homage is a term being grossly misunderstood

Rating: Null/10 (24 October 2003)

i find it hard to read the previous comments, being an avid fan of kung fu cinema AND QT. In my opinion, this is one of Tarantino's best outings to date; the action is flawless, the references are outstanding, and the acting fits. and that's the part that bugs me the most - people are harping on this movie because of its one-dimensional plotting and acting, because it's all action and no story. have any of you sat down to watch a 70s era kung fu (especially gordon liu films, i recommend eight diagram pole fighter or master killer)? these films are ALL ABOUT action, telling story through action, and constantly skimping on story/plot! while we laud QT for his ability to intertwine pop cult references into his movies, we criticize it when he takes it to the next level.
tarantino, in my opinion, does an incredible job of questioning the genre he's taken up: the use of campy, dated effects, when it comes to violence, allow the viewer to place it in the present. the absurdity is impossible to mistake, but at the same time, it says alot about the current state of cinema. the big questions are: why is more realistic violence rendered "more appropriate" today? secondly, why is it not alright to laugh at tarantino's blood bath, yet it's okay to stare in quiet horror at movies that portray intimately realistic violence? that's a scary division.
Kill Bill is excellent because it is what it is, and nothing more.