Fuck what Weinstein did, I’m on QT’s side. He is the creator at the end of the day. He knows what it is. I’m looking forward to what you think after the film is released as one film.
And dude, stop embarassing yourself.
I don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about regarding the owl, but whatever.
THEY GET SPLIT INTO TWO SEPERATE PARTS OF ONE MOVIE!! Neither of the volumes are a complete movie.
Kill Bill is one movie that got split into two movies.
how exactly did i embarass myself?
after the film is released as one, Vol.1 and Vol.2 will not suddenly evaporate, they will still exist.
the volumes are not complete, NO. BUT they are two movies. they both have a beginning, an end, and whole lot in the middle. shall i draw you a picture?
The Owl is used when someone is stating the obvious.
Like for example, something obvious as the fact that Kill Bill was released in two Volumes. Instead of saying “Thank you captain obvious!”, you can post this picture:
edit: Stuntman Max is begging for the picture. he is stating the obvious, see?
finally somebody is making some sense around here 
[quote=“Crazy_Hattori”]
how exactly did i embarass myself?
after the film is released as one, Vol.1 and Vol.2 will not suddenly evaporate, they will still exist.
the volumes are not complete, NO. BUT they are two movies. they both have a beginning, an end, and whole lot in the middle. shall i draw you a picture?
The Owl is used when someone is stating the obvious.
Like for example, something obvious as the fact that Kill Bill was released in two Volumes. Instead of saying “Thank you captain obvious!”, you can post this picture:
edit: Stuntman Max is begging for the picture. he is stating the obvious, see?
[/quote]
You embarassed yourself with the:
[quote]YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MAKES…
…
wait for it…
TWO MOVIES!!!1111eleven11one
OMGSPLOSION!![/quote]
Quentin Tarantino’s films:
Reservoir Dogs
Pulp Fiction
Jackie Brown
Kill Bill
Death Proof
(You can post that owl pic, now).
Oh also, it isn’t just me that says so btw, almost all the reviews I have read say so, as well as QT and a lot of people here. It’s one film. End of.
Ok, I’ll leave you two love birds to it. Fucking lame o’s.
No shit, Sherlock.
When I think of Kill Bill I think of it as one film.
[quote=“Jack Rabbit Slim”]
When I think of Kill Bill I think of it as one film.
[/quote]
which is understandable and quite logical, since it is one big story - one that got divided into two films.
Why some people would say JB is not a pure QT movie? Because its a book adaption, unlike QT’s other films where he wrote the entire story from his own head (keep reading please). While its true that QT did borrow heavily from other movies, some would say down right ripped off, to me he took great ideas from other films and made them his own. So what am I saying?
Are any of QTS movies pure QT? No. His best, pulp and dogs (IMO), were rewrites of his then buddy Roger Averys stories sprinkled with QT magic. In summation, all QT movies are 100% QT. He does what he does in all his films. BORROW ideas and make them kick ass.
Hows that for double speak!!!???
BTW, its silly to argue about KB being two movies. While I wish it would have been one long film I somehow remember having to go see two films. Did anyone else do that? As such, it can only be characterized as being two films in its current form. It was cut and edited into two different films was it not? I hope to one day get a chance to see the movie as one film as it was intended to be. When you can see the film in its full edit, which no one has yet, then you can say its one film.
BTW2, Starwars was one long 12 hour movie. FACT!
[quote=“Crazy_Hattori”]
which is understandable and quite logical, since it is one big story - one that got divided into two films.
[/quote]
I don’t think you quite get it. Yes they were split into two films, but these films were incomplete. They DO NOT stand on their own. They are NOT two films, but TWO VOLUMES of ONE film.
[quote=“Knoxville Kingpin”]
BTW, its silly to argue about KB being two movies. While I wish it would have been one long film I somehow remember having to go see two films. Did anyone else do that? As such, it can only be characterized as being two films in its current form. It was cut and edited into two different films was it not? I hope to one day get a chance to see the movie as one film as it was intended to be. When you can see the film in its full edit, which no one has yet, then you can say its one film.
[/quote]
I remember going to see two halves of one film. It was cut and edited as two volumes of one film, hence the reminders he gives us (the opening scene on V1 being played at the start of V2 etc).
Check this out:
http://www.tarantino.info/wiki/index.php/Kill_Bill
[quote=“Ify”]
I don’t think you quite get it. Yes they were split into two films, but these films were incomplete. They DO NOT stand on their own. They are NOT two films, but TWO VOLUMES of ONE film.
I remember going to see two halves of one film. It was cut and edited as two volumes of one film, hence the reminders he gives us (the opening scene on V1 being played at the start of V2 etc).
Check this out:
http://www.tarantino.info/wiki/index.php/Kill_Bill
[/quote]
OK, let me just click that link and I will read…
OH NO!!
I don’t know what the fuck you’re implying, but here’s what it says just in case you were too retarded to comprehend:
"The 4th film by Quentin Tarantino. Released as two different “Volumes” in 2003 and 2004, with an integral version planned for release (premiered in Cannes 2006) in 2007.
Two Volumes, different versions. One film
Kill Bill was created as one film and then released as two volumes. However, it is considered to be one film (the entire saga has also been termed The Whole Bloody Affair). "
Oh yes, here is another point, why wasn’t Volume 2 dubbed “The 5th film by Quentin Tarantino”? It was dubbed “the new film”, because it would be silly to dub it “the other half of Kill Bill” or something.
"…Death Proof is a film that he simply cannot stop talking about. It’s not, he insists, one half of a novelty film. The script is most definitely The Fifth Film From Quentin Tarantino… "
<LINK_TEXT text=“http://film.guardian.co.uk/interview/in … 97,00.html”>'Resist the temptation to ridicule this' | Movies | The Guardian</LINK_TEXT>
The “Death Proof” portion of “Grindhouse,” as all true cinema devotees know, is the “fifth film from Quentin Tarantino” (if you count the “Kill Bills” as one movie, which he does).
<LINK_TEXT text=“http://www.cleveland.com/film/plaindeal … xml&coll=2”>http://www.cleveland.com/film/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/117533131199020.xml&coll=2</LINK_TEXT>
They aren’t called Kill Bill 1 and Kill Bill 2. They are called Volumes. the definition of which is - “One of the books of a work printed and bound in more than one book”. Just change the word book for film, and what do you get? Precisely the point I’ve been trying to make.
I can’t believe you are going against the man himself. I mean he created the film. If he says it’s one film, then it’s one film.
Technically it is 2 different films, they where not released together and both can stand alone. Its like an encyclopedia you cant release it in 27 volumes one volume a year, every volume is released at once hence it being one book. Tarantino stated that it is one film 2 volumes, but technically it is two different films its a pointless argument. Get rid of the technical definition and aspect of it and it is one film. It can be looked at either way, i look at it as one film but to each there own. Yous are both right.
This is pretty funny to say the least. Kill Bill has NOT been released as one film yet, no matter how it was intended. If anyone has seen that edit of the film please give a review because I can’t wait to see it.
[quote=“Knoxville Kingpin”]
This is pretty funny to say the least. Kill Bill has NOT been released as one film yet, no matter how it was intended. If anyone has seen that edit of the film please give a review because I can’t wait to see it.
[/quote]
Dude, I’m not saying that Kill Bill wasn’t split, it was. All I’m saying is that the split doesn’t mean that they are completely seperate films. Magazines gave them seperate reviews as they had seperate releases but that doesn’t mean they were both seperate films. They just got released seperately that’s all. They still remain part of ONE film. You have to acknowledge that. The film was too big to be released as one, yes, they are seperate films but not complete films in themselves. You cannot have one without having the other. Volume 2 isn’t a sequel. It doesn’t have it’s own cast and crew. It was one production that unfortunately had to be split in halves.