{"id":198,"date":"2003-10-22T21:26:31","date_gmt":"2003-10-23T01:26:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/?p=198"},"modified":"2003-10-22T21:26:31","modified_gmt":"2003-10-23T01:26:31","slug":"kill-bill-volume-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/?p=198","title":{"rendered":"Kill Bill, Volume 1"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><em>Kill Bill<\/em> is gorgeous and ice-cold. Pure formalism. Where Tarantino&#8217;s earlier films were filled with humanity, with unforgettable characters and genius dialog, <em>Kill Bill<\/em> reduces these to an absolute minimum. Nothing is allowed to interfere with the pure kinetic beauty of the fight scenes. That is to say, <em>Kill Bill<\/em> is to <em>Pulp Fiction<\/em> as Kubrick is to Howard Hawks. In fairness, <em>Kill Bill<\/em> never feels anal or constipated the way all of Kubrick&#8217;s films do. Nor is Tarantino doggedly repetitive, the way Kubrick insists on being.<br \/>\nAll the set-ups, all the elements of cinematic form in <em>Kill Bill<\/em> are fantastic: the decors, the camera angles, the editing of the fight scenes are so brilliant that they reveal in comparison how lame and unimaginative nearly all other English-language action cinema is. Even <em>Lord of the Rings<\/em>, powerful and lyrical as it is in bringing to life its (admittedly) dubious source material, can&#8217;t hold a candle to <em>Kill Bill<\/em> in terms of sheer visual inventiveness.<br \/>\nAs for the citations and allusions: I got the sense that nearly everything in the film was sampled from one or another obscure samurai or martial arts film that I don&#8217;t remember or (more likely) haven&#8217;t seen. The effect was like the best hip hop: the film is rich in its web of references, and this works even if you don&#8217;t know what the references are to.<br \/>\nBut <em>Kill Bill<\/em>&#8216;s formal mastery and meta-cinematic referentiality comes at a price. Near the very start of the film we read the title: &#8220;Revenge is always best served cold&#8221; (which Tarantino, with characteristic cinephile in-joke wit, tags as an &#8220;old Klingon proverb&#8221;). And this story of Uma Thurman&#8217;s revenge is indeed served cold. The film is so utterly devoid of emotion it feels reptilian. (Perhaps I am slandering reptiles?). The fight scenes are awe-inspiring, but they have absolutely none of the sense of fun that makes Tarantino&#8217;s models, the Hong Kong fight scenes, so exhilarating. Nor is there any of the sense of fatality that imbues Leone&#8217;s (and others&#8217;) spaghetti Westerns, another obvious source of Tarantino&#8217;s iconography.<br \/>\nEven Tarantino&#8217;s racial obsessions are cut to the bare minimum. Uma Thurman gets the people of color out of the way in Volume One, killing Vivica Fox and Lucy Liu; in Volume 2, to be released next year, she will get to go after the white villains, Daryl Hannah, Michael Madsen, and David Carradine (unless Carradine is a fake Asian, as he was in the frequently-Tarantino-referenced <em>Kung Fu<\/em>).<br \/>\nSo Tarantino has proved that he is as brilliant a visual director as he is a writer\/director; but at what cost?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p><em>Kill Bill<\/em> is gorgeous and ice-cold. Pure formalism. Where Tarantino&#8217;s earlier films were filled with humanity, with unforgettable characters and genius dialog, <em>Kill Bill<\/em> reduces these to an absolute minimum. Nothing is allowed to interfere with the pure kinetic beauty of the fight scenes. That is to say, <em>Kill Bill<\/em> is to <em>Pulp Fiction<\/em> as Kubrick is to Howard Hawks. In fairness, <em>Kill Bill<\/em> never feels anal or constipated the way all of Kubrick&#8217;s films do. Nor is Tarantino doggedly repetitive, the way Kubrick insists on being.<br \/>\nAll the set-ups, all the elements of cinematic form in <em>Kill Bill<\/em> are fantastic: the decors, the camera angles, the editing of the fight scenes are so brilliant that they reveal in comparison how lame and unimaginative nearly all other English-language action cinema is. Even <em>Lord of the Rings<\/em>, powerful and lyrical as it is in bringing to life its (admittedly) dubious source material, can&#8217;t hold a candle to <em>Kill Bill<\/em> in terms of sheer visual inventiveness.<br \/>\nBut <em>Kill Bill<\/em>&#8216;s formal mastery comes at a price. Near the very start of the film we read the title: &#8220;Revenge is always best served cold&#8221; (which Tarantino, with characteristic cinephile in-joke wit, tags as an &#8220;old Klingon proverb&#8221;). And this story of Uma Thurman&#8217;s revenge is indeed served cold. The film is so utterly devoid of emotion it feels reptilian. (Perhaps I am slandering reptiles?). The fight scenes are awe-inspiring, but they have absolutely none of the sense of fun that makes Tarantino&#8217;s models, the Hong Kong fight scenes, so exhilarating. Nor is there any of the sense of fatality that imbues Leone&#8217;s (and others&#8217;) spaghetti Westerns, another obvious source of Tarantino&#8217;s iconography.<br \/>\nEven Tarantino&#8217;s racial obsessions are cut to the bare minimum. Uma Thurman gets the people of color out of the way in Volume One, killing Vivica Fox and Lucy Liu; in Volume 2, to be released next year, she will get to go after the white villains, Daryl Hannah, Michael Madsen, and David Carradine (unless Carradine is a fake Asian, as he was in the frequently-Tarantino-referenced <em>Kung Fu<\/em>).<br \/>\nSo Tarantino has proved that he is as brilliant a visual director as he is a writer\/director; but at what cost?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-198","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-film"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/198","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=198"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/198\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=198"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=198"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shaviro.com\/Blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=198"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}