My sweetie and I went to see Kill Bill yesterday. Odd little film, but this ain’t a review.
There was a couple, probably in their 50s, sitting behind us. In the middle of the big fight scene, the couple walked out, the husband muttering that the film was “disgusting.”
Then why the fuck did you sit through 90% of the movie?! The reviews weren’t enough to tell you that you’d find the movie “disgusting”? The opening scene, where an eight months’ pregnant woman is shot in the head wasn’t “disgusting”? The woman being killed in front of her four year old daughter wasn’t “disgusting”? The animation with the pedophile being killed while having sex with an 11 year old wasn’t enough to put you over the edge? The repeated rapes of a comatose woman didn’t get you to walk out?
No, all of that was fine, apparently. Listen, bub, if all of that met with your approval, I fail to understand why the killing of (roughly) 32,000 yakuza caused such outrage. Suck it up.
Sua
This really isn’t a rant. It was just so bizarre I wanted to share, and the Pit seemed the appropriate spot.
Yes, anyone who likes this film is pretty much a shithead. Anyone who actually * defends * this film as “art” is a colossal shithead. And anyone who thinks that it’s “just a matter of taste” is contemptible beyond words.
I don’t know art, but I know what I like, and I like seeing decapitations result in a spray of blood so strong that the victim’s blood pressure must have been dangerously high.
I mean, look at some of it! You’d think a papercut on one of those yakuza would look like a fire hydrant of blood.
How anyone could think that a movie with the word “Kill” in its title could not be violent is beyond me. Especially as it was marketted as a kung-fu revenge flick. There’s a fucking katana on the movie poster. And directed by Quentin Tarantino, noted since Resevoir Dogs for his use of over-the-top violence and profanity (which he toned down for this flick, actually). Did they chose a movie at random? Wish I had that kind of cash.
Oh, and there were 88 Yakuza, plus Gogo, Sophie, and O-Ren (89 if the kid she spanks wasn’t a full-fledged member), although I can’t say if they all turned out for the fight.
WorldEater, I think Quentin’s learned his lesson. I hear tell he’s in a crowd scene, but he doesn’t have a speaking role.
LonesomePolecat, yeah. It’s art. It’s worth watching, and it’s worth talking about. It’s stylish, but it retains substance. Not only is it a top-notch action flick, it brings the themes of its parent genre(s) (mainly 70’s kung-fu, but also the rape-revenge and femme-fatale subgenres) to such clarity that it bears examination as a cultural commentary.
I reckon the couple mentioned in the OP got caught up in it, but then remembered towards the end that they’d intended to walk out in disgust so they could tell their friends.
Well, I guess I’m a shithead 'cause I liked the film.
People, IT"S JUST A MOVIE! IT’S JUST FOR ENTERTAINMENT. I bet the same people who complain about the first one now will go see the second one when it comes out just to have something to complain about.
See, now I’m having a bit of a dilemma. I was called a fucking bitch once because I gave a negative review score to a shitty game. And now I’m called a shithead for liking a movie someone else doesn’t like. When I make my sig file, how should I sign it? DeadlyAccurate, fucking bitch or DeadlyAccurate, shithead. Or maybe I should go with DeadlyAccurate, fucking shithead bitch. I just don’t get insulted like this often enough to get familiar with these things. Oh, the agony of indecision.
On the topic of the OP, I saw two elderly women walk into a showing of Fight Club. They were gone about halfway through. I have no sympathy for those who are too dumb to find out what a movie is about before they go, and then are pissed when it offends them. Especially when said movie has the word “kill” in the title.
I would have rather seen one 3 hour movie than see teo 1.5 hour movies. That’s my biggest complaint about this flick. To be honest, I find the shot of the ceiling in Res Dogs to be far more disturbing than all of the graphic blood and gore in KB. Something about movie blood and guts fires off my “It’s not real - go ahead and laugh” reaction. But in RD, Q left it up to you to imagine what cutting a rookie cop’s ear off would look like. I have never smiled once about that scene and it still bugs me to this day. Leaving it up to my mind to fill in the blanks was much more disturbing.
And thats’s the point. The cop in RD was supposed to be disturbing, whereas the limbs that sever at a feathers touch, and gallons of blood at high pressure were supposed to be cartoonish. You cheer the Bride, you fear Mr. Blonde.
I’ve also heard Vol. II is supposed to be drastically different in tone (less of a pure action piece), so that may justify the split.
Not saying this isn’t a problem, but there’s also a problem in Hollywood marketing. I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen a movie commercial or trailer, and thought, “hey! That movie looks cool…I wonder what it’s about?”
Until Hollywood can give us a clue as to the actual plot of a movie, people can’t always be expected to know what a flick is about.
Well, call me Miss Shithead! Loved the movie. Loved.
As for the OP, I totally agree. Come to think of it, the last time I saw it I remember a couple leaving during the last scene too, mumbling something vaguely negative-sounding. Jesus, either grow a pair and sit through the movie you paid for, or don’t come to a movie where you know the violence is going to be plentiful and mighty, like, oh I don’t know, a Quentin Tarantino movie??
