I was 13 when I saw Pulp Fiction and it changed the way I look at
cinema in
the best way possible. It was a film where the story and narrative
seemed
unimportant and the characters and ideas were the center of
attention. I also
liked all of his other films before Kill Bill when they came out.

Since then, my way of looking at cinema changed so although I still
admire
many things about Tarantino, I have to question how much of an artist
he is.

I saw Pulp Fiction on DVD last night and although there might be
something I
have missed because of the "DVD effect" I was convinced that he is
not
interested in form as much as he is interested in dialogue and
characters. He
is one of those directors that I have to call a genius and not an
artist. I realize
this is a matter of taste but I really won't understand anyone who
does not
enjoy Pulp Fiction. Tarantino definitely comes up with a very
original way of
looking at the world and characters around us. If there is nothing
else, there
is his humour that is so definitely unique.

Need an example for my last point?

Jules: Pigs sleep and root in shit. That's a filthy animal. I ain't
eat nothin' that
ain't got enough sense to disregard its own faeces.
Vincent: How about a dog? Dogs eat their own feces.
Jules: I don't eat dog either.
Vincent: Yeah, but do you consider a dog to be a filthy animal?
Jules: I wouldn't go so far as to call a dog filthy but they're
definitely dirty. But,
a dog's got personality. Personality goes a long way.
Vincent: Ah, so by that rationale, if a pig had a better personality,
it'd cease to
be a filthy animal. Is that true?
Jules: Well we gotta be talkin' about one charmin' motherfuckin' pig.
I mean
he'd have to be ten times more charmin' than that Arnold on Green
Acres, you
know what I'm sayin'?

This humour was definitely there in Jackie Brown and in Reservoir
Dogs.

Kill Bill seems to be very different than all the other films in that
he does not
use as much dialogue and instead has long action sequences. Tarantino
uses violence to mock our idea of violence and especially our idea of
its
representation in film and tv. When the head of that "yakuza" is cut
off and a
huge amount of blood "springs", or when the Bride says "For those of
you
lucky enough to leave with your lives, go! But leave your limbs! They
belong
to me! ", I don't get any pleasure from the violence itself but from
the fact that
the violence, or rather my idea of it, is being ridiculed.

A friend of mine, who likes Kill Bill a lot more than I do, said
about Kill Bill
"Tarantino waited, waited, waited... and exploded". I see what he
means by
explosion but I don't like it. Kill Bill is full of ideas, and
that's what is all about.
The blue screen with silhouettes fighting, the shot of the plane
almost flying
between the skyscrapers in Tokyo, or the nurse with one eye who
whistles
Herrmann's twisted nerve are all amazing. However, my problem is that
no
real emotions is really expressed in the film. And I think it becomes
obvious
when you ask yourself the quetion "What was the theme or the subject
of the
film?" Revenge seems to drive the plot but it is not expressed
cinematically in
any way, and it is even made fun of. (In one scene, Michael Madsen,
who was
in the gang who massacred the people in the Bride's wedding, says:
"She
deserves her revenge, and we all deserve to die")

I really like Andrew Sarris' article in New York Observer since he
writes how
much he admires the film in many ways and finishes his article by
saying that
Kill Bill is a "marvelous entertainment".

I recommend Kill Bill to everybody and I like to think that everyone
in this
group will "enjoy" it if they are open-minded enough. If you expect
art, you
might be deceived.

I will see it once more to give another chance. I am positive that
Tarantino's
genius is going to overwhelm me again but not all geniuses are
artists, even if
they make films.

Yoel