December 14th, 2005
|11:58 pm - [A couple of ]October[s ago], Go For The Kill|
ribsinbacon finally convinced me to watch Kill Bill: Vol.1 tonight. Yes, yes, I know, I know. It's December of 20-freakin'-05, shoulda watched it when it came out, etc., etc., etc. I would like to point out that none of you lot wanted to see it with me when it was in theaters ('cept my sister and her boyfriend, and the timing just didn't work out for us), and (as has been well-documented) I don't see first-run movies unless it's a social outing. Eventually Kill Bill left theaters and since I don't rent movies I didn't see it until tonight.
I'm not going to bother reviewing Kill Bill because you and your friends covered that ground over coffee at Denny's in the wee hours of October 10th, 2003. I will say that after hearing r3507's "it's hard to be a successful hack" speech, Quentin Tarantino fits the "hack" mold perfectly, and in the best possible sense. He borrows indiscriminately from other sources, and I've never seen him do anything original. Under other circumstances that would be a criticism, but he's competent and he's so blatant about it that he's not just making derivative works, he's making the definitive derivative works. Why sit through all of the Shaw Brothers films when you can get the "Best Of" in a slicker, more entertaining package featuring Daryl Hannah? That's Quentin Tarantino's strength.
Uh, sorry for the digression, though. That's not why I'm posting about Kill Bill. I'm posting because I was surprised to see the opening titles cite Kill Bill as Quentin Tarantino's fourth film. Um, wasn't Kill Bill like, his fifth? Fifth and a quarter?
The .25 is his contribution to the film Four Rooms, which consists of four conceptually connected short subjects, each directed by a different person. There's nothing wrong with his quarter of Four Rooms, but it is only a quarter which is why he doesn't consider it a major film (well, that and the critics dismissed it).
The other one perplexes me a little. I can totally understand why he'd want to leave My Best Friend's Birthday out of his oeuvre -- it's a very low-budget, amateur production, and almost half of the master copy was destroyed in a fire. John Q. Moviegoer has never heard of it, but Quentin Tarantino fans definitely have, and it's not like you can't download a bootleg with Bittorrent or buy one from SuperHappyFun.
The reason it's perplexing is that it's a lie. And his fans know it's a lie. And he knows that his fans know it's a lie. There is no reason to refer to Kill Bill as Op. 4 (K¹.4?) unless Tarantino is deliberately setting the record straight as to what movies he wants to be remembered for. Either that or Miramax needs to do some more research before paying someone to do their titles, but I'm betting it's the former.
Current Mood: satisfied
Current Music: Aphex Twin -- Funny Little Man
|Date:||December 15th, 2005 08:06 am (UTC)|| |
You have no idea how weird that is to see that you just saw Kill Bill, I was thinking about that moviw through out the day and just discussed it with Jim less than I hour ago. But more importantly, I've never heard of 'My Best Friend's Birthday'. I remeber thinking that 4 seemed like, the wrong number of movies for him, but that might be because I'm thinking of "From Dust till Dawn" or other films that he's in or helped make, Sin City or something. Now I need a Quinten icon!
I love the Shaun icon. Anyway, My Best Friend's Birthday has always been the legendary "lost Quentin Tarantino film." As far as I know no complete copy of it exists, but I saw a partial version once. I'll see if I can't get my hands on a copy and show it to you. IMDB says it was remade as a movie called True Romance, which QT wrote but didn't direct. That one might be worth your time.