|
Originally posted by PixyJunket http://www.maverick.com/kill-bill/buy/flash.html |
Spoiler:
|
In the version I saw the bride had grabbed the hillbilly's tongue with her teeth, and it cut away to Buck coming back in. From Buck's POV you could see that the guy's throat was all ripped out, probably from the Bride's teeth. I'd imagine it was that which killed him.
And yes, Sophie seemed to have all but that one arm still attached when she was tossed down the hill, but The Bride could have removed... OTHER parts of her. I'll have to check the script again to see what was supposed to have been removed. |
Am I the only one who is happy with what we got, a fun movie? Too many people seemed to be worried about 1 or 2 seconds of extra gore or the appearance of fake blood.
|
Originally posted by PixyJunket Am I the only one who is happy with what we got, a fun movie? Too many people seemed to be worried about 1 or 2 seconds of extra gore or the appearance of fake blood. |
Originally posted by jough In the version I saw the bride had grabbed the hillbilly's tongue with her teeth, and it cut away to Buck coming back in. From Buck's POV you could see that the guy's throat was all ripped out, probably from the Bride's teeth. I'd imagine it was that which killed him. And yes, Sophie seemed to have all but that one arm still attached when she was tossed down the hill, but The Bride could have removed... OTHER parts of her. I'll have to check the script again to see what was supposed to have been removed. |
I think the scene w/ the bride killing senor redneck was cut on purpose - the movie is entirely playful with it's blood, that scene in particular wouldn't have been in any way, and thus wasn't in the movie.. but what do I know.
|
The cut is written in the final shooting script. So I don't think what actually happened to hillbilly boy was even filmed.
EDIT Okay, here's a piece of the earlier blue pages with the scene pretty much completely different than in the film: Quentin Tarantino wrote: INT. HALLWAY (HOSPITAL) - NIGHT Gerald paces, waiting for his turn behind the door. THEN... He hears behind the door a commotion, then Warren SCREAM LIKE A BITCH. He bangs on the closed door and says; GERALD He man, keep it down in there, I can hear your ass out here. More falsetto SCREAMS behind the door... THEN... The HEAVY THUD of a body falling. Not what he expected. INT. THE BRIDE'S ROOM - NIGHT Gerald pushes open the door to see one hellva sight. His buddy, bloody and lying motionless on the floor, and The Bride lying haphazardly on the bed, in her coma. He moves to his buddy, who's dead. Then moves to The comatose Bride... Who SUDDENLY SPRINGS TO LIFE, GRABBING him by the front of his shirt, YANKING HIM DOWN TO HER, and PLUNGING the I.V. NEEDLE in her arm DEEP INTO HIS TEMPLE, THEN TWISTING IT AROUND and AROUND, turning the right side of his brain into scrambled eggs a la The BRIDE. She tosses the now brain-dead Gerald to the floor. |
Whoa, the needle shot would've been interesting!
|
Originally posted by Numanoid Has anyone ever said that the MPAA forced Tarantino to go to B&W, as Jack seems to be indicating? I think it's pretty clear from the above that Tarantino willingly went to B&W for American audiences out of 1) Fear of the dreaded NC-17 (here's your MPAA influence) and 2) He didn't think American audiences could stomach it. Then AFTER seeing the B&W, he decided he liked that better, artistically. Which of course doesn't explain why the foreign releases are in color. Tarantino was on Kevin & Bean on KROQ in LA. He talked about Kill Bill pretty extensively. From the interview, I wouldn't even say he chose the B&W just for aesthics. He said that Asian audience are used to very bloody scenes, while American/European audiences aren't. He felt the the scene was so bloody/red that it would become distracting for Americans/Europeans -- i.e. that's all they would remember/talk about/notice about that scene. I haven't seen the movie, but he seems to be implying that there is stuff going on in the scene that he wants audience to notice/understand -- and that with all the blood/red it would distract them -- but he doesn't believe that Asians would have the same problem. As far as splitting the movie in two. Tarantino said that while he didn't come up with the idea, he embraced it. He said he was happy that Weinstein asked him to make two movies because he knew that making one would have required him to do a lot more editing in order to get it down to a reasonable time and to flow right. With 2 movies, he felt a lot less confined in what he could do. So.. either Taranitino is lying and is "working for the man." or Taratino is telling the truth and y'all need to stop your whining! |
So apparently Tarantino is saying that he has spoon-feed American audiences (and surprisingly, European viewers as well) just like the rest of Hollywood does on a regular basis. :lol:
Wooo, thank god he didn't distract me with all that colourful blood I could have seen. Good thing he didn't put too many shiny objects in the film as well, or I would have been completely confused. ;) Screw all this, I still think the B&W is a cop out but I know, its all been argued to death here enough. |
We should put out a petition for an early February re-release in full, unedited, unrated format :D Of course, I doubt any theaters here would show it, but hey it'd be pretty badass if you ask me :)
|
Originally posted by DodgingCars Tarantino was on Kevin & Bean on KROQ in LA. He talked about Kill Bill pretty extensively. From the interview, I wouldn't even say he chose the B&W just for aesthics. He said that Asian audience are used to very bloody scenes, while American/European audiences aren't. He felt the the scene was so bloody/red that it would become distracting for Americans/Europeans -- i.e. that's all they would remember/talk about/notice about that scene. I haven't seen the movie, but he seems to be implying that there is stuff going on in the scene that he wants audience to notice/understand -- and that with all the blood/red it would distract them -- but he doesn't believe that Asians would have the same problem. Just kidding, don't get your feathers ruffled. http://www.ameritech.net/users/dvdtalk/rome.gif |
Originally posted by immortal_zeus So in other words, he's saying that Asians are smarter than Americans. :D Just kidding, don't get your feathers ruffled. http://www.ameritech.net/users/dvdtalk/rome.gif |
I'd just like to say that I'm a damn good driver. Asian women, on the other hand....watch out. :p
http://www.ameritech.net/users/dvdtalk/rome.gif |
Originally posted by jough The cut is written in the final shooting script. So I don't think what actually happened to hillbilly boy was even filmed. EDIT Okay, here's a piece of the earlier blue pages with the scene pretty much completely different than in the film: |
I figured the lip-biting scene was filmed that way more for pratical reasons than for any other reason. From the brief shot of the lip-biting we see, his lip obviously had to be fake at that point. Using the cuts, they didn't have to figure out how to realisticly show a lip stretching and then being torn.
|
Originally posted by matome That's one of the few things that bothered me. Given the intensity of the door slamming, when they cut to the shot where The Bride leans over his body to peek out the hall, the guy's head looked fine, no blood or anything. Wouldn't his skull have been crushed with blood and brain matter all over??? Spoiler:
With all that said, thumbs up for this flick, hopefully we'll have even more Sonny Chiba in Vol. 2! |
Originally posted by Jay G. I figured the lip-biting scene was filmed that way more for pratical reasons than for any other reason. From the brief shot of the lip-biting we see, his lip obviously had to be fake at that point. Using the cuts, they didn't have to figure out how to realisticly show a lip stretching and then being torn. |
Forgive me if this was already covered in this voluminous thread, but wasn't the hospital orderly that arranged the "rendezvous" the same actor that played Michael Keaton's cop partner in Jackie Brown? I'm pretty certain the answer is yes. I guess that Michael was too busy to play the redneck.
|
Originally posted by Jack Straw Forgive me if this was already covered in this voluminous thread, but wasn't the hospital orderly that arranged the "rendezvous" the same actor that played Michael Keaton's cop partner in Jackie Brown? I'm pretty certain the answer is yes. I guess that Michael was too busy to play the redneck. |
More details of the Japanese cut, from the Daily Yomiuri:
Tarantino a la japonaise: Raw and bloody Naomi Tajitsu Daily Yomiuri Staff Writer Privileged audiences in Japan, you're in for a treat. Quentin Tarantino knows that we can take what he dishes out better than American or European audiences, so he's come up with an exclusive version of Kill Bill that is more vibrant and visceral than what the rest of the world is seeing. The Japan version, which will also be screened in other Asian countries, is only a minute or two longer than the American one, but according to producer Lawrence Bender, it packs a bigger punch. There are a few extra shots in different scenes, the anime sequence of O-Ren Ishii's (Lucy Liu) childhood is longer, and the entire House of Leaves scene, where the Bride (Uma Thurman) slices and dices the Crazy 88, remains in color throughout (as opposed to cutting to black and white and then back to color in the American version). In addition, the dedication in the opening credits to the late Kinji Fukasaku, the king of ultraviolence and one of Tarantino's great influences, is not included on the American version. Of course, images of dismembered corpses falling en masse into a bloody pool have more impact in color than in black and white, but while Bender admits the Japan version is more violent than the American one, he maintains that all the changes were made in the name of style and aesthetics. "Quentin just felt that stylistically, (it's what) the Japanese would want," explains the producer, who has been working with Tarantino since Reservoir Dogs. "It's just a vibrant, more aggressive feeling. It's a stronger feeling. With black and white, it gives it a different style. "By being in color, it hits you harder than in black and white," he continues. "The blood is red, as opposed to being black, you know, so it just hits you a little bit stronger in color. You see more detail in color." According to Bender, Tarantino had wanted to make a Japan version of Kill Bill from the beginning, out of respect to both the culture that inspired a considerable amount of the film's content and the land where much of the film's first installment takes place. Also, the version is a salute to the Japanese who worked on the film's crew and cast, including Shinichi "Sonny" Chiba, who plays Okinawan swordmaker Hattori Hanzo. The producer also explains that subtle differences between the violence in the two versions has a little to do with the common perception that Japanese audiences have a high tolerance for representations of violence. "People in Japan have grown up watching yakuza movies and watching more violent movies," he says. "They're not used to those kinds of movies in the United States." And then finally, the truth comes out. "Americans just can't take as much as the Japanese," Bender admits. --Naomi Tajitsu And the dedication to Kinji Fukasaku is a nice touch. |
Oh yeah, I'll be picking up the Jap. DVD asap. Give me more blood and gore, baby!
|
Originally posted by matome Oh yeah, I'll be picking up the Jap. DVD asap. Give me more blood and gore, baby! |
Ah yes, but I'm sure that QT would have never allowed the release of this alternate version if it did not equally represent his intent and vision (albeit for a different intended audience, an audience that I find my own film sensibilities closer to). Let the debate continue.... ;)
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:02 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.