Skip to main content

That woman, deserves her revenge and… we deserve to die. But then again, so does she.

Kill Bill: Vol. 2 
(2004)

(SPOILERS) I’m not sure I can really conclude whether one Kill Bill is better than the other, since I’m essentially with Quentin in his assertion that they’re one film, just cut into two for the purposes of a selling point. I do think Kill Bill: Vol. 2 has the movie’s one actually interesting character, though, and I’m not talking David Carradine’s title role.

There’s likely a degree to which Tarantino’s reasons for failing to avail himself of Warren Beatty for Bill are bombast (“We decided this movie shouldn’t be our first marriage” – there won’t be one at all now). He cited the Colonel Kurtz factor as key to the original plan with Beatty, so when the decision to introduce Bill earlier was made, the need for a star turn fell by the wayside. But even in his ultimate screenplay, there’s an anticipation for Bill that isn’t really served by the very serviceable but not that electric Carradine; he’s good in the same vanilla way Thurman is, which is to say, no one here overshadows the action itself, which is probably what Tarantino really wanted.

Not having Beatty is the difference between having Will Smith in Django Unchained and Jamie Foxx. The confrontation between Bill and the Bride is, uh, okay. Yeah, I guess it’s a decent twist that he turns out to have been a good dad to Uma’s child, announced as living at the end of Vol. 1, but we’ve already had children and violence domix twists in the first scene of the first volume, a fight with Vivica A Fox that leaves her daughter without a mother. The overall sense is one of “Quentin’s just trying to see how many tenuous tonal shifts he can stuff into his movie” rather than there being any genuine interest in exploring a mother’s relationship with her lost child (anything you get of that is all Uma). Who in any case has been etched out as a budding psychopath (the loveable scamp goldfish incident)

Will Self, in an excoriating review, claimed “Tarantino’s films aren’t merely bad, they also render reasonably intelligent people totally vacuous and stupid” (to which, the great unwashed Internet acolytes will doubtless respond “No, you’re totally vacuous and stupid”). He goes on to suggest, in a position I have some sympathy with, that they “come out spouting a load of gibberish about pop cultural synergy, the purity of the martial-arts genre and how Tarantino is pushing back the frontiers of contemporary cinematic art”. Albeit, I suspect a lot of them, even the professed film buffs, just think, like Quentin, that they’re cool flicks. I’ll leave you to read for yourself what he says about the director as a “masturbating video-store clerk”.

This is, basically, more of the same: more chapters, more fights and more flashbacks, with Chinese martial arts this time instead of Japanese, allowing the introduction of Chekov’s Shaolin King Kong Palm – I mean, Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique – and more choice cuts. Regarding which, while Quentin’s picks for his soundtracks are often inspired, it’s a mistake to lift something already iconic – such as a track from The Good, the Bad and the Ugly – and try to make it your own. At least, if you assume or respect your audience has any of the kind of grounding in classic movies you do.

Robert Richardson’s cinematography is striking and colourful, but contrastingly, I don’t care for the switches to black and white in either volume. This time, the Bride must fight Daryl Hannah, a one-eyed Californian Mountain Snake who represents another example of the director – after such resounding early successes – entirely failing to show that a performer has any other sides to justify his lending them the honour of a second career wind. But then, it’s further testament to the mediocrity of his writing on Kill Bill that there wasn’t even a sliver of a Reservoir Dogs/ Pulp Fiction fairy dust effect. Given Self’s comments about masturbation, I shudder to think of how long Tarantino spent in the editing suite, playing and replaying the moment where Uma squidges Daryl’s one remaining eye between her toes.

I do like Michael Madsen’s performance, though, and when Tarantino isn’t switching back into lazy mercenary tactics on Budd’s part, there’s an appealing world weariness to the character and his belief that they’ve all got it coming (the Bride too). His not having pawned his priceless sword after all is also an appealing touch. While the Kill Bills can’t otherwise boast engaging characters, they consistently forward relentlessly seedy ones, in this case Larry Bishop making an impression as the berating manager of the strip club where Budd works.

Kill Bill: Vol. 2 seems even longer than Vol. 1 – because it is – and has less variety to it. Which may actually be a good thing, in terms of Tarantino’s taste for distasteful mayhem. The final chapter goes on forever, and would only really justify itself with a Beatty. Hell, Dustin Hoffman would make you sit up in your seat for sheer incongruity value. But I suspect Beatty would have called his director on the sloppy material, which would have required shutting the butt of the then sexagenarian down. I mean, did anyone seriously not groan when Bill announces “As you know, I’m quite keen on comic books. Especially the ones about superheroes”. Yeah, and did you know, Woody sees a psychoanalyst.

Maybe Quentin was spending too much time with Robert Rodriguez, as evidenced by their subsequent ill-fated collaboration. Mostly, I think Kill Bill was an irreversible tipping point, after which, for better or worse, it became clear there’d be no retreat from full immersion in his own cinematic wonderland, where inter-referentiality was everything. Even if he ever got around to remaking Less Than Zero, as he has mooted, it would be an unapologetic ‘80s movie/music fest. The positive side is that, after he got the grindhouse out of his system, he’d return to something approaching form.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

So you made contact with the French operative?

Atomic Blonde (2017)
(SPOILERS) Well, I can certainly see why Focus Features opted to change the title from The Coldest City (the name of the graphic novel from which this is adapted). The Coldest City evokes a nourish, dour, subdued tone, a movie of slow-burn intrigue in the vein of John Le Carré. Atomic Blonde, to paraphrase its introductory text, is not that movie. As such, there’s something of a mismatch here, of the kind of Cold War tale it has its roots in and the furious, pop-soaked action spectacle director David Leitch is intent on turning it into. In the main, his choices succeed, but the result isn’t quite the clean getaway of his earlier (co-directed) John Wick.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

I take Quaaludes 10-15 times a day for my "back pain", Adderall to stay focused, Xanax to take the edge off, part to mellow me out, cocaine to wake me back up again, and morphine... Well, because it's awesome.

The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
Along with Pain & Gain and The Great Gatsby, The Wolf of Wall Street might be viewed as the completion of a loose 2013 trilogy on the subject of success and excess; the American Dream gone awry. It’s the superior picture to its fellows, by turns enthralling, absurd, outrageous and hilarious. This is the fieriest, most deliriously vibrant picture from the director since the millennium turned. Nevertheless, stood in the company of Goodfellas, the Martin Scorsese film from which The Wolf of Wall Street consciously takes many of its cues, it is found wanting.

I was vaguely familiar with the title, not because I knew much about Jordan Belfort but because the script had been in development for such a long time (Ridley Scott was attached at one time). So part of the pleasure of the film is discovering how widely the story diverges from the Wall Street template. “The Wolf of Wall Street” suggests one who towers over the city like a behemoth, rather than a guy …

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Dude. You’re my hero and shit.

El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie (2019)
(SPOILERS) I was going to say I’d really like to see what Vince Gilligan has up his sleeve besidesBreaking Bad spinoffs. But then I saw that he had a short-lived series on CBS a few years back (Battle Creek). I guess things Breaking Bad-related ensure an easy greenlight, particularly from Netflix, for whom the original show was bread and butter in its take up as a streaming platform. There’s something slightly dispiriting about El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie, though. Not that Gilligan felt the need to return to Jesse Pinkman – although the legitimacy of that motive is debatable – but the desire to re-enter and re-inhabit the period of the show itself, as if he’s unable to move on from a near-universally feted achievement and has to continually exhume it and pick it apart.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013)
(SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Who would want to be stuck in a dream for ten years?

Top 10 Films 2010-19
Now, you may glance down the following and blanche at its apparent Yankophile and populist tendencies. I wouldn’t seek to claim, however, that my tastes are particularly prone to treading on the coat tails of the highbrow. And there’s always the cahiers du cinema list if you want an appreciation of that ilk. As such, near misses for the decade, a decade that didn’t feature all that many features I’d rank as unqualified classics, included Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, Tron: Legacy, The Tree of Life, The Guard and Edge of Tomorrow.

Don’t make me… hungry. You wouldn’t like me when I’m… hungry.

The Incredible Hulk (2008)
(SPOILERS) It’s fortunate the bookends of Marvel’s Phase One are so sturdy, as the intervening four movies simply aren’t that special. Mediocre might be too strong a word (although at least one qualifies for that status), but they amountto a series of at-best-serviceable vehicles for characters rendered on screen with varying degrees of nervousness and second guessing. They also underline that, through the choices of directors, no one was bigger than the franchise, and no one had more authority than supremo Kevin Feige. Which meant there was integrity of overall vision, but sometimes a paucity of it in cinematic terms. The Incredible Hulk arrived off the back of what many considered a creative failure and commercial disappointment from Ang Lee five years earlier yet managed on just about every level to prove itself Hulk’s inferior. A movie characterised by playing it safe, it’s now very much the unloved orphan of the MCU, with a lead actor recast and a main c…

The only things I care about in this goddamn life are me and my drums... and you.

Some Kind of Wonderful (1987)
(SPOILERS) The final entry in John Hughes’ teen cycle – after this he’d be away with the adults and moppets, and making an untold fortune from criminal slapstick – is also his most patently ridiculous, and I’m not forgetting Weird Science. Not because of its unconvincing class commentary, although that doesn’t help, but because only one of its teenage leads was under 25 when the movie came out, and none of them were Michael J Fox, 30-passing-for-15 types. That all counts towards its abundant charm, though; it’s almost as if Some Kind of Wonderful is intentionally coded towards the broader pool Hughes would subsequently plunge into (She’s Having a Baby was released the same year). Plus, its indie soundtrack is every bit as appealing as previous glories The Breakfast Club and Pretty in Pink.

Mention of the latter highlights Some Kind of Wonderful’s greatest boast; it’s a gender swapped Pretty in Pink, only this time Hughes (and his directing surrogate Howard…