-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is Kill Bill the greatest action movie of all time?
- Thread starter Mrbob
- Start date
- Status
Dagless M.D.
Member
I wouldn't even call Kill Bill an action film to be honest. Terminator 2 is what i'd consider an action film
Die Squirrel Die
Member
karasu said:
Of course it was, it's about the only way to justify Vol. 2 being so stretched out and padded. Vol. 1 just about stood on its own, although they were plenty of places where the supposedly uncutable film could have done with some editing. Kill Bill could have been an absolutely amazing 2 and a half hour film. Instead it was 4 hours that is as likely to have you yawning as being gripped with excitement.
And I appreciate that QT likes to give roles to his favourite actors but he should have had better judgement than to shoehorn in a role for Madsen that he'd have no idea what to do with. I don't think it's a coincidence that Bud is the only character that The Bride doesn't actually kill herself.
And I think revealing the mystery of who the wedding party was took something interesting away from the film. It could have been this fantastic ambiguity of what exactly Bill had taken away from her. Nevermind that the friends of the groom seemed really out of place with the rest of the film.
And I think that he undermines the very opening where The Bride won't spare Venitia Green because of her child by having The Bride be spared because she is pregnant. Add that hypocrsy into the fact that Bill is the only charming and likeable character (apart from Pai Mei, for obvious reasons) and you end up really not routing for The Bride.
And don't get me started on B.B. That sort of cheap cynical attempt at eliciting an emotional response is something I never thought QT would stoop to. And to do it so badly. God, people complaining about Spielberg pulling the same crap but I don't I've seen anything of his that is a clumsy as WT was.
And I think revealing the mystery of who the wedding party was took something interesting away from the film. It could have been this fantastic ambiguity of what exactly Bill had taken away from her. Nevermind that the friends of the groom seemed really out of place with the rest of the film.
And I think that he undermines the very opening where The Bride won't spare Venitia Green because of her child by having The Bride be spared because she is pregnant. Add that hypocrsy into the fact that Bill is the only charming and likeable character (apart from Pai Mei, for obvious reasons) and you end up really not routing for The Bride.
And don't get me started on B.B. That sort of cheap cynical attempt at eliciting an emotional response is something I never thought QT would stoop to. And to do it so badly. God, people complaining about Spielberg pulling the same crap but I don't I've seen anything of his that is a clumsy as WT was.
That's not to say I don't like KB. I really like Vol.1 but Vol.2 is far too few high punctuated by stretched of absolute tedium.
And what really pissed me off about it, is we had to have that whole laborous buried alive bit, and it hinged on a 'stupid idiot' moment. You know, those moments when the character has to act like an absolute idiot in order to progress the plot. The Bride is meant to some super martial arts, crazy avenging, kill hordes of Yakuza, eyeball plucking hardass bitch, but her method of attack is to fling the trailer door right open whilst standing there like a complete muppet, walking into a trap that anyone with the blindest bit of sense could see coming, nevermind superasskicking avengers.
karasu
Member
No , it wasn't. It was originally intended to be two films, but instead it was broken up into two, released at two different dates,finished at two different times. They have completely different tones and play on completely different emotions. Part one is visual masturbation, and it's beautifulfor that reason (I didn't dig any of the action or dialogue), part two is far more soulful.
ManDudeChild
Member
If by "greatest action movie" you mean steaming pile of hackneyed crap then yes, Kill Bill IS the "greatest action movie.
Son of Godzilla
Banned
How is something you laugh at not amusing?
Warm Machine
Member
I think you are thinking of Die Hard or Hard Boiled.
Late Stage Marxist
Member
Kill Bill is top 10 material as far as action flicks go.
I thought both were enjoyable movies, but action-wise they really weren't spectacular to me. I thought The Last Samurai had much more memorable action scenes, but that wasn't really an action movie... or was it?
Anyway, I don't think Kill Bill is top 10 of all time material, but if you asked me to name my picks over it I couldn't really tell you. It just didn't knock me out of my seat, that's all.
Anyway, I don't think Kill Bill is top 10 of all time material, but if you asked me to name my picks over it I couldn't really tell you. It just didn't knock me out of my seat, that's all.
You guys are just like all the geeks in college back when Pulp Fiction came out, froathing at the mouth about how Tarantino the best director of all time, saying that Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs were in the top ten movies of all time, etc.
It's happening again.
Kill Bill's no slouch, but the action is nowhere near the all-time greats. Flicks with either bigger budget special efx setpieces or more intricate and original choreography have it beat by a mile. It's still a great movie, but get real.
It's happening again.
Kill Bill's no slouch, but the action is nowhere near the all-time greats. Flicks with either bigger budget special efx setpieces or more intricate and original choreography have it beat by a mile. It's still a great movie, but get real.
I agree with you. And the best action seen in the movie (the fight between the Bride and the one eyed girl) was great not because of the choreography (almost non-existant) and not because of the camera work but instead because of the intensity of the actors and the sound editing.Teddman said:
karasu
Member
It's actually because of all of it. The camerwork compliments the brutally of the scene. It could have been cut and edited to all hell. As any number of modern day Action movies will show you.
I don't think special effects make a great action movie at all. They tend to get in the way in my opinion.
I don't think special effects make a great action movie at all. They tend to get in the way in my opinion.
CajoleJuice
Member
I pretty much agree with Die Squirrel Die. I thought Vol 1 was pretty awesome with the action. The over-the-top action and blood squirting all over the place just looked cool. Vol 2 was good for the first hour or so, with Pai Mei being hilarious and the one-eyed bitch getting owned. The last hour was boring, pointless and just awkward.
And if you want an action movie, go watch some Die Hard, Matrix or Terminator movies.
And as movies go, Pulp Fiction >>>>>>> Kill Bill.
And if you want an action movie, go watch some Die Hard, Matrix or Terminator movies.
And as movies go, Pulp Fiction >>>>>>> Kill Bill.
I picked up Kill Bill Volume 1 when I was in Japan. All I've watched so far (of the Japanese version) is the fight scene in the House Of Blue Leaves; as many people know, the part of that scene where everything goes black and white in the American version remains colorized in the Japanese release.
However, I was watching it with a friend of mine, whose seen the movie dozens of times, and he kept pointing out extra shots in this scene showing more violence, and even an extra shot of the "kid" that Uma spanks towards the end of the scene showing up to fight her.
So my question is, is the House Of Blue Leaves scene the only scene that got censored like this, or are there more scenes with extra footage?
However, I was watching it with a friend of mine, whose seen the movie dozens of times, and he kept pointing out extra shots in this scene showing more violence, and even an extra shot of the "kid" that Uma spanks towards the end of the scene showing up to fight her.
So my question is, is the House Of Blue Leaves scene the only scene that got censored like this, or are there more scenes with extra footage?
Teddman said:
So more money = better film ???
You can take your overbudgeted CGI crap like the Matrix Revolutions, James Bond, etc. Don't give me the choreography, either. It's brilliant in Kill Bill. Tarantino hired on Wu Ping (however you spell it), the man behind the choreography in the Matrix (Dunno if he was with them for reloaded and crapalutions), as a consultant with his action scenes. There is hardly a repetitive scene in any of the fights. Especially the House of Blue Leaves. And that is amazing considering how long it is. But that's fine, if you want to ignore brilliance in the favor of high budget crap thats your opinion.
Also, maybe the world splooged for Tarrentino after Resevoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. However they had no influence on me as I just saw them for the first time a couple days ago. Pulp Fiction is pretty damn good but Resevoir Dogs, well, it isn't. Not that its horrible, but that damn blonde guy spilling out blood screaming mumbled words out the entire time, yuck. Both disturbing and annoying.
Reservoir Dogs is fuckin' great. Watch your damn mouth!
EDIT: I still don't know what we're arguing about. Kill Bill is not really comparable to Terminator 2 or any other notable action films known for their unmitigated carnage and sweeping shots of destruction. The best action films are the ones that you can watch without pressing fast forward during all the dialogue, and here, Kill Bill certainly qualifies. So does the original Matrix for that matter. Both are just good flicks, though.
But really, who cares? Claiming one flick is the best of any particular genre is entirely subjective and almost always dependent on the viewer or critic's own preferences.
EDIT: I still don't know what we're arguing about. Kill Bill is not really comparable to Terminator 2 or any other notable action films known for their unmitigated carnage and sweeping shots of destruction. The best action films are the ones that you can watch without pressing fast forward during all the dialogue, and here, Kill Bill certainly qualifies. So does the original Matrix for that matter. Both are just good flicks, though.
But really, who cares? Claiming one flick is the best of any particular genre is entirely subjective and almost always dependent on the viewer or critic's own preferences.
Not in general. But does it help for an action film? Yes. Especially you are talking about the GREATEST ACTION MOVIE OF ALL TIME.Mrbob said:
There's no denying that big budget special efx sequences and/or terrific action choreography are components of an ultimate action film. And in 'special efx' I'm not talking about strictly digital fare. Practical effects like munitions, stunts, vehicle destruction, firearms, etc are part of that.
Budget and efx are not superficial entities, they are key to the genre. We're talking action movies here!
Sure, the choreography is great. But let's make this clear: You think Kill Bill has the best choreography of all time?Don't give me the choreography, either. It's brilliant in Kill Bill. Tarantino hired on Wu Ping (however you spell it), the man behind the choreography in the Matrix (Dunno if he was with them for reloaded and crapalutions), as a consultant with his action scenes. There is hardly a repetitive scene in any of the fights. Especially the House of Blue Leaves. And that is amazing considering how long it is. But that's fine, if you want to ignore brilliance in the favor of high budget crap thats your opinion.
There is plenty of "low budget crap" that outdoes Kill Bill's choreography. You need look no further than Iron Monkey or a shelfload of Jackie Chan flicks. Btw, Kill Bill's budget wasn't peanuts, so I don't know why you're going with that "high budget crap" angle.
The problem with the premise of this thread is that Kill Bill is not an out and out action movie. It stops the trains numerous times for drama and extended dialogue scenes. As others have pointed out, there are many lulls in the action along its four hours. It's great, but don't try to cast it as a wall-to-wall thrill ride or the high water mark of action. It's not.
- Status