Kill Bill: Volume 2

Almost literally the same as the first film. Formal expressiveness disappears and the dialogues drag on like the saliva of a drunk Mexican. I liked a few things (the characters of Master Pai Mei and the typical Tarantino dirty man Budd), but the whole is terribly annoying, stretched, fragmented, disharmonious, awkward and hopeless. Moreover, Uma Thurman seems rigid and unnatural in the kung fu scenes. Yes, I'm biased, I admit, but I really don't care for this. I understand what Tarantino is up to, I appreciate the certain grip on his aesthetic plan, but I can't do anything about the fact that the whole seems like total stupidity to me. All I really like about Kill Bill is the final duel with Bill, for which I give the second film one more star. (15.10.2005)

A star better than Vol 1. It has more good dialogues (which is where Tarantino traditionally excels), the story is told in a more interesting way (the first part is pretty straightforward, unlike the second) and there’s less action (which I don’t think it’s bad). The scene with Pai Mei, who loves to constantly fix his moustache, is hilarious. (17.06.2010)

While the first movie was just a showcase of Tarantino the director, this time the story gets a word in. Uma no longer has to strut her kung fu stuff, so she no longer looks like a paddle come to life and, most importantly, Quentin has moved closer to Sergio Leone. Which greatly benefits the movie (and Tarantino). A massive benefit! ♫ OST score: 4/5 (13.08.2006)

I rate both parts of Kill Bill highly. They are a pure pleasure for me, as they fully satisfy my cravings as a movie fan. However, I don’t like the fact that the saga as a whole is divided into two films. That’s partly because there is a spoiler at the end of the first one solely for commercial reasons, which kills the main point of the entire 200-minute saga. And also because the individual parts are stylistically incongruous. After watching the first one, I wanted the second one to have the same brisk pace and eccentric style. And when watching the second one, I longed to experience the events of the first one in the same crystal-clear Tarantino form (slower pace, intense dialogue) that the second one has. (17.05.2004)

Lawrence Bender is said to have regretted cutting even a minute of the material Tarantino shot. I don’t believe a word of it. As a seasoned businessman, he must have made the calculations that a film like Kill Bill could only make money if it was released in two parts. As it is, we have "only" two highly above-average films that would have made the best Tarantino movie by combining the wild and entertaining first part and the slowed down and sometimes too talkative second. The master once again proved that he has ideas to spare, although visually the second part is poorer than the previous one. He also proves again that he can write dialogues that are a joy to listen to, but some of them are too drawn out and some situations and characters are unnecessary (the pimp, Budd's boss and the scene with him). And Quentin also proved again that he can squeeze the best out of actors who are past the zenith of their careers, David Carradine is a class act. But alas, we could have enjoyed a brilliant piece of cinema, instead we watched two successful parts, thanks to the interference of the producers, or perhaps Quentin's overconfidence. Who knows. (23.05.2004)