Well if you think about it, it’s not really Volume III. Volume 1 and II are both one and the same, they belong to one movie. The next installment will stand on it’s own. For now let’s call it ‘Kill Beatrix’ because that is what it really is. I still believe that QT should go with my idea of bringing in another assassin to aid Elle Driver, because Beatrix has her companion in B.B. and Sophie has Nikki. I was thinking about it today and it makes senses that this showdown if it goes down like this three way I’m thinking about then this would mean we would get to see not 1, not 2, but 3 Hanzo swords all at once. Beatrix has hers, Sophie would have Bill’s, and Elle would have Budd’s.
I believe that this would make for one hella of a showdown. I believe that when we get to this point when we do see Budd’s sword again Elle would have scratched the inscription right off and all that would remain would be Bill’s name. I myself can’t wait to see what QT does come up with.
This is my first post. I agree with what you are saying. I like that concept. And I too have always wondered why people would call the sequel volume 3; volume 1 and 2 were merely two parts of one movie. There can NEVER be a “Volume 3” as “Volume 2” concludes the “Kill Bill” story. There can be, however, an entirely new movie: Either Kill Bill 2 (notice there’s no “Volume” in there) or, like the Man with No Name trilogy, it could be a totally different name like “The Blind and the Limbless” or “Nikki’s Revenge”. Kill Bill itself is a spinoff of Pulp Fiction; It’s the Pilot from Pulp Fiction, as was mentioned by Mia Wallace. The Fox Force 5 = The Deadly Viper Assasination squad. They merely took out the French one who’s specialty is sex and replaced her with Budd (although i’m guessing Sofie Fatale was the french chick, as she’s said to be “another of Bill’s protege”). So, why are those of you that are so pissed about sequels and whatnot not pissed that Kill Bill is a spin-off of Pulp Fiction? I see the “sequel” to Kill Bill being a spinoff in the way that Kill Bill is a spin-off of Pulp Fiction. Can it really be considered a sequel if the entire premise of the movie is turned upside down; the avenger becoming the avenged? I also like the idea of the prequel, and I too think it should be an Animatrix type affair, rather than a feature film.
Woah woah, hold your horses there buddy. Kill Bill IS NOT a spin-off of Pulp Fiction. The Fox Force Five and Deadly Viper Assassination Squad are quite similar, but one cannot call Kill Bill a spin-off solely because of that. Your deductive logic is interesting, but it is false. Furthermore, Kill Bill is in a different universe to Pulp Fiction. Therefore, in no way are these two films related, apart from in ways
outside of the actual film e.g. trunk shots, long shots, pop culture dialogue.
I have said it before and I will say it again, I think the idea of another part to Kill Bill is ridiculous. Hopefully, QT has got that out of his system, and I don’t want to see any more Kill Bill stuff for another 15 years. If he makes the other part in 15 years as he has claimed, fair enough. But at the moment, I want him to concentrate on his WWII epic and anything else he may have in the pipeline (Grind House (Grind) etc.)