Wow, that's overrated

Rating: Null/10 (6 February 2004)

I know. Every time we get a Tarantino film we get those who love it and those who don't. Those who praise it as a hallmark of cinematic stylistics, and those who think it's a pretentious piece of poop. Well, guess what, up until this film, I wasn't part of the latter group. But Mr. Tarantino went and screwed himself up. Written as a homage to the samurai films of the 60's, Kill Bill lacked substance, which was not the case in Pulp Fiction or Resevoir Dogs. This movie was totally lacking plot, and Tarantino thought he could make up for it by shoving in a feminist edge and story line, couple it with, admittedly, excellent direction (the shot set-ups and colourization were awesome) and he expects to get praise. Well he did. Tarantino went out there, continuing on his trend of rethinking the film genres. First it was gangster films (Resevoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction), and then it was blaxploitation. Why does he resurrect these dead film genres and skewer their traditions? To get attention. Once all the commentary has been said, he can go in and make it seem like he's brilliant. The guy's a great director, but he's a lousy writer. This film took a terrible, wafer-thin plot, mixed it with a storyline that most critics would be afraid to disapprove of, and threw in some great mise-en-scene. And for this, he's one of the greats? No, sorry. The greats made their own classics. They didn't pick on genres already gone by in a pointless fashion. But, he'll continue to do this, and people will continue to praise it... or not.