Subject: your kill bill volume 2 review
From: ldamo chuck [gpxproductions@yahoo.com]

your review was quite accurate.

but the word used in the movie was 'cockblockery'. Not cockfuckery. big difference. and you made it a main focus of your article. pay attention

I respond:

Oh, but "cockfuckery" is so much better, don't you think?

Subject: comment kill bill
From: bandonbeachbum Silverman [bandonbeachbum@msn.com]

Wow, your review of Kill Bill 2 was one of the worst reviews I have ever read. It sounds like you are a radical feminist and had no intention of liking the movie before you even saw it. If Roger Ebert calls it one of the best movies he has ever seen, it can not be as bad as you made it out. You should be reviewing Calendar Girls or Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen, which really stunk.

I respond:

Roger loved it? Oh well, then. Never mind my review. What can you expect from a mere girl?

Subject: murder bill
From: Maurice Depestre [maurice@creditex.com]

i wasn't going to write but this:

"The Last Chapter: Quentin's Low Opinion of Women Is Hailed as Romantic (But Not by Me)"

made me change my mind...

i do, i do love your musings and nothing in the world will ever stop me (save for a Hattori Hanzo sword shoved way up my sternum and coming out under my chin before entering my jaw and coming out from the top of my skull) from the fix i get reading your reviews.

BUT.

you hate da tarantino man m'am. What did he ever do to deserve such contempt from you?

1. i am not a critic, so i'm definitly not trying to suck up to the big T.

2. i am not american (just to say that it's not in my genes to credit american cinema as the second coming of Christ.) i have a very eclectic taste when it comes to movies and i can get as much pleasure as watching fluff like hellboy as i do savoring a delicate moment in cinema paradiso... (well, not quite as much...)

but my dear flick philosopher, give the guy some slack. He's fresh, his rythm is his own, he's creative, there's life in his stuff, there's fuel, there's movement, there's energy ... he's pedantic, yes, but at least he's honest about it.

Your review of KB2 is the first that made me think that you cultivate a clear (and very slanted) bias against the T-man, and i'm tempted to believe that you're thoroughly enjoying your position.

Please let me suggest one thing. clear up your mind, put the flick philosopher (or rather, the feminist in her) aside for a cpl of hours. forget everything you know about tarantino (though i realize that i might as well ask you to get the man-eating mares of Diomedes as an easier alternative), and go see Kill Bill again. At least try. How can you be so forgiving toward Hellboy or X-men and such a hard hearted Hera when it comes to Kill Bill?

I simply cannot understand, that, for instance, where you see him being degrading and patronizing towards women, i see a very deep admiration and the message that women are clearly more "worthy" - for lack of a better word - then men...

in any case, i just tought i'd write for the occasion: for once, i stand at the complete antipode on one of your reviews.

P.S. please forgive any mistake that may have occured in my email. English is not my first language.

I respond:

I don't hate Tarantino -- at least, I've liked his other films very much. But I do think he's trying way way way way way too hard with the *Bill* films, and with the *Bill* films, he way way way way too interested in indulging himself than in giving us a compelling story.

It's only my opinion, and I know I'm in the minority with it. But if you don't think that every critic who's praising *Bill* isn't also "biased," you're deluding yourself. It's just that their biases and yours happen to coincide on this issue.

Subject: Honest Look at Kill Bill
From: Eric Meyer [suicide_fred@hotmail.com]

I just want to thank you for honestly looking at Quentin Tarantino and the Kill Bill movies. I see too many reviewers going gaga over what is essentially a movie for him to get off on. I saw the first one, and may see the second, but I really felt the first part was rather mediocre.

If we were going by stereotypes, me the college sophomore should be a fantatic of Tarantino, and have his films all sitting on my shelf, so I can watch them daily, and quote them. As it stands, that's far from the case, and I'm glad to see that I am not the only one who isn't all impressed with Tarantino.

Subject: Kill Bill--you go
From: Kristin Landon [kplandon@comcast.net]

Your review of Kill Bill: Volume 2 is the funniest film review I have ever read, anywhere. Thank you.

Up to now I'd assumed I was merely pathetic for allowing my antediluvian dislike of misogynism and "comic" violence to keep me from witnessing the greatness that is (or so I'm told from all sides) Kill Bill. You've given me the strength to carry on. Thanks for that as well.

I respond:

I don't necessarily have a blanket objection to *all* comic violence -- it's just the package it comes in here that bothers me.

Subject: Good call on "Kill Bill" (plus a question)
From: Patrick Dodds [patlandness@hotmail.com]

Glad to see the "post-feminist" ending didn't escape your snarky attention. This is time will be seen as Tarantino's lesser works when the hype dies down. It looks like he's taken a step back after "Jackie Brown". Shame.

I was actually hoping for reviews of "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction" to go along with "Kill Bill v.2" like you did with "The Passion of the Christ", but I guess you had your fill of QT.

Prey tell, what do you think of "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction"?

I respond:

I would have loved to review *Dogs* and *Fiction* along with *KB,* but the time wasn't there. It'd be too much to go into them now -- though I can say that I generally have loved Tarantino's other films -- but maybe I'll get a chance to review them soon.

Subject: Kill Bill Volume Two
From: Thomas, Sarah Michelle [SMT1@alfred.edu]

My name is Michalina and I am a longtime reader and admirer of your site. I love your refreshingly immediate take on cinema as an experience and the excited tone you bring to your reviews. Moreover, I often find myself agreeing with you, and, on the few occasions where we have disagreed, I have respected the clear and cogent way you have presented your opinions. Nothing annoys me more than when I hear some mysogynistic troglodyte say you dislike this-or-that movie because you're a feminist.

That said, however, I have some problems with your review of Kill Bill: Volume Two. I saw your point on the first installment, though I didn't agree with it. However, the understandably bad taste the first movie left in your mouth has, I believe, unduly colored your perception of the second. Loath as I am to make the argument, I think in this case you let your politics override your critical judgement, and here's why.

Reading your reviews of both installments together, I barely got a sense of you acknowledging a shift in tone from one to the other; even if you didn't like either, I think you have to admit both films operate utilizing different atmospheres. Had I not seen Kill Bill Volume Two but just read your review, I would have imagined a sort of Kill Bill Redux, which is NOT what we see in the theater. Moreover, I had a hard time seeing what in the movie itself so turned you off. You seemed much more disgusted with Quentin Tarantino's attitude than with the actual cinematic artifact we are here presented with; aside from the comments about Michael Madsen's dialogue and the length of certain scenes, you barely referred to the film at all.

What was mentioned was your belief that Quentin Tarantino gets off on making women suffer and playing games with the audience. This is, I suppose, entirely possible. And if it is true, it is certainly deplorable. Yet it is also deplorable that someone like, say, John Woo gets off on blowing things up, or M. Night Shyamalan gets off on scaring the bejeezus out of people. Yet these bizarre fetishes have contributed to complex and arresting works of cinematic art, works which we take at face value without reading overmuch into the peccadilloes of their creators. Just because you might find Mr. Tarantino's fixations personally revolting does not mean his film should be judged as anything other than an aesthetic construct. And this kind of judgement was something that I found uncharacteristically absent from your review.

I liked Kill Bill Volume Two very much. You didn't. And that's OK; I'm not trying to change your mind. I would, however, urge you to, if you ever see it again, judge it more on its own merits and failings than on who the director is or what you assume he feels about our gender. If nothing else, perhaps it will infuriate you less.

I respond:

You say I "barely referred to the film at all," but my whole review -- from its structure to its tone -- is about the film. I always assume my readers are smart enough to pick on things like that, and that I don't have to spell everything out.

You may think that there's a moral equivalency in torturing women, blowing up inanimate objects, and scaring the audience. I don't. And yet, I can concede that perhaps there is a "complex and arresting work of cinematic art" to be created from a fetish for torturing women -- I just don't think it's *Kill Bill Volume 2.*

Why do you assume that I have judged the film any less on "its own merits and failings" than you have? Biases work to make us like things as much as they work to make us dislike them.

Subject: Kill Bill Vol. 2
From: Jonah Falcon [jonahnynla@mindspring.com]

I'm sure his attitudes on women MAY just be that he's a butt-ugly high school dropout video clerk.

I respond:

Heh. I'm sure he's got no trouble getting laid now that he's rich and famous, though maybe there's some residual contempt left over from before he was rich and famous.

The reader responds:

That's my point - I'm sure he knows that if he wasn't rich and a producer/director, women wouldn't touch him with someone ELSE'S ten-foot pole.

Subject: kill bill review
From: Lrob72566@aol.com

your review sucks.carradine was aewsome and will be nominated for an oscar.go fuck yourself you fucking dike!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I respond:

You can see into the future all the way to next February? That's so cool! Can you tell me what next week's Lotto numbers will be?

Oh, and I'm not a dike. I've never, in fact, had anything to do with controlling or redirecting the course of water.

The reader responds:

and you think carradine wasnt good in this movie?.he was the definition of cool.sure hes old but this is the best thing he has ever been in.

I respond:

I think my position on Carradine's performance is perfectly clear in my review.

The reader responds:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/click/movie-1131502/reviews.php?critic=columns&sortby=default&page=1&rid=1272284

I respond:

So?

Subject: Kill Bill
From: Mason, Ian [ian-mason@augustana.edu]

First off, I'd like to say I really enjoy your site and really admire, often times agree, with your critical appraisals. It is clear you are someone who loves movies. Thats why I was so disappointed by your reviews of Kill Bill volumes 1 and 2. It seems like you went in with preconceived notions about film and were ready to completely tear it apart before you even saw it. Meanwhile Thomas Jane's abysmal The Punisher made your hot list. Tarantino is a guy who loves film and that passion is indicated by the sheer audacity and verve with which he makes his movies. Just like Star Wars was a love letter by George Lucas to B serials, this is Tarantino's tribute to kung fu films and westerns. It's a tribute to the sheer joy of movies that are not merely confined to being good or bad, but penetrate the soul. I'll admit the movie may not be on par with Citizen Kane or the Godfather, as some might argue, but its undeniably infectious in its style. Tarantino isn't condescending to us as audience viewers, but rather inviting us along on his journey.

I respond:

Of course I went into *Kill Bill* with preconceived notions -- I go into *every* film with preconceived notions, and so do you. So does everyone. Sometimes that notions are confirmed -- sometimes they aren't. My preconceived notion about *KBV1* was that I would love it, because I've loved Tarantino's other films. That notion was not confirmed, and I can tell you for a fact that *KB* certainly *is not* "undeniably infectious" -- that the film is "infectious" is your opinion, and perfectly valid as such, but "undeniability" of it requires only one person to say "Hey, I don't find it infectious" (and I'm certainly not the only one to do so) for it to be, well, denied.

What, pray tell, is my "hot list," and where is *The Punisher* on it? I haven't even put the film in my 2004 ranking yet.

The reader responds:

Sorry I meant your bias meter when I said hot list. Chalk it up to an oversight on my part. And I didn't intend to offend you, I just wanted to understand why you hated the film so vehemently. I could understand not liking it, but you put it second from the bottom on your 2004 list. Your review did not list one redeeming factor or positive aspect of the movie. Usually when I dislike a movie, I at least find one or two valid aspects of it. People don't set out to make bad films and its unfortunate when you don't like a film. I wasn't trying to say your opinion was wrong because it is all subjective. I suppose infectious was a poor adjective. What I meant by infectious is a quality you can apply to movies I love like Lost in Translation. I meant the style of the film is done in a manner that polarizes the audience. I did not mean everyone will love it, as many friends of mine hated Lost in Translation. What I was trying to say is I didn't understand why you hated the film so much. I find when I dislike a film there isn't much I can say about it, but when I love a film I can write pages upon pages about it. You strike me as a person who passionately loves film so I was curious why you were admant in your disection of kill bill. Are you offended that other critics like it. Or is it more disappointment with Tarantino. Sorry again.

I respond:

You're right: No one sets out to make a bad movie (except the people who made *The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra*, and so I highly recommend it). But the reason I really, really, really hate the *Bill* movies is because they reek of Tarantino's belief that he's a genius who's made a film for the ages.

I'm not offended that other critics like the film. I'm offended by this: I suspect many of those critics praising the film would not be doing so if it weren't Tarantino's. I suspect they're giving him a pass because *their* preconceived notions are that Tarantino is a genius and so everything he does must automatically be genius. I'm offended because I think other critics aren't being as honest as they should be. Maybe I'm wrong -- maybe they all honestly do love the film. But the reverential tone of many of the reviews suggests to me that something else is going on.

Oh, and yes, *The Punisher* was in the "I'm psyched" slot on my Bias Meter. That's hardly an endorsement, merely an expression of my preconceived notions and hopes for a film.

Subject: Your "Kill Bill Vol 2" review
From: Cathryn Veritas [askewnislasher@yahoo.com]

Oh, if only I'd gotten to your website before I went to the theatre yesterday. I'd have saved myself ten bucks, two hours, and an awful lot of "Can something happen now, please?"s.

Although at least it added an extra dimension of amusement and satisfaction to reading your review. It was also reassuring to see that I'm not the only one who may have watched "Back to the Future" once or twice too often. (By the way, wouldn't that make the best meta-crossover ever? Let's hop into the Delorean, go pick up the Bride - or Beatrix, whatever - and then head back in time so that she can have a little "chat" with Tarantino about the things that can happen to a filmmaker who gets too, ahem, self-indulgent.)

So, as always, thanks for the laughs. =)

I respond:

Glad I could make the experience a little more tolerable. :->

06.09.04

newer mail | to batch #2