i am waiting to see Inglourious Bastards
I’m looking forward to Inglorious Bastards more then I’m looking forward too Volume two as a matter of fact. I like Kill Bill but seeing Quentin do that war movie will be hella cool!!!
“BITCHES LEAVE” - Robocop
[quote]you call me an asshole because i hate a movie… hmm is this a democracy or a dictatorship?
[/quote]
What are you talking about! A can’t stand it when people pull this.
This isn’t a dictatorship, as no one is trying to stop you from posting. They are entitled to state their beliefes just as you are. What are you looking for? A world without conflict? A world where no one bothers to contest your opinions because they don’t want to offend you? Screw that and grow up.
[quote]
I dont understand people like you. I just dont know where the hell you come from. You call yourself “thenexttarantino” but you dont like his latest movie? You walk out in the middle of his fuckin movie? What the fuck is wrong with you?
Personally I think if you dont like QTs movies or Kill Bill you should pack up your shit and get the fuck out. I mean, lets be fuckin men about this.
Theres noone here that didnt like Kill Bill except for maybe 2 or 3 people, and they obviously are only here to start shit with those of us who loved it.
FUCK ALL THE KILL BILL HATERS!!!
[/quote]
I don’t mind them being here, but what are they thinking? They can bash a movie we love and we won’t represent our opinons? We’re not allowed to bash back? Because we think differenly I’m not allowed to argue? There is your fascism.
[quote]If anything you are the asshole for having the narrow mind. Tarantino is a cool director and as far as the backlash against me regarding gore let me just say this: when gore is used properly it has an effect but when it is just used for the sake of gore it has no point and is grotesque.
[/quote]
There is a difference, but I understand where you are coming from…sort of. Kill Bill’s violence is pure. It is used artfully and as a tribute to a somtimes horrifyingly bloody sub-genre. Yet this type of bloodletting isn’t sadism (which, for my money, it the only type of negative violence…I’m probably going to have to explain that later). It is darkly comical, yes, and in some parts, the blood comes off as nervously funny, in others horribly disturbing. This movie displays a dynamic of violence that represents the comical pureness of well placed violence, but doesn’t let us forget how horrible violence really is. It is intense, disturbing stuff. It is, however, not a bad disturbing, and it is a just violence. The Bride is justified in her quest, and we see in many scenes that she doesn’t want to exact her bloody revenge where it doesn’t belong. It is a very moral movie. Also, the bloodletting offers a wonderful parallel to the degree at which the bridge wishes to punish those who did her wrong.
For evil, not justified, and sadistic violence, see House of 1000 Corpses. You will see a definate difference between good violence and bad.
House of 1000 Corpses is a piece of shit move directed by fuckin Rob Zombie, who gives a shit what the violence is like
anyway, stop tryin to defend the violence in Kill Bill-the movie isn’t supposed to have some big message its just supposed to be fuckin entertaining
I’m defending the purity of the violence in Kill Bill, which is at the very heart of the film’s quality. I didn’t in any way try to add meaning to the movie, other than to say that Tarantino used violence in a way that was entertaining, funny, disturbing, and ultimately pure. If this the violence wasn’t pure, as excessive as, it is it would be a heap of sadistic violent trash. As is it is a beautifully artful violent movie. If things this mature bother you, that’s fine, but I’ll continue to post on what I feel like posting on.
the reason why everybody says the violence is justified in Kill Bill and is sadistic in House of 1000 Corpses is because Kill Bill is a good one and House of 1000 Corpses is a shitty one. Kill Bill does have sadistic moments like the beginning and when Go-Go stabs that fucker in the bar, but its a good movie overall so we dont complain
Lemme help you out:
sa·dism
-  psychology hurting others for sexual pleasure: the gaining of sexual gratification by causing physical or mental pain to other people, or the acts that produce such gratification ÂÂ
-  being cruel for fun: the gaining of pleasure from causing physical or mental pain to people or animals ÂÂ
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library 2003. © 1993-2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
I don’t know about you, but that scene with Go-Go didn’t give me sexual gratification, nor did it give me pleasure. It showed me how evil Go-Go was, and, as such, the scene was a device for developing her character. The actions of the characters are at times sadistic, but the movie itself is not. It doesn’t expect us to take pleasure in death or torture.(even in the funny scenes, the humor is in the placement of the violence and how it was executed, not that the violence actually happened).
There is nothing wrong with taking satisfaction with a justified revenge (such as the Bride’s) but enjoying violence for violence’s sake isn’t cool. That would be like House of 1000 Corpses, which, aside from being horrible, was sadistically horrible. They tortured those people graphically for well over an hour, and expected us to take morbid pleasure in it. Not cool.
It is a very thin line, and, while Kill Bill dances along it in points, it never crosses.
whatever…i was just tryin to say that if a movie is good then it doesn’t matter how violent it is, but if it sucks ass then it is seen as gratuitous
[quote]
actually, go gos scene turned me on, id like to have sex with her, and then get my balls cut off.  id definately be worth it. ;D
[/quote]
ditto, uh except for the balls getting cut off part 
[quote]whatever…i was just tryin to say that if a movie is good then it doesn’t matter how violent it is, but if it sucks ass then it is seen as gratuitous[/quote]
All I was saying is that the intention of the violence is the internal source for the quality of a movie. If the movie is gratuitous it appears, rather, it is, bad, and it is the intention of the excess that determines whether it is gratuitous.
And Go-Go turns me on in general. She was beautiful. But the fact that she cut up that one dude didn’t turn me on. It repulsed me. The fact I would be willing to go throught that is beside the point… 
it didn’t repulse me, i thought it waz funny
What did you find funny? Like I said earlier, if anything was funny about the deaths in the movie, it was QT’s neat placement and delivery. Not the deaths themselves. If you thought the fact that the guy was killed was funny, it it gave you your kicks, then you are a sadist.
the whole scene is just funny, not because somebody dies. i dont get pleasure from seeing ppl die in real life, but i do in movies like John Woo and Tarantino. it was funny because of the absurdity…i don’t think that all of his internal organs would have fell on the floor just because go-go stabbed him with her knife
What does John Woo have to do with Tarantino? There completly oppisite Directors. And not ONE organ is spilled in Kill Bill its all blood and limbs.
I thought those were organs in Kill Bill when Go-go cut that guy open…but I’m no doctor. What were they, now that you mention it?
Nah just a tidal wave of blood.
it looked like some intestines and shit to me…i was saying how i like action scenes in John Woo movies and in Tarantino’s, but i dont like seeing people die in real life
it’s not hard bullet, just read it carefully