henke on 16/9/2007 at 20:15
I just watched DOA: Dead or Alive: Teh moviening and I thought it kicked ass. (man) Then I go on iMDB and see that it only has a 4.8/10 score. Charlies Angels has 5.6. And Kill Bill:Vol 1 has 8.2. Now, I've watched Kill Bill and Charlies Angels many times and I'll probably be watching DOA again as well. They're all fun excellently choreographed wire-fu slapfests with knowingly-cliched plots. So why is Kill Bill rated so much higher? Is it just that because the director has made more serious movies in the past. So people feel that they can shut their brains of and enjoy a mindless popcorn flick because "it's Tarantino, man!" Whereas if they watch Charlies Angels they're constanly wondering "Is it ok that I enjoy this? Or will I be viewed as a philistine if I do?"
I mean, I know
I do. If someone comes up to me and asks me if I liked Kill Bill or Charlies Angels better I'll answer Kill Bill without batting an eye. But if it comes to actually watching one of them again I'd be just as inclined to watch Charlies Angels as Kill Bill.
So is it just me (and all of you, don't lie) being spineless with-the-grain-going sheep or does Kill Bill (Vol 1) really have some quality that sets it far above DOA and Charlies Angels?
Discuss!
(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8xm_WmRuoc) DOA trailer
(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C79p5XQUuAg) Kill Bill Trailer
Starrfall on 16/9/2007 at 20:24
Blood and cool snake code names.
edit: eyeballs
edit edit: tits full of rock salt
see edit, supra edit 1: volumes
didn't you used to only get like two minutes before it says you edited the post whats going on oh ok there it is
Fafhrd on 16/9/2007 at 20:34
Good acting, coherent editing and action scenes, good writing. All things that are simply not present in DoA or Charlie's Angels.
Sulphur on 16/9/2007 at 20:47
...and I just saw this thread right after watching Episode one again with a couple of friends.
Kill Bill's got a lots of winks and nods nudges, a lot of them towards Wuxia and anime and Bruce Lee fans. But those are the obscure things.
I'd second the amazing editing (long shots, cuts, and all), action, and writing. The dialogue comes across as a little overdone at times, but it's usually delivered extremely well. The acting's pretty good; even when it's ham-handed and scenery chewing, Tarantino is usually getting the actors to do that for specific reasons.
Also, it has an amazing soundtrack. When you've got this ballet of violence and emotions like most of Kill Bill Episode one, the right music at the right time does wonders for the movie. Hearing that excerpt from that Santa Esmeralda song near the end still sends shivers down my spine.
Plus, the story's driven with an intensity I haven't seen in a while, and the core emotion is something that can be quite devastating when done right - pure, burning revenge.
demagogue on 16/9/2007 at 21:17
What Kill Bill and Charlie's Angels had in common - you get the idea that they were piecing it together as they went along, throwing in random fun things left and right.
What's different: In Kill Bill, you get the idea that that was the point ... an homage to the great movie genres, by a movie-lover for movie-lovers ... Leone Spaghetti Westerns, Shao Lin Kung Fu flicks, Hatori Hanzo ... I mean look at the list of homages ((
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266697/movieconnections) part 1, (
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0378194/movieconnections) part 2). For people that really follow movies, and get these allusions, there's no doubt that this was made by somebody that absolutely loves movies and making movies and poured his creative heart into it, putting the kind of thought into each homage that was developed over decades of devotion to watching these movies ... but also making it into a damn fine movie even if you didn't follow a single homage, like Sulphur, et al, was saying ... well thought-out fight scenes and action, funny plot hooks, a great sound track (finding the 5678's was so cool), camera work and editing was awesome ... just well put together, like a lot of devoted, careful thought went into it.
In CA, I got the idea that they were making it up as they went along for the exact opposite reason ... they simply ran out of creative steam and just started pulling it out of their asses out of sheer creative laziness ... at some point, after shooting had already started (they started on half a script) the writing just started being done by a faceless group sitting around a table wondering aloud, "this might look cool", writing it as shooting is going on, with no deeper reflection than the idea "cool" and what they have to do to cover shooting for the next week.
From my perspective, despite the superficial similarities, CA and KB couldn't be more different in the attitude behind the writing. KB makes me want to cheer for Tarantino's efforts; CA makes me want to just shake my head and feel slightly ill watching them try so hard for something so ill-conceived.
Eshaktaar on 16/9/2007 at 22:07
Watching Kill Bill was like watching several movies packed into one. Watching Charlie's Angels was like not watching a movie.
SD on 16/9/2007 at 22:53
Kill Bill is well over-rated and if the over-zealous BBC hadn't had them removed from YouTube, I would be pointing you in the direction of Mark Kermode's reviews of both parts.
Scots Taffer on 17/9/2007 at 00:26
Charlies Angels is actually a classic "so bad it's good" in my opinion, well, at least after a couple of not-so-quiet-ones on a Friday night although it's criminal how Bill Murry just mails in his performance. DOA I know nothing about and look even less likely to know anything about ever after watching that trailer.
Kill Bill on the other hand is a totally weird mixed bag. I remember enjoying it at the time but I have absolutely zero interest in ever rewatching it. I agree with SD that it's very overrated (though I'd prefer it if he could espouse a single opinion on movies these days without sucking off Mark Kermode) and demagogue missed an important point while discussing all of Quentin's allusions, homages and constant wink-wink referencing, it completely shatters immersion and destroys any chance of getting sucked in because "ah, this is the moment where you realise I'm spoofing a wild west movie" or "here's the obligatory KUNG FU homage you all knew was coming, c'mon David Fucking Carradine's in the cast". That's not to say it isn't a very slick, beautifully shot, lovingly produced movie, it is, but it's just not a very good movie.
SubJeff on 17/9/2007 at 02:40
Kill Bill is just put together with so much more skill. It's not a great film but I enjoyed it more than CA (which was a fun distraction); it has so much more depth, better acting, better writing, better action. It's also much more serious and gritty. They are worlds apart. DOA looks worlds apart from both of these too. It looks bad. At least CA was fun without making you (*me) cringe too much.
