Home

by **SiouxieSioux** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:22 am

So, its on general release from tommorrow. Is anyone else excited about this stylized homage to B-Movies? A big part of me craves his fan-boy geekness, since I myself am a film geek. I reckon it'll be great fun and extremely gore-gous(couldn't resist).

Saw it on the opening night.....one word-genius

by **Cloud** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:27 am

That's easily the best pun I've ever heard. Hehe. I shall definitely be going, there is no end to my excitement

by **Anon.** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:38 am

[s]SiouxieSioux wrote on 10:22, 16th Oct 2003:
...stylized homage to B-Movies... his fan-boy geekness.

Are those your own words?

by **SiouxieSioux** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 12:23 pm

Donald, shut up;p. For your info. they are my own words. Come to think of it, why wouldn't they be? I'm hardly writing anything apart from the obvious......

by **Anon.** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 12:32 pm

I'm sorry - it just sounded entirely unlike your usual conversational style.

How is it "obvious" unless you've seen the film (which you haven't)?

by **Plette** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:36 pm

The fact that it's being released in two parts seems to me like a shameless ploy to make us pay for the same movie twice. They could have released it as a whole - 3 hour movies are pretty common these days. It annoys me enough that I think I'll just wait until it comes out on video - unless of course they expect you to rent/buy it in two separate parts, in which case they can take a hike.

[hr]Sola lingua bona est lingua morta.

by **SiouxieSioux** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:52 pm

Yes but the point is that each part is 2 1/2 - 3 hrs long and so a 6 hr film would be too much for audiences. I think, in fact, Vol 1 is around 2 3/4 hrs. To answer Donalds question, I havn't seen it, but from watching trailers and clips its pretty evident what it is. Besides, the script reveals the style(although it was written to deliberately confuse people).

P.S Donald you know I always criticise movies and know I'm a film geek.

by **Plette** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 5:23 pm

[s]SiouxieSioux wrote on 16:52, 16th Oct 2003:
Yes but the point is that each part is 2 1/2 - 3 hrs long and so a 6 hr film would be too much for audiences.

Part 1 is 110 minutes, and part 2 is 94 minutes, according to the sites I checked...

[hr]
Sola lingua bona est lingua morta.

by **Prophet Tenebrae** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 5:29 pm

More money for the shameless self-publicising and above all irritating Quentin then!

by **Cain** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:20 pm

sticking my tuppence worth in, i was under the impression that the film, as a whole was about 3 hours.

the studio exec responsible for it has a thing for 90 minute films, and doesn't get 3 hour films, so he told Tarantino's bunch to make it two films.

[hr]
I hold an element of surprise

by **Pussycat** on Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:27 pm

I imagine a shorter film to begin with is more likely to attract a wider audience to the two "volumes" than a three hour film. The latter would no doubt appeal mostly to Tarantino fans.

I won't be seeing it though as I literally can't afford to see one film twice and so spent my money on Finding Nemo instead

by **Prophet Tenebrae** on Fri Oct 17, 2003 12:35 am

Just wait for it on kazaa.

by **SiouxieSioux** on Fri Oct 17, 2003 8:46 am

I heard Vol 1 was 2 1/2 hrs. Richard, just because you met the guy and hate him, dosn't change the fact that the film may be shameless fun:)

by **Cain** on Fri Oct 17, 2003 8:52 am

[s]Prophet Tenebrae wrote on 01:35, 17th Oct 2003:
Just wait for it on kazaa.

Wait for it? pfft!

If you have to wait for it, somebody isn't doing their job properly.

[hr]
I hold an element of surprise

by **SiouxieSioux** on Fri Oct 17, 2003 9:34 am

by **SiouxieSioux** on Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:50 pm

The reason is this-Vol 1 is uber violent and so Tarentina said that he wanted to split it because he didn't think audiences could stomach both bits together. He also said that he wants it to be for everyone and not just the fanboys.

by **Little Ed** on Fri Oct 17, 2003 4:09 pm

Maybe homage, but everything about it says it ain't gonna be one of those cult classics, just a documentary on the good old days.
Stine said she saw it, and she said it was cool (if you know Stine, I'm sorry). If you want to watch cult, watch old Peter Jackson films.

by C. on Fri Oct 17, 2003 7:07 pm

mmm, fairly enjoyed it I would give it maybe a 7/10.

I enjoyed the 'humour' in the film and I can understand how the film was meant to come across as being not too serious but a few little things still seemed too major to be overlooked:

**Spoilers**

Bites out a tongue and squishes a guys head in a hospital and no police presence for 13 hours whilst she sleeps in the murdered guy's car?
4 years of muscle atrophy wangled away with a bit of will power.
Swords on planes? prrrlease at least they could have put them in a suitcase in the hold.

Wont bother going over the fight scenes, I liked the choreography but I really wish The Matrix was never released as everyone seems to have become Neo-like.

by **MrGreedy** on Sat Oct 18, 2003 6:57 pm

Loved it. I don't think you should let the implausbilities get in the way of the pleasure of the cinematic experience. Although the fight scenes were choreographed by Yeun Wo-Ping (sp?) who also choreographed the Matrix, I thought they were very disimilar in style (i.e. better if you're bored of Matrix and Matrix-influenced fight scenes).
Music, acting, editing, animated bit, all superb. Will definitely be watching it again before the week is out.

by **EviLTwiN** on Sat Oct 18, 2003 9:50 pm

it was brilliant.

and im sorry but if you have a problem with implausbilities then you totally aren't getting the type of film this is.

i guess it is plausible for one woman to fight off about 100 people with swords yeah???

Home

TheSinner.net

Kill Bill Vol 1

Kill Bill Vol 1

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Homage to B-Movies?

Re:

Re:

Re:

Who is online