Originally posted by Sorcerer And why shouldn’t I be discussing my thoughts about a movie, in a topic about discussing thoughts on a movie…You call my comments mindless…they are based exactly on what everybody involved with the making of the movie wanted me to base them on - the trailor.
You miss my point, and epic’s point, and maz’s point. You are discussing your thoughts on a trailer, not a movie. And again, no ‘suitable for all audiences’ trailer could ever, in any way, even begin to do a Tarantino movie justice. Therefore, your comments deserve ridicule, which is the only possible reason you interjected them into this discussion anyways.
As far as me being a fanboy, well, that’s not entirely true. Yeah, I love his movies and enjoy them immensely more than anyone else’s work. But I have no problem with people who bash his films - providing they take the time out to see them. They’re not for everyone, especially people who judge movies only based on the trailer. A judgment of any product based only on an advertisement is shallow.
“The new version, they said, would not be available until the day before release – which, by a wild coincidence, was exactly one day too late for any critic to see it and get a timely review into a newspaper.”
wahhhhh! those poor critics. i’ve never understood why people let the media decide what they do with their time.
I just listened to many of the songs off the soundtrack as well. Very beautiful, the credit song especially (The Lonely Shepherd by Zamfir. Fourteenth track.)
I am most likely going to buy it ^^
kill bill vol. 1 is the best action movie ive ever seen. refering to kill bill and charlies angels in the same sentence should be limited to a sentence with a structure similiar to: “Kill Bill vol. 1 is a far, far greater movie than Charlie’s Angels.” judging a movie by its trailer is like taking a book youve never heard of and flipping to random single page and reading only that. the only reasons i can imagine for which someone would dislike kill bill would be if they are an extreme pacifist or something, or are trying to pretend that its not intellectual enough for them.
That guy who wrote your review Vicki completely misunderstood just about anything from the movie. I haven’t read such a surface-level understanding of a movie in a long time. It’d be like saying The Thin Red Line or Saving Private Ryan were just movies about violence.
As for myself, I’ve been wanting to see the movie since the early summer precisely because I thought the trailer was so cool. Granted, others I spoke too weren’t quite as impressed, but for me personally I really liked the trailer. So it’s not like Sorcerer is right that the trailer blew, or that others are right that the trailer doesn’t show how cool the movie is, it’s just a matter of taste or correct perspective. That’s all.
It’s lunacy to think that Kill Bill even remotely resembles Charlie’s Angels. Kill Bill is a methodical revenge story drenched in style and acting as an ode to '60s and '70s-era westerns and martial arts movies. Charlie’s Angels is a summer blockbuster whose main premise is: Guys want to see hot girls do things.
The movie is obscenely violent, to the point of dark comedy. But it has a real story to tell, and it is told extremely well. And the story is accompanied by some of the best directing, style, setting, dialogue, and use of music around these days. And the movie has a soul, which will be even more apparent with Volume 2 (curse you greedy Miramax for splitting it in half).
Anyway, read this review of it instead I suggest for those on the fence. The guy didn’t give it a completely stellar score (only 7 out of 10), but he seems very confident that with the release of the second half Kill Bill will become one of the best martial arts movies ever made.
I really really really wasn’t impressed, by anything. Just came back. Everything bordered on the absurd, and the martial arts were far from absurdly good. I can pull better moves in my sleep and it was occasionally very obvious when chords were used. The movie had no substance, its 1 scene to the next of predictable god modding with cheesy lines. I found the LotR 3 preview more exciting.
Originally posted by Sinistral I really really really wasn’t impressed, by anything. Just came back. Everything bordered on the absurd, and the martial arts weren’t absurdly good. The movie had no substance, its 1 scene to the next of god modding.
Its a parody of Asian film. So in other words it did its job.
EDIT: Also, why would you go see an action film for plot?
I just saw it, and it was pretty cool. I didn’t expect much plot and just went for the ride. Man, Uma killed more people then Clint Eastwood! Very bloody, it was like watching Blade of the Immortal if it was a movie. Overall, i expected a great action film, and I got one.
What were you expecting from the fight scenes Sin? Breakdance fighting?
Half decent choreography? Stances that don’t make me want to cry? Moves a purple belt would have problems doing? Apart from an occasional exageration, there really isn’t that much blood… She doesn’t kill that many people either. You’ll notice a lot of people survived the fights. That was funny when everyone just slithered out in the orgy
It was ok. Ok as in I didn’t walk out in the middle. (But I’ll admit it would have to be pretty damn horrible for me to walk out, as I don’t like to waste money.)
There’s no comparison to Pulp Fiction. It’s a different kind of movie, yeah… but, guh. What was the point? I was sitting there blinking at the limbs getting chopped off, thinking “umm. ok.” And COME ON. Parody or no, it was painful to look at some of those people’s fighting stances. There were maybe two scenes that I actually enjoyed, one was the beginning, and the other was Lucy Liu chopping Tanaka’s head off. (I suppose it counts as a spoiler o_O) Most of the rest was just drawn out absurdity.
Actualy Stances are not that exciting. Im sure you know that there is an entire style of Kung-fu that is used just for show. If you would want to see authentic stances in sword fighting, stick with Seven Samurai.
What would you consider a bloody movie? And I would say she killed a fair amount of people…
Go back and count. You’re not that observant. Proportionally, not that many people died.
I’ve done martial arts for years. Stances are VERY important for balance, control and ease of motion. If you don’t have the right stance, ESP in sword fighting, it WILL kill you. There’s a difference between authenticity and slopiness.
A bloody movie… Saving Private Ryan. If you just want liters of blood, go in the horror section of Blockbuster and pick a couple titles. Hellraiser had an interesting amount of blood in it if I remember right. Kill Bill didn’t have me blink , esp not flinch.
Alot of the people fighting just looked… dumb. If I had wanted to see people looking dumb, I could’ve stood outside the movie theater and kept my money.
I’ve done martial arts for years. Stances are VERY important for balance, control and ease of motion. If you don’t have the right stance, ESP in sword fighting, it WILL kill you. There’s a difference between authenticity and slopiness.
Oh give me a break, its a MOVIE not a instructional video. The whole idea was to be “stylish”, and realize that one person couldn’t take on 87 people armed with swords, chains, throwing axes. Did you really expect to go into this movie and see actual fighting stances when the previews showed a schoolgirl with a metal ball on a chain (complete with a razor blade ring).
Go back and count. You’re not that observant. Proportionally, not that many people died.
I saw people getting cut in half, stabbed through the heart, gut, people getting their limbs cut off left and right, I’m no doctor, but I’d say the massive amount of blood shown spewing out of their body told us they wern’t happy campers.
Eh yeah, it wasn’t his best work, actualy, I’d say it was his worst plot wise. It was a tribute to the old action films. They all can’t be Resivor Dogs after all.
Style? What style? Martial arts are arts because of style. When there is no art, there is no style 8P. Thus here, there is a lack of style. The only reason you say there is style is because other people have advocated the movie had style for reasons which may or may not have been explained where you read em, without necessarily understanding the meaning of style.
The thing is when you watch a movie with drawn out action scenes, the untrained eye doesn’t even notice a stance unless the individual doesn’t move for an elongated period of time. You really have no idea what you’re talking about. It is doable to have 1 person kick a lot of ass WITH style. I can watch a well choreographed fight and appreciate it because I am able to see these details because I’m accustomed to them. Thus when I see a sloppy one, its dead obvious.When you get in a real fight in the real world, you might not adopt too many different stances, but there are certain stances which you will take to make certain moves easier to use and to simply make sure you don’t get killed. Saying it doesn’t need to be an instructional video is meaningless and just makes you sound dumb.
You also avoided what I said. Me: not that many people “died”. You: “limbs everywhere”. My reply: losing a limb =| dying. All you had were a lot of handicaps.
ah yes, a golden age for the prostetic limb companies.
You sure take movies seriously. Telling me I don’t know what I’m talking about, and saying I sound dumb doesn’t make you right after all = P
Believe it or not, but I’ve gotten a black belt in Shotokan karate, and i’ve studied several different types korean styles of martial arts. I know the movie didn’t use actual skills and stances based on actualy combat, hell, practicaly ALL martial art schools nowadays don’t use moves based on actual combat.
I know about stances, and well, actual fighting isn’t that much fun to watch in the movies. Mostly grappling and holds and such. If you didn’t like the movie, thats just fine, but man, don’t take it so seriously.
I’m not taking it seriously. I found it unentertaining that a movie entirely based on fighting scenes was filled with so much bad fighting. Hand to hand stances matter less than that how you hold your sword in a fight, you should know that, though I will hand to em that it was good not to have elongated katana duels and to have encounters short.
Yeah, I agree that the fighting wasn’t real, and I know very little about sword fighting (I read the book of five rings, thats about it if you don’t count bo staff and naunchaku). I do know that in ol’ time Japan if you held your sword wrong, it ment big trouble (ie punishment, even death) so I can see where your comming from.
Lets just say this: I knew it was’nt very real in terms, but I didn’t let it bug me. An example would be Jean Claude Van Damme movies, yeah, he does a lot of spinning and splits, but in the real world, it wouldn’t be that practical, but that didn’t stop you from watching “Bloodsport” did it?
I will hand to em that it was good not to have elongated katana duels and to have encounters short.
hmm, yes, elongated katanas, cool looking, but thats about it.
If you like sword styles, and comics, you should check out (if you haven’t already) Lone Wolf and Cub, Vagabond, or Blade of the Immortal. Blade of the Immortal isn’t as much about the actual stances as it is about sword schools though…
Originally posted by Sinistral Why would I go see the Matrix or CTHD?
Again I ask, why would you go see an action movie for its plot?
The Matrix- oh yeah, lets combine every fucking idea in philosophy and religion we can and cram it all in there to make it look like a plot. That movie. Yeah- its cool, but the plot is NOT anything new- nor are ANY of the ideas. Bah.
I don’t know about Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. Haven’t seen it and so I can’t judge.