showdown arrives quickly after 60 minutes or so of action. But here again Tarantino's own cleverness only undermines any dramatic potential. As Uma Thurman squares up to Lucy Liu's murderous underworld boss in a duel of samurai swords the audience can be forgiven for heading for the exits. We already know who wins the fight because arch-manipulator Tarantino has shown us earlier in the film. Tarantino seems to have forgotten the strengths of his first film Reservoir Dogs - a strong narrative with strong characters in a tight structure produces a great film. A weak narrative, with cartoon characters and a mess of a structure produces a poor film. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/r...ews/3158948.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts