Kill Bill: Script vs Screen
The volume of Kill Bill on the screen is close to the first half of the 200+ page script that has been floating around some circles for quite some time. But it has been tweaked, and for the better. Expanded, in fact, and a more elaborate and energetic film than most reading it could have imagined. The differences may not be huge, they don't affect the plot, but they are equally significant and interesting. The script was good, but not great. One realizes quickly, however, that the document is but a glimpse into the world in Tarantino's mind a peak at a project still under construction.
Previous Comments
[1] On Oct-18-2003, jp wrote:Quentin , I hear that you are , or have removed the Chapter ;
"Yuki's Revenge" from Kill Bill Volume 2 ....True?
___Please reconsider__! ,as it is a great sequence IMO
From all indications and what I hear everyone is wanting more
of Chiaki Kuriyama(Gogo Yubari) and she would be perfect to play
GoGo's "Twin Sister", Yuki Yubari.
Another idea would be to shoot addt'l wraparound footage as
originally planned(in screenplay)
for the sequence outside Vernita Greens , with Yuki stalking Uma
as the Ice cream man,to be included on DVD release of Kill Bill Vol 1.
just some thoughts....
*BTW Thanx so very much for Kill Bill! the movie is Great!!
[2] On Nov-08-2003, yogi wrote:
Well, it woud not be possible to include that scene because Yuki was never introduced in KB Vol.1 . But i felt the scene rather unnesecary, even though light and entertaining. Yet it's not mandatory for the plot to develop, so it's okay if it's taken out.
I need to really say that the End of Vol 1 was great, with the daughter-thingy and the blackout to "The lonely sheperd" from the Soundtrack - superb.
[3] On Nov-13-2003, Bender wrote:
Perhaps you noticed, buy GoGO played the part of which usualy was Yuki in one scene in kill bill vol. 1. In the pub, where she stabs the man in the stomach when she goes " do you want to penetrate me?" that was meant to be Yuki saying that (after being upset due to GoGo's death). So therefore, it is a sign all refferneces to Yuki have been removed.
[4] On Jan-24-2004, ajay david wrote:
dear quentin
thanks for kill bill-v1. it is an education to all serious students of film. obviously you have so much energy, it gets translated into every sequence. and it is an experience to see the irrreverent way in which you treat everything from cinema 'grammar' to the critics.
btw, i loved the opening title - ' the fourth film by quentin tarantino'! how very much like you and your films. you gotr guts man, no filmmaker would dare do such a thing. how did the studio allow it esp when they have lot of problems with the credit lines?
[5] On Apr-04-2004, Daniel wrote:
I'll spare a lot of words by saying up front I wasn't all that excited to see "Kill Bill" until I read the screenplay draft on the internet. Basically, I thought the script accomplished two things: celebrate the better aspects of the revenge genre as well as provide a new twist within it, something to which future movies within the struggling genre could ascribe to achieving.
Sadly, with "Kill Bill" it seems Tarantino has achieved neither of the two goals I saw within the script. While it is true he has celebrated the genre with basic plot points and motivations, Tarantino also included all of the overplayed, decaying, and quite frankly boring elements of the revenge genre. He has cobbled together the best and worst parts of cinematic history from westerns, samurai, and yes, revenge movies to make something that while is equally good as the sum of its parts, but also equally tired and cliched. This is my chief gripe: Tarantino has offered nothing, NOTHING new to cinema with the release of this movie (and I refuse to refer to this single movie in different volumes). Other directors have done all of the nonsense in this movie before: sometimes better, sometimes worse. Kill Bill, at best, is a retrospective, a montage, and at worst, derivative schlock.
Tarantino, Reservoir Dogs was decent. Pulp Fiction was very well done (though it irks me you have somehow managed to accumulate all the credit for what was obviously a collaborative effort). Jackie Brown was the most professional film you've ever done.
Kill Bill is overlong, unoriginal, and boring. It is a huge, huge step in the wrong direction. And when you make your 5th film (again, Kill Bill is one movie, not two) I hope you take some of the clout you have obviously and strangely garnered in Hollywood, take a risk for once, and provide audiences with something new.
[6] On Apr-14-2004, Mr. Yellow wrote:
Although I feel that what Daniel posted was correct (that nothing was added the the world of cinema through this movie) I disagree with where he stands. Yes, his previous movies were more intelligent, and gone are the witty lines that every movie buff can recite by memory, but you have to understand that that wasnt't what he was going for. He wanted to test his limits as a writer and director by doing an action film. And what better way to test your skills than to do all forms of action in one movie. Kill Bill was meant to be a parody of all the action flicks and I don't understand how some other people can't understand that. I believe that this film is a step in the right direction for Tarantino and it only shows the diversity of his writing and directorial skills.
[7] On Apr-18-2004, Voom wrote:
I would just have to say, that not only was Quentin testing his limits by directing an action film (as he admits in the "Making Of" section on the Vol. 1 DVD), but he was also stepping onto NEW, yes NEW, ground, by furthering the FEMALE action flick. There are very few, if any, very well done action films with Females in the main roles (the only one I can think of by memory is La Femme Nikita). People have said that this film wasn't empowering for women or a feminist film, but that it was exploitation. I have two responses to this: 1. In the "Making Of" section of the DVD, Quentin states that this film was, as previous stated in this thread, a montage/parody of all action films, especially taking note of the exploitation films of the 70s. There were many female exploitation films of the 70s (Pam Grier, anyone?), and while these films weren't exactly trashy or sexist, they weren't exactly empowering or feminist either, but they were a step in the right direction for equal rights for women. Patrick Stewart has condemned Kill Bill by saying it "It doesn't empower women, it only empowers women to kill other women." In most action films, a Man is the protagonist, and he kills other men (and women, but mostly men). If it is perfectly ok for a Man to kill another Man in an action film, and it is not seen as degrading, then why would it not be ok for a Woman to kill another Woman in an action film, if Men and Women are equal? The female action flick wasn't exactly "new" ground, but it's a genre that isn't highly explored. Kill Bill volumes 1 & 2 are some of the finest made female action films ever. If I want to see a girl kick ass in a movie (which I do) I'm not going to rent "Charlie's Angels." I want to rent something EXCITING, with a good story, plot, and just overall a well-made film. Quentin has accomplished this. Brava!
