<LINK_TEXT text=“http://movie-reviews.colossus.net/movie … bill2.html”>http://movie-reviews.colossus.net/movies/k/kill_bill2.html</LINK_TEXT>
Another review
>:( Hope this movie isnt a bore!!! Channel4.com said virtually the same thing, the running time is too long, and it is bloated.
I personally think that Sally should have edited Vol.2 down and joined it with Vol.1. But I cannot say much until saying Vol.2.
:
[quote] >:( Hope this movie isnt a bore!!! Channel4.com said virtually the same thing, the running time is too long, and it is bloated.
I personally think that Sally should have edited Vol.2 down and joined it with Vol.1. But I cannot say much until saying Vol.2.
:[/quote]
Yeah, cuz you know QT is one of the most boring directors around right?
Dude please. :
Yeah, I’m sure this movie will be entirely boring.
Wait… that’s retarded. I’M RETARDED. SHIT!
I’ve got good news. My Science teacher has a friend who works with Miramax (he works on the DVDs) and he was able to score me a pass to a press screening of Vol. 2 for tomorrow.
I’ll let you guys know what I think of it (probably a 10/10 for sure)
I posted this earlier in a separate post, which mysteriously disapeered…
Now that the matrixfan bullshit is gone and this thread is actually scrollable with some actual reviews…
for the completist, David Denby’s negative review:
The Current Cinema | The New Yorker
At least he’s consistent (hated Vol. 1 also), but it’s another astute review that degenerates into name-calling (he calls QT a megalomaniac), thus many grains of salt should be taken with this review.
David Ansen of Newsweek loves “Vol. 2”.
MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos
If you remember, he though Vol. 1 was lacking in substance…which of course, is paid off here in Vol. 2.
at rottentomatoes it has 14 reviews so far, and is at 100%. Volume 1 ended up with 84%.
I’m sure Volume 2 will end up higher, as berardinelli, one of the main detracters of Volume 1, has given it a positive review (barely though, he’s really peeved at the whole “split” thing).
who isnt “peeved” at the whole split thing?
weinstein
Been awhile since I posted here, I missed the debut of Kill Bill 2 in Austin last month (which got a 5 minute ovation at the end)… Seeing it for the first time tonight, it so happened I got so caught up in the story and characters that I completely forgot it was a Tarantino movie (probably the highest compliment I can give it). It is definitely a more character driven movie and definitely a movie that is non commercial, and one that people will love or hate and no inbetweens. Some might feel this is Tarantino’s first movie since Pulp Fiction, others may feel let down it doesn’t have Vol. 1’s euphoria. The only let down I had was something pointed out to me by one of the 3rd unit directors of Kill Bill, but thats something unfortunately I can’t post here or mention. And bottomline, this is far and above any crap you get on a Friday release from any studio in California… is it worth your $5-$10, indeed it is.
forum member fidelo1st wrote this review:
<LINK_TEXT text=“Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos … lume2.html”>Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos</LINK_TEXT>
[quote]forum member fidelo1st wrote this review:
<LINK_TEXT text=“Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos … lume2.html”>Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos</LINK_TEXT>[/quote]
Sorry, but someone who gives “Apocalypse Now” only a “B” is not really a serious review-writer in my opinion. So I don’t give a shit on this review.
I dont even know who Fidelio1st is. Never seen him in here or talked to him about QTs films. I can tell just by reading his review that hes not a real fan of Grindhouse films or cinema in general. All he can say is obvious stuff that most “critics” will write about a movie they didnt get.
Ill listen to badassmovieman instead, he’s into the same kinds of films as me and alot of other people on here.
I’m not expecting Volume 1. I’m expecting Vol 2. Diff mood, diff pace, more character development and more fun cinema.
[quote]I I’m not expecting Volume 1. I’m expecting Vol 2. Diff mood, diff pace, more character development and more fun cinema.
[/quote]
Yeah! And a hell lot of cool scenes with Bill and a stylish showdown!
can someone please tell me if the Shaw Brothers logo along with the grindhouse feature presentation thing come up at the begining of volume 2? I would really love to know.
thanks.
[quote] All he can say is obvious stuff that most “critics” will write about a movie they didnt get.
[/quote]
Seriously, look at his list of favorite films. It’s like he just went to the AFI page and checked off some randomly
Brazil
A Clockwork Orange
Taxi Driver
Serpico
Manhattan
Seven Samurai
The Godfather I & II
Raging Bull
Pulp Fiction
Do the Right Thing
Annie Hall
Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
I’m still alittle worried about the “anticlimactic” ending, which I and most ppl already know what will happen. Most likely Tarantino is gonna pull a Takashi Miike on us and
spoiler*********
have the Bride finish off Bill in one quick swoop (meaning that the fight is less than 30 seconds)
You must mean an assistant director on the film as Tarantino famously does not use second or third units on his films.
A short showdown would be appropriate. It’s Leone-style. Looooong building to the climax. Short action. That’s it. Think of the trio in GBU. 5 minutes of cool music and camera-angles and at the end…just one shot.
If you know QT you know he will never play by the movie rule book. Thats one of the main reasons he chose a Revenge film to do this time. He always said how much he hates Revenge films that pussy out in the way they are done. Specifically when the revenge seeker doesnt kill the main villain with their own two hands. In Kill Bill, The Bride kills every victim by her hand, not by them falling on a rock or getting impaled by a sharp metal pike by accident.
But QT also loves films that fuck with the audience. For example when he was on Charlie Rose way back in 95, he said how much he loved DePalma’s Raising Cain which as he said was a “cinematic experiment on how NOT to satisfy an audience”.
So you will never get a QT film where things go by a movie rulebook, theres always gonna be some twist or joke or gimmick that fucks with us as an audience to see if we are really into it. Isnt that why we go see his films in the first place and love them so much? It is for me.