Kill Bill 2-Regarding the attack on Budd
PAVELB1
People nitting over Uma's attack on Budd are missing out on the
natural progression of each attack.
She calls out O-Ren and that just gives O-ren time to muster her
forces, so that didn't work.
She knocks on Vivica's door, giving Vivica a couple of seconds to
recognize her, this leads to a dragout fight.
She busts down Budds door, instead of knocking and gets shot.
She busts down Bill's door, but with a gun drawn this time.
Natural progression.
W Long
Peace,
Wyndell
--------
Music producer, songwriter, remixer,writer, & movie freak.
- for film talk__art_mp3's_
dj mixes_MIDI prod_ beats 4 sale
Chicago hip hop / house / techno:
visit: http://www.wyndelllong.com/
PAVELB1
>>
>>
>>People nitting over Uma's attack on Budd are missing out on the
>>natural progression of each attack.
>>
>>She calls out O-Ren and that just gives O-ren time to muster her
>>forces, so that didn't work.
>>
>>She knocks on Vivica's door, giving Vivica a couple of seconds to
>>recognize her, this leads to a dragout fight.
>>
>>She busts down Budds door, instead of knocking and gets shot.
>>
>>She busts down Bill's door, but with a gun drawn this time.
>>
>>Natural progression.
>>
>Still dum, even for a fictional character.
>
>
>
I will bet, and answer honestly, that you thought Independence Day was
stupid because a computer virus could never be introduced to an alien
system like that.
and you didn't like Signs because you thought the water thing was
stupid, and why didn't the aliens just use death rays or something.
?
trotsky
Oh, this reminds me of another lame bit of plotting in the film: Bud
has the ability to realize he's about to be attacked by Uma, but in all
their history together he didn't have an inkling that Daryl Hannah's
character would try to kill him?
Robert Matthews
wrote:
There's no getting around it; the whole second movie is one big
plot loophole.
I was willing to cut the first one a lot of slack because was
obviously not meant to be realistic. The Bride gets on an airplane with
a Samurai sword? Why not? She steals the most garishly unmissable car in
the world from a man she's just killed and the police don't pick her up
within minutes? Sure, no problem.
But the second movie is full of people acting the way they do not
because it's how people would act but because it's what was in the
script. The whole Budd and Elle sequence was the perfect example. Why
did Budd take the money out of the bag, exposing the snake? It's not as
if he was going to give the bag back to Elle--if she can afford a
million bucks for a sword she can afford to give him a piece of cheap
luggage. In the real world he would have taken out one of the bundles of
money, obviously, to luxuriate in it; but the only reason he started
emptying the bag was *in order to expose the snake*. Which, as you've
noted, he should have expected anyway--any normal person, anyone who
isn't bound by a ridiculous script, would assume that she'd try to get
the money back from him and take steps to protect himself from her. (And
if I'd been her I wouldn't have taken a sip from the drink, either,
because why wouldn't he try to kill her and likewise get the money and
the sword?)
Bad script. Bad, bad script.
Robert Matthews
Gregg Cattanach
> But the second movie is full of people acting the way they do not
> because it's how people would act but because it's what was in the
> script. The whole Budd and Elle sequence was the perfect example. Why
> did Budd take the money out of the bag, exposing the snake? It's not
> as if he was going to give the bag back to Elle--if she can afford a
> million bucks for a sword she can afford to give him a piece of cheap
> luggage. In the real world he would have taken out one of the bundles
> of money, obviously, to luxuriate in it; but the only reason he
> started emptying the bag was *in order to expose the snake*. Which,
> as you've noted, he should have expected anyway--any normal person,
> anyone who isn't bound by a ridiculous script, would assume that
> she'd try to get the money back from him and take steps to protect
> himself from her. (And if I'd been her I wouldn't have taken a sip
> from the drink, either, because why wouldn't he try to kill her and
> likewise get the money and the sword?)
>
> Bad script. Bad, bad script.
>
> Robert Matthews
Because *EVERYONE* knows that in a bag full of money there is *ALWAYS* a
deadly snake hiding in the 100s.
HUH?
PAVELB1
If you can't figure THAT out, you have no business seeing the movie.
Even I didn't think she would have the guts to do it.
Jordan Lund
> and you didn't like Signs because you thought the water thing was
> stupid, and why didn't the aliens just use death rays or something.
I thought Signs was stupid because water was lethal to the aliens so
they decide to invade a water based world without any kind of
protection. But I didn't mind her busting down the door at Budd's.
Although I kind of half expected her to just stab him through the
trailer wall... :^)
- Jordan
Robert Matthews
"Gregg Cattanach" <gcattana...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> Robert Matthews wrote:
> > But the second movie is full of people acting the way they do not
> > because it's how people would act but because it's what was in the
> > script. The whole Budd and Elle sequence was the perfect example. Why
> > did Budd take the money out of the bag, exposing the snake? It's not
> > as if he was going to give the bag back to Elle--if she can afford a
> > million bucks for a sword she can afford to give him a piece of cheap
> > luggage. In the real world he would have taken out one of the bundles
> > of money, obviously, to luxuriate in it; but the only reason he
> > started emptying the bag was *in order to expose the snake*. Which,
> > as you've noted, he should have expected anyway--any normal person,
> > anyone who isn't bound by a ridiculous script, would assume that
> > she'd try to get the money back from him and take steps to protect
> > himself from her. (And if I'd been her I wouldn't have taken a sip
> > from the drink, either, because why wouldn't he try to kill her and
> > likewise get the money and the sword?)
> >
> > Bad script. Bad, bad script.
>
> Because *EVERYONE* knows that in a bag full of money there is *ALWAYS* a
> deadly snake hiding in the 100s.
>
> HUH?
Oh, try to read between the lines. Do I have to spell everything
out?
No, he needn't have expected that there'd be a snake (although it
was a pretty easy guess, since all the assassins were nicknamed after
deadly snakes), but he certainly should have anticipated that she'd do
something to try to kill him and take back her money. He wasn't remotely
careful around a woman he knew he couldn't trust, with a hugely valuable
object and a bagful of money, and how stupid is that? They both acted
like idiots, which is to say they acted not like recognizable human
beings but like actors in a bad movie.
Robert Matthews
trotsky
Finally, the voice of reason. It's hard to believe Quentin didn't have
enough time to work out the details, since he claimed that he and Uma
came up with the idea sometime around "Pulp Fiction".
PAVELB1
wrote:
It wasn't water they were vulnerable to, it was the impurities in the
water...remember Mel's daughter said the water was 'bad'.
It's unlikely they were vulnerable to plain old h20, as they appeaered
to be water based creatures as opposed to Mercury or Barium.
trotsky
Except Bud.
WHAT?
trotsky
Now you're just a liar. Tell me, in no uncertain terms, what you
"figured out." Take as much time as you need.
trotsky
How did he know she was a woman he couldn't trust?
H
attempts to knock the film hold no water. These movies are not menat to be
realistic. You must hate James Bond films as well.
.H.
Robert Matthews <pyr...@ns.deleteme.sympatico.nospam.ca> wrote in message
news:0faab98ebcf803c0...@news.teranews.com...
H
.H.
W Long <wynde...@aol.comDobre> wrote in message
news:20040427030941...@mb-m01.aol.com...
Jordan Lund
> Why did Budd take the money out of the bag, exposing the snake?
He was making sure she wasn't cheating him by putting, say, $10,000
worth of hundreds on top of a bunch of newspaper. Happens in movies
like this all the time.
- Jordan
EA
"trotsky" <gms...@email.com> wrote in message
news:408EB5D7...@email.com...
I would imagine he figured that since she was so tight with his brother
that she wouldnt try to pull any shit on Budd cuz Bill would probably
then kill her... this just from the POV of budd.
Tweek
: >>has the ability to realize he's about to be attacked by Uma, but in all
: >>their history together he didn't have an inkling that Daryl Hannah's
: >>character would try to kill him?
: >
: >
: > If you can't figure THAT out,
:
:
: Now you're just a liar. Tell me, in no uncertain terms, what you
: "figured out." Take as much time as you need.
Budd was Bill's brother. I assumed, like most people who had been paying
attention would, that since Elle Driver was a consort of Bill's, she
wouldn't kill his brother. Budd probably made the same assumption.
Try paying attention at the movies.
PAVELB1
Everyone in the film underestimates Elle's capability for treachery.
Notice Madsen is playing Budd without the slightest hint of distrust
towards Elle. HAD he shown any distrust, then everyones screaming at
the screen, "The suitcase you fool!! Check the suitcase! Be careful!"
would have been more justified.
frater mus
> Because *EVERYONE* knows that in a bag full of money there is *ALWAYS* a
> deadly snake hiding in the 100s.
My wife predicted a snake; I was bettting on a scorpion.
fm,
who has seen too many Dr. Phibes movies.
--
L.V.X., brother mouse
http://www.mousetrap.net/otr/ Old Time Radio trades
http://makeashorterlink.com/?K16312E06 CBS Radio Mystery Theater database
http://greyhound.mousetrap.net/altus/ retired racing dog
Jay G
>
> Finally, the voice of reason. It's hard to believe Quentin didn't
> have enough time to work out the details, since he claimed that he
> and Uma came up with the idea sometime around "Pulp Fiction".
He got the idea back then. He didn't seriously work on the
script until years later, some point after Jackie Brown.
-Jay
trotsky
PAVELB1 wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 17:22:06 -0400, "Tweek" <no...@jose.com> wrote:
>
>
>>: >>Oh, this reminds me of another lame bit of plotting in the film: Bud
>>: >>has the ability to realize he's about to be attacked by Uma, but in all
>>: >>their history together he didn't have an inkling that Daryl Hannah's
>>: >>character would try to kill him?
>>: >
>>: >
>>: > If you can't figure THAT out,
>>:
>>:
>>: Now you're just a liar. Tell me, in no uncertain terms, what you
>>: "figured out." Take as much time as you need.
>>
>>Budd was Bill's brother. I assumed, like most people who had been paying
>>attention would, that since Elle Driver was a consort of Bill's, she
>>wouldn't kill his brother. Budd probably made the same assumption.
>>
>>Try paying attention at the movies.
>>
>
>
> Everyone in the film underestimates Elle's capability for treachery.
Including the screenwriter, apparently. 8 million year her treachery
rash breaks out. Personally, I think she should've been named after a
17 year locust.
> Notice Madsen is playing Budd without the slightest hint of distrust
> towards Elle. HAD he shown any distrust, then everyones screaming at
> the screen, "The suitcase you fool!! Check the suitcase! Be careful!"
> would have been more justified.
I see what you mean. You have to figure Elle wanted to kill Budd (I'm
surprised Quentin didn't make this into another four and a half hours
worth of movies!) for like, twenty years, then waited till they killed
Kiddo's wedding party as comrades in arms, then waited another four
years for her to come out of her coma, then waited for Hanzo to finish
beating off and make her sword, and then she waited for some
indeterminate amount of time for Kiddo to kill the other two bitches,
and then, when she found out that Budd supposedly saved her ass by
burying Kiddo alive, she decides to kill him as his reward. Hell, when
you put it that way, it makes perfect sense. I guess the only other
question is how long she had the snake.
trotsky
Now this is just sad. Now we have two people in a row that are too
fucking stupid to be believed. Here, check this out, Tweek, you generic
anonymous shithead (oh, and please don't complain I'm using Tarantino
like language discussing Tarantino): if Budd didn't have an inkling that
she would kill him because she was a consort of Bill's THEN WHY DID SHE
KILL THE FUCKING GUY YOU STUPID SHIT? DID BILL THE SUPER HEINOUS
ASSASSIN LEADER JUST TURN OUT TO BE A GUY THAT THE CHICKS DIDN'T GIVE A
SHIT ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE, BECAUSE HE WAS A PUSHOVER AND PANTYWAIST
AND EASY TO KILL?
I swear to Christ, ever since Dubya has been in office, the fucking I.Q.
in this country has been cut in half. That's why the movie is popular.
trotsky
I happen to agree with you, but that "could" and not "couldn't".
EA
Yeah I know, I was agreeing with you... yeah i just replied to the wrong
one.
EA
>
>
> Tweek wrote:
> > : >>Oh, this reminds me of another lame bit of plotting in the film:
Bud
> > : >>has the ability to realize he's about to be attacked by Uma, but in
all
> > : >>their history together he didn't have an inkling that Daryl Hannah's
> > : >>character would try to kill him?
> > : >
> > : >
> > : > If you can't figure THAT out,
> > :
> > :
> > : Now you're just a liar. Tell me, in no uncertain terms, what you
> > : "figured out." Take as much time as you need.
> >
> > Budd was Bill's brother. I assumed, like most people who had been paying
> > attention would, that since Elle Driver was a consort of Bill's, she
> > wouldn't kill his brother. Budd probably made the same assumption.
> >
> > Try paying attention at the movies.
>
>
> Now this is just sad. Now we have two people in a row that are too
> fucking stupid to be believed. Here, check this out, Tweek, you generic
> anonymous shithead (oh, and please don't complain I'm using Tarantino
> like language discussing Tarantino): if Budd didn't have an inkling that
> she would kill him because she was a consort of Bill's THEN WHY DID SHE
> KILL THE FUCKING GUY YOU STUPID SHIT? DID BILL THE SUPER HEINOUS
> ASSASSIN LEADER JUST TURN OUT TO BE A GUY THAT THE CHICKS DIDN'T GIVE A
> SHIT ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE, BECAUSE HE WAS A PUSHOVER AND PANTYWAIST
> AND EASY TO KILL?
She called Bill and told him she was dead and that B.M. had put a B.M. in
his trailer.
If she has to lie that means she is afraid of what he would do to her if he
knew the
truth.
The question for her at thepoint before she decided she would kill him was,
whether or
not he would have called Bill himself to tell him, therefore blowing her
cover story.
PAVELB1
>
>Now this is just sad. Now we have two people in a row that are too
>fucking stupid to be believed. Here, check this out, Tweek, you generic
>anonymous shithead (oh, and please don't complain I'm using Tarantino
>like language discussing Tarantino): if Budd didn't have an inkling that
>she would kill him because she was a consort of Bill's THEN WHY DID SHE
>KILL THE FUCKING GUY YOU STUPID SHIT? DID BILL THE SUPER HEINOUS
>ASSASSIN LEADER JUST TURN OUT TO BE A GUY THAT THE CHICKS DIDN'T GIVE A
>SHIT ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE, BECAUSE HE WAS A PUSHOVER AND PANTYWAIST
>AND EASY TO KILL?
>
>I swear to Christ, ever since Dubya has been in office, the fucking I.Q.
>in this country has been cut in half. That's why the movie is popular.
>
I can tell that by your post. what is your natural language anyway?
Cause, it's not English.
She explained to Budd and the audience why she killed him you fat
dumbfuck.
>DID BILL THE SUPER HEINOUS
>>ASSASSIN LEADER JUST TURN OUT TO BE A GUY THAT THE CHICKS DIDN'T GIVE A
>>SHIT ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE, BECAUSE HE WAS A PUSHOVER AND PANTYWAIST
>>AND EASY TO KILL?
What? Bill's not at the top of his game any more. Hence Elle's comment
"Just go smoke some pot honey, I'll be right home".
You're right, people's IQ's have been split in half. I have to hold
you by your fucking Kentucky Fried Chicken greasy ass hand and explain
the whole Goddamn movie.
If you don't understand, then fine. But don't start crying when we
explain it to you. Hard to believe a fucking QT movie is 'too deep'
for people to get.
W Long
>On 27 Apr 2004 07:09:41 GMT, wynde...@aol.comDobre (W Long) wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>People nitting over Uma's attack on Budd are missing out on the
>>>natural progression of each attack.
>>>
>>>She calls out O-Ren and that just gives O-ren time to muster her
>>>forces, so that didn't work.
>>>
>>>She knocks on Vivica's door, giving Vivica a couple of seconds to
>>>recognize her, this leads to a dragout fight.
>>>
>>>She busts down Budds door, instead of knocking and gets shot.
>>>
>>>She busts down Bill's door, but with a gun drawn this time.
>>>
>>>Natural progression.
>>>
>>Still dum, even for a fictional character.
>>
>>
>>
>
>stupid because a computer virus could never be introduced to an alien
>system like that.
I enjoyed Id4, own the dvd.
>
>and you didn't like Signs because you thought the water thing was
>stupid, and why didn't the aliens just use death rays or something.
>
>?
I didn't like signs because it was a boring movie and it didn't have enough Sci
for my Fi.
PAVELB1
>>
>>I will bet, and answer honestly, that you thought Independence Day was
>>stupid because a computer virus could never be introduced to an alien
>>system like that.
>
>I enjoyed Id4, own the dvd.
>
>>
>>and you didn't like Signs because you thought the water thing was
>>stupid, and why didn't the aliens just use death rays or something.
>>
>>?
>
>I didn't like signs because it was a boring movie and it didn't have enough Sci
>for my Fi.
>
>
>Peace,
>
>Wyndell
>
Well...that's why i'm not a good better.
trotsky
Whatever, jayg. He had plenty of time to write something coherent.
trotsky
I'm not sure I'm following your antecedents: the first "she" was Elle
and the second "she" was Kiddo?
> If she has to lie that means she is afraid of what he would do to her if he
> knew the
> truth.
Agreed.
> The question for her at thepoint before she decided she would kill him was,
> whether or
> not he would have called Bill himself to tell him, therefore blowing her
> cover story.
That seems logical too. It still strikes me as odd that they had this
history together as a "legendary band of assassins" and she would
suddenly kill him. Was there something in the dialogue that made it
clear that she hated him, or was it that she simply didn't want to give
him the money? Also, although the back story was never made clear (even
though he had four and a half hours to do so) it seemed Daryl Hannah's
character had a predilection towards poisoning people, so wouldn't Bill
know something was up?
trotsky
Another Quentin apologist. What were the movie's flaws, Pavly?
EA
yes considering 1.) elle cant call bill to tell him elle is dead and B.) as
far as
we know only one "she" was "dead" in the scene under discussion and as the
subject of the phonecall. yeah yeah overuse of pronoun... anyway...
>
>
> > If she has to lie that means she is afraid of what he would do to her if
he
> > knew the
> > truth.
>
>
> Agreed.
>
>
> > The question for her at thepoint before she decided she would kill him
was,
> > whether or
> > not he would have called Bill himself to tell him, therefore blowing her
> > cover story.
>
>
> That seems logical too. It still strikes me as odd that they had this
> history together as a "legendary band of assassins" and she would
> suddenly kill him. Was there something in the dialogue that made it
> clear that she hated him, or was it that she simply didn't want to give
> him the money?
Elle's stated motive was that she was pissed that a no-good bushwhackin
lowlife like Budd killed the greatest warrior she ever knew etc etc
Would Elle have killed Budd regardless? I dont know... maybe she thought
she was in her own movie: Kill Budd.
> Also, although the back story was never made clear (even
> though he had four and a half hours to do so) it seemed Daryl Hannah's
> character had a predilection towards poisoning people, so wouldn't Bill
> know something was up?
Well, did Bill know that Elle killed Pai Mei (or as I like to cal him, Pay
Me)?
>
>
Jay G
It was coherent, or were you actually confused by the plot at any
point? If you think the script was bad, fine. However, your
timeframe was off. As to what constitutes "plenty of time," it
can take as little as a few days or as many as several years to
write a screenplay, depending on the writer and the story.
Even with a finished draft though, most scripts get altered during
filming, as this one was as well.
-Jay
WareWolf
I got the impression that Budd was always the weakest link in the group. He's the
only one who felt any real remorse at what was done to Kiddo, for example. (I don't
know if Bill's attitude could properly be called remorse.) We never see Budd show
off any real fighting chops, either. He was, as Elle described him, a bushwhacker.
If it hadn't been for being Bill's brother, Budd probably would have been, at best
a garden-variety hit man, and would not even have been considered for the DVAS. Thus
Kiddo's underestimation of him, and thus Elle's contempt which finally boiled over
when she thought he'd killed Kiddo, whom she did respect. Plus, he was selling one
of the priceless mystical Hanzo swords, which may also have lowered him in Elle's
eyes.
Of course, after killing Budd, she'd most likely have to kill Bill herself, which
may explain the "smoke some pot, I'll be home soon" line. She figured that now that
she was going to have Hanzo's greatest sword, she might be able to take Bill out
and become the new #1 assassin.
One truly evil bitch. I think I'm in love.
Dusty
--
"We should not march into Baghdad. To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our
coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a
latter-day Arab hero. Assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely
entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an unwinable urban
guerilla war, it could only plunge that part of the world into ever greater
instability."
George H. W. Bush in his 1998 book "A World Transformed"
trotsky
EA wrote:
> "trotsky" <gms...@email.com> wrote in message
> news:408FAE5B...@email.com...
>
>>
>>EA wrote:
>>>She called Bill and told him she was dead and that B.M. had put a B.M.
>>
> in
>
>>>his trailer.
>>
>>
>>I'm not sure I'm following your antecedents: the first "she" was Elle
>>and the second "she" was Kiddo?
>
>
> yes considering 1.) elle cant call bill to tell him elle is dead and B.) as
> far as
> we know only one "she" was "dead" in the scene under discussion and as the
> subject of the phonecall. yeah yeah overuse of pronoun... anyway...
I was just tryin' to make sure we were on the same page.
>>>If she has to lie that means she is afraid of what he would do to her if
>>
> he
>
>>>knew the
>>>truth.
>>
>>
>>Agreed.
>>
>>
>>
>>>The question for her at thepoint before she decided she would kill him
>>
> was,
>
>>>whether or
>>>not he would have called Bill himself to tell him, therefore blowing her
>>>cover story.
>>
>>
>>That seems logical too. It still strikes me as odd that they had this
>>history together as a "legendary band of assassins" and she would
>>suddenly kill him. Was there something in the dialogue that made it
>>clear that she hated him, or was it that she simply didn't want to give
>>him the money?
>
>
> Elle's stated motive was that she was pissed that a no-good bushwhackin
> lowlife like Budd killed the greatest warrior she ever knew etc etc
> Would Elle have killed Budd regardless? I dont know... maybe she thought
> she was in her own movie: Kill Budd.
Again, I would wonder why it took her this long to put Budd in his
place. In fact, with that stable of hot chicks to pick from, what
history did Budd have with them? None? Besides that, nothing really
showed Budd as that much of a lowlife, so basically, it was one of those
"Here's the plot I contrived, never mind the backstory." It's just not
good writing.
>>Also, although the back story was never made clear (even
>>though he had four and a half hours to do so) it seemed Daryl Hannah's
>>character had a predilection towards poisoning people, so wouldn't Bill
>>know something was up?
>
>
> Well, did Bill know that Elle killed Pai Mei (or as I like to cal him, Pay
> Me)?
Not that I know of. The only person that was told was Kiddo. BTW, did
Quentin bleep out the name so people wouldn't complain how stupid it was
until after they already paid for the second movie?
trotsky
Jay G wrote:
> trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
>>Jay G wrote:
>>
>>>trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Finally, the voice of reason. It's hard to believe Quentin didn't
>>>>have enough time to work out the details, since he claimed that he
>>>>and Uma came up with the idea sometime around "Pulp Fiction".
>>>
>>>He got the idea back then. He didn't seriously work on the
>>>script until years later, some point after Jackie Brown.
>>
>>Whatever, jayg. He had plenty of time to write something coherent.
>
>
> It was coherent, or were you actually confused by the plot at any
> point? If you think the script was bad, fine.
Fine. I do.
However, your
> timeframe was off.
I was just messin' with the timeline to be more like Quentin. This
whole thing reminds me of a Mad TV sketch about two guys that were
obsessed with being as much like Craig Kilborn as possible.
As to what constitutes "plenty of time," it
> can take as little as a few days or as many as several years to
> write a screenplay, depending on the writer and the story.
> Even with a finished draft though, most scripts get altered during
> filming, as this one was as well.
For the quadrillionth time, you're being a Quentin apologist. Was the
script flawless to you, jayg? What were its flaws?
EA
Well, in her opinion he was a lowlife, and I think the way the movie
portrayed
him was meant to indicate this. It seems also like the charachter just did
not
care about much of anything. He refuses help which shows he is not as
protective
of his own life as most people are or you can look at it as: he faces her
alone, bravely.
But, he does use the gun which is pretty cheap, then again he didnt know
that 'trix didnt have one.
(and she should have known he did have one.)
>
>
> >>Also, although the back story was never made clear (even
> >>though he had four and a half hours to do so) it seemed Daryl Hannah's
> >>character had a predilection towards poisoning people, so wouldn't Bill
> >>know something was up?
> >
> >
> > Well, did Bill know that Elle killed Pai Mei (or as I like to cal him,
Pay
> > Me)?
>
>
> Not that I know of. The only person that was told was Kiddo.
Then there was nothing that indicates that he knew of her predilection
towards
poisonings.
> BTW, did
> Quentin bleep out the name so people wouldn't complain how stupid it was
> until after they already paid for the second movie?
LOL!
>
EA
"WareWolf" <dus...@NONONOnc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1af9f220d...@news-server.nc.rr.com...
> Tweek wrote in rec.arts.movies.current-films :
> > : >>Oh, this reminds me of another lame bit of plotting in the film:
Bud
> > : >>has the ability to realize he's about to be attacked by Uma, but in
all
> > : >>their history together he didn't have an inkling that Daryl Hannah's
> > : >>character would try to kill him?
> > : >
> > : >
> > : > If you can't figure THAT out,
> > :
> > :
> > : Now you're just a liar. Tell me, in no uncertain terms, what you
> > : "figured out." Take as much time as you need.
> >
> > Budd was Bill's brother. I assumed, like most people who had been paying
> > attention would, that since Elle Driver was a consort of Bill's, she
> > wouldn't kill his brother. Budd probably made the same assumption.
> >
> > Try paying attention at the movies.
> >
> >
> >
>
> I got the impression that Budd was always the weakest link in the group.
He's the
> only one who felt any real remorse at what was done to Kiddo, for example.
(I don't
> know if Bill's attitude could properly be called remorse.) We never see
Budd show
> off any real fighting chops, either. He was, as Elle described him, a
bushwhacker.
Vernita was also an attempted bushwhacker... what a wus.
>
> If it hadn't been for being Bill's brother, Budd probably would have
been, at best
> a garden-variety hit man, and would not even have been considered for the
DVAS. Thus
> Kiddo's underestimation of him, and thus Elle's contempt which finally
boiled over
> when she thought he'd killed Kiddo, whom she did respect. Plus, he was
selling one
> of the priceless mystical Hanzo swords, which may also have lowered him in
Elle's
> eyes.
>
> Of course, after killing Budd, she'd most likely have to kill Bill
herself, which
> may explain the "smoke some pot, I'll be home soon" line. She figured that
now that
> she was going to have Hanzo's greatest sword, she might be able to take
Bill out
> and become the new #1 assassin.
In her plan, Bill was supposed to think Beatrix killed Budd...
Jay G
> "WareWolf" <dus...@NONONOnc.rr.com> wrote
>>
>> Of course, after killing Budd, she'd most likely have to kill Bill
>> herself, which may explain the "smoke some pot, I'll be home soon"
>> line. She figured that now that she was going to have Hanzo's
>> greatest sword, she might be able to take Bill out and become the
>> new #1 assassin.
>
> In her plan, Bill was supposed to think Beatrix killed Budd...
...at least, until she got home.
I don't think Elle was planning on killing Bill either. However,
it is an interesting take on the film.
-Jay
Jay G
>
> I was just messin' with the timeline to be more like Quentin. This
> whole thing reminds me of a Mad TV sketch about two guys that were
> obsessed with being as much like Craig Kilborn as possible.
Dude, you watch Mad TV?
-Jay
Jay G
> did Quentin bleep out the name so people wouldn't complain how
> stupid it was until after they already paid for the second movie?
It was bleeped out in the original script, when it was planned
to be one film. Also, a few of the actors and reviews spoiled
the name, some as far back as when Vol. 1 was released.
-Jay
Melquiades
>EA <noe...@email.net> wrote:
>> "WareWolf" <dus...@NONONOnc.rr.com> wrote
>>>
>>> Of course, after killing Budd, she'd most likely have to kill Bill
>>> herself, which may explain the "smoke some pot, I'll be home soon"
>>> line. She figured that now that she was going to have Hanzo's
>>> greatest sword, she might be able to take Bill out and become the
>>> new #1 assassin.
>>
>> In her plan, Bill was supposed to think Beatrix killed Budd...
And he was supposed to think Elle killed Beatrix. If Budd was alive, he'd
know the truth about who killed Beatrix.
EA
"Melquiades" <cla...@nospam.mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:TuZjc.14395$gH6....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
ahh so you are saying she wanted credit for the kill above all else?
Melquiades
Yes, that's the impression I got. She told him where he'd find the body, but
not who killed her. I think she wanted to be Bill's new Bride, with credit
for offing the old one.
Tweek
: fucking stupid to be believed. Here, check this out, Tweek, you generic
: anonymous shithead (oh, and please don't complain I'm using Tarantino
: like language discussing Tarantino): if Budd didn't have an inkling that
: she would kill him because she was a consort of Bill's THEN WHY DID SHE
: KILL THE FUCKING GUY YOU STUPID SHIT? DID BILL THE SUPER HEINOUS
: ASSASSIN LEADER JUST TURN OUT TO BE A GUY THAT THE CHICKS DIDN'T GIVE A
: SHIT ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE, BECAUSE HE WAS A PUSHOVER AND PANTYWAIST
: AND EASY TO KILL?
She killed him because he took away her chance to kill the Bride. This
thought simply didn't occur to Budd. I say again to you, pay attention at
the movies, you simple fuck.
somedude
> > Notice Madsen is playing Budd without the slightest hint of distrust
> > towards Elle. HAD he shown any distrust, then everyones screaming at
> > the screen, "The suitcase you fool!! Check the suitcase! Be careful!"
> > would have been more justified.
Honestly, I didn't see it coming at all. There was no hint in the movie
(or in KB1) that there was any bad blood between Elle and Budd.
Certainly you didn't detect any during their initial dialogue in the
trailer. They struck me as old colleagues. And if there was going to be
trouble I would've expected a physical fight, not the snake. (I hope
everyone picked up on the species in-joke...Black Mamba, i.e. the
Bride's nickname, so in a sense, Budd _is_ killed by Black Mamba. I
suspect Elle planned it that way, which reinforces her reasoning for
killing Budd, see below.) Of course, it turns out that Elle is pissed
off that Budd got to the Bride before her.
> I see what you mean. You have to figure Elle wanted to kill Budd (I'm
> surprised Quentin didn't make this into another four and a half hours
> worth of movies!) for like, twenty years, then waited till they killed
> Kiddo's wedding party as comrades in arms, then waited another four
> years for her to come out of her coma, then waited for Hanzo to finish
> beating off and make her sword, and then she waited for some
> indeterminate amount of time for Kiddo to kill the other two bitches,
> and then, when she found out that Budd supposedly saved her ass by
> burying Kiddo alive, she decides to kill him as his reward. Hell, when
> you put it that way, it makes perfect sense. I guess the only other
> question is how long she had the snake.
I think Elle explained herself to Budd clearly, imo, as he lay
dying...she was insulted that a low-life boozehound like himself had
killed an obviously superior opponent. I picked up a sort of undertone
of grudging admiration (by Elle, for Beatrix). That might be why Elle
wanted him to die by way of a Black Mamba -- in this case, a real one,
since Beatrix (codename Black Mamba) missed her chance to do the honors.
Practically a tribute to Beatrix from Elle, though there's no sign of
this when they finally fight. Elle would certainly be insulted at the
suggestion that Budd "saved her ass"!
BTW, notice how Elle carefully makes note of the location of Beatrix's
grave? I got the distinct impression that she wasn't _absolutely_ sure
she was as dead as Budd claimed and had she not come crashing through
the door of the trailer, Elle was probably going to check out the
cemetary.
(Sidenote...I do have a little problem with the way Beatrix dug herself
out of the grave. Wouldn't Budd have dropped the other casket _on top_
of hers, making it nearly impossible for her to dig herself out
vertically?)
somedude
> > Elle's stated motive was that she was pissed that a no-good bushwhackin
> > lowlife like Budd killed the greatest warrior she ever knew etc etc
> > Would Elle have killed Budd regardless? I dont know... maybe she thought
> > she was in her own movie: Kill Budd.
>
> Again, I would wonder why it took her this long to put Budd in his
> place.
She had just found out that he "killed" Beatrix the previous night, on
the phone. She immediately drove to Budd's trailer (presumably Elle
lived around L.A., since she obviously drove to Barstow in a matter of
hours) and then things got nasty.
> In fact, with that stable of hot chicks to pick from, what
> history did Budd have with them? None? Besides that, nothing really
> showed Budd as that much of a lowlife, so basically, it was one of those
> "Here's the plot I contrived, never mind the backstory." It's just not
> good writing.
I thought the scene in the strip club showed how low Budd had sunk into
self-pity and uselessness, not to mention his (false) claim to Bill that
he pawned his sword for $250. Budd was almost a traitor to the group, it
seems, since he had basically retired from the assassin life without
permission, as Beatrix had done. (I thought the most touching moment in
the film was when we realize that he actually kept his sword after all,
in a back room of the trailer. Obviously for sentimental value.)
somedude
>
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 at 14:25 GMT, <gcattana...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
> > Because *EVERYONE* knows that in a bag full of money there is *ALWAYS* a
> > deadly snake hiding in the 100s.
>
Not any snake, a Black Mamba. My theory is that this was a deliberate
tribute on Elle's part to Kiddo.
trotsky
You don't?
trotsky
Can you please explain what "bleeped out in the original script" means?
trotsky
It is, considering the "assassins" don't exactly do anything in the
film, except kill each other.
Melquiades
ELLE
Do you know where (BLEEP) is?
trotsky
Wasn't that depicted in the movie?
trotsky
Dude, nobody else on this group had this interpretation for her motives.
Nail soup.
trotsky
You know, I think that might've been stated in the movie and I either
didn't realize it or forgot it. It really doesn't make sense for me to
say we don't know what her motives were if they were explained to some
degree in that scene. I think in my defense I can say that up until
that point we didn't know what her stance was, since she had only one
other part in the first movie. As an aside, let me just say Quentin did
a marvelous job of making a beautiful woman like Daryl Hannah as ugly as
possible. No, this isn't a compliment.
I picked up a sort of undertone
> of grudging admiration (by Elle, for Beatrix).
Which is fine. Except that she proved herself an effective killing
machine in the first movie, and proved herself very easy to get the drop
on by both Budd and Bill in v2.
That might be why Elle
> wanted him to die by way of a Black Mamba -- in this case, a real one,
> since Beatrix (codename Black Mamba) missed her chance to do the honors.
> Practically a tribute to Beatrix from Elle, though there's no sign of
> this when they finally fight. Elle would certainly be insulted at the
> suggestion that Budd "saved her ass"!
That's an interesting interpretation. It could've been alluded to in
the movie, of course, and thus less speculation would be required.
> BTW, notice how Elle carefully makes note of the location of Beatrix's
> grave? I got the distinct impression that she wasn't _absolutely_ sure
> she was as dead as Budd claimed and had she not come crashing through
> the door of the trailer, Elle was probably going to check out the
> cemetary.
I agree with this too. Kiddo hadn't been easy to kill up to that point,
thus it would make sense Elle would have her doubts.
> (Sidenote...I do have a little problem with the way Beatrix dug herself
> out of the grave. Wouldn't Budd have dropped the other casket _on top_
> of hers, making it nearly impossible for her to dig herself out
> vertically?)
No biggie--they just would've flashed back to her "fist through several
caskets" training.
WareWolf
Guess you missed the O-ren flashback sequences in the first movie,
particularly the part of the anime sequence where she puts a bullet into
the guy in the limo. Or the part where she kills the Yakuza boss who
insults her.
Dusty
--
This Week's Column: The Stepford Bush
http://dusty.booksnbytes.com/columns/2004/2004_0418.html
trotsky
somedude wrote:
> trotsky wrote:
>
>
>>>Elle's stated motive was that she was pissed that a no-good bushwhackin
>>>lowlife like Budd killed the greatest warrior she ever knew etc etc
>>>Would Elle have killed Budd regardless? I dont know... maybe she thought
>>>she was in her own movie: Kill Budd.
>>
>>Again, I would wonder why it took her this long to put Budd in his
>>place.
>
>
> She had just found out that he "killed" Beatrix the previous night, on
> the phone. She immediately drove to Budd's trailer (presumably Elle
> lived around L.A., since she obviously drove to Barstow in a matter of
> hours) and then things got nasty.
Except this significantly lessens the legend of Bill the legendary
assassin with custom made truth serums at his disposal. Maybe he'd been
keeping his truth serum business a secret and Elle wasn't that worried
about him finding out the truth. Maybe Elle thought she was smarter
than everbody else, and the mere fact that she was shown as subservient
in the rest of the film was a red herring. Maybe the fact that she
poisoned people like Pei Mei never was investigated. Nail soup.
>>In fact, with that stable of hot chicks to pick from, what
>>history did Budd have with them? None? Besides that, nothing really
>>showed Budd as that much of a lowlife, so basically, it was one of those
>>"Here's the plot I contrived, never mind the backstory." It's just not
>>good writing.
>
>
> I thought the scene in the strip club showed how low Budd had sunk into
> self-pity and uselessness, not to mention his (false) claim to Bill that
> he pawned his sword for $250. Budd was almost a traitor to the group, it
> seems, since he had basically retired from the assassin life without
> permission, as Beatrix had done. (I thought the most touching moment in
> the film was when we realize that he actually kept his sword after all,
> in a back room of the trailer. Obviously for sentimental value.)
I found that whole think puzzling. Why bother telling Bill he pawned
the sword in the first place? If he actually had a conscience, why
would he bury Kiddo alive and act like that was no big deal? Nail soup.
WareWolf
some...@somefreakinplace.com says...
> (Sidenote...I do have a little problem with the way Beatrix dug herself
> out of the grave. Wouldn't Budd have dropped the other casket _on top_
> of hers, making it nearly impossible for her to dig herself out
> vertically?)
>
>
Yeah, that didn't make any sense to me either. I was scratching my head
and going "what'd they do with the other body, then?"
But then the movie moved on and so did I.
WareWolf
says...
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 at 14:25 GMT, <gcattana...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
> > Because *EVERYONE* knows that in a bag full of money there is *ALWAYS* a
> > deadly snake hiding in the 100s.
>
> My wife predicted a snake; I was bettting on a scorpion.
>
> who has seen too many Dr. Phibes movies.
>
>
Heh! Would have been hilarious to see him pick up the phone and get a
spike through the head from the receiver. My favorite Dr. Phibes moment.
Dusty
--
"The Devil's Right Hand" by Dusty Rhoades, COMING in 2005 from St.
Martin's/Minotaur
Nick Macpherson
>In article <4090B8...@somefreakinplace.com>,
>some...@somefreakinplace.com says...
>> (Sidenote...I do have a little problem with the way Beatrix dug herself
>> out of the grave. Wouldn't Budd have dropped the other casket _on top_
>> of hers, making it nearly impossible for her to dig herself out
>> vertically?)
>>
>>
>
>Yeah, that didn't make any sense to me either. I was scratching my head
>and going "what'd they do with the other body, then?"
>
>But then the movie moved on and so did I.
I wondered why Budd didn't grab a lawn chair, a shotgun and a case of beer and
spend the night by the grave just in case she did dig herself out.
W. Orr
>In article <4090B8...@somefreakinplace.com>,
>some...@somefreakinplace.com says...
>> (Sidenote...I do have a little problem with the way Beatrix dug herself
>> out of the grave. Wouldn't Budd have dropped the other casket _on top_
>> of hers, making it nearly impossible for her to dig herself out
>> vertically?)
>>
>>
>
>Yeah, that didn't make any sense to me either. I was scratching my head
>and going "what'd they do with the other body, then?"
Did we see how decomposed the other body was by this point or if there
was a difference between the casket they pulled out and the one she
was in; I can't recall? I'd assume they'd either:
-Put Uma in the same casket they'd just pulled out, maybe dumped the
corpse on top on the casket, and then covered the whole thing with
dirt.
-Budd and friend didn't seem like the most honest of folks. If they
brought their own pine box for Uma, dumped the original corpse in the
hole on top, and took the actual 'nice' casket to sell for beer money.
(It could happen. They clean it up really well, put an ad in the
paper, make up a bogus story that explains why they own an empty
casket, and profit. Caskets are pretty expensive and I'm certain
they'd find a buyer.)
Ram Firestone
> On 27 Apr 2004 08:38:16 -0700, lu...@earthlink.net (Jordan Lund)
> wrote:
>
> >PAVELB1 <pav...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<0h2s80tt16hijhq2c...@4ax.com>...
> >
> >> and you didn't like Signs because you thought the water thing was
> >> stupid, and why didn't the aliens just use death rays or something.
> >
> >I thought Signs was stupid because water was lethal to the aliens so
> >they decide to invade a water based world without any kind of
> >protection. But I didn't mind her busting down the door at Budd's.
> >Although I kind of half expected her to just stab him through the
> >trailer wall... :^)
> >
> >- Jordan
>
> It wasn't water they were vulnerable to, it was the impurities in the
> water...remember Mel's daughter said the water was 'bad'.
>
> It's unlikely they were vulnerable to plain old h20, as they appeaered
> to be water based creatures as opposed to Mercury or Barium.
Akkkk! You missed the whole idea of the movie. She always said the
water was bad, no matter what water it was. It was a psychological
problem of hers. That's why she left half filled glasses of water all
over. This was the same as Mel's son having asthma and Mel's wife
telling him to tell his brother to "swing away". These were supposed
to be acts of god that initially looked random but saved them from the
aliens in the end. It's why Mel's character regained his faith.
Ram
Jeffy3
>
> My wife predicted a snake; I was bettting on a scorpion.
Unless you were watching a bootleg tape or had a private screening, I
will assume you and your wife chit chat during movies. Shame shame!
trotsky
Guess so. Anything involving the titular character? I don't think so.
trotsky
WareWolf wrote:
> In article <4090B8...@somefreakinplace.com>,
> some...@somefreakinplace.com says...
>
>>(Sidenote...I do have a little problem with the way Beatrix dug herself
>>out of the grave. Wouldn't Budd have dropped the other casket _on top_
>>of hers, making it nearly impossible for her to dig herself out
>>vertically?)
>>
>>
>
>
> Yeah, that didn't make any sense to me either. I was scratching my head
> and going "what'd they do with the other body, then?"
>
> But then the movie moved on and so did I.
I've never walked out of movie before. What's it like?
WareWolf
That wasn't what you were claiming, Greg. Look up a few lines. "The assassins don't
exactly do anything in the film except kill each other." Remember? Nothing about the
"titular character" in that claim, now is there, Greg? I pointed out that O-ren
killed two other people on screen in her "professional" capacity that were NOT DVAS
members or their henchmen. (She also killed the non-DVAS Yakuza who killed her
parents, but that could be considered more a family-honor killing, not a
professional one.)
So guess you were wrong, eh, Greg? Guess you're so into trashing QT movies that you
can't be bothered to get your facts right. There are plenty of reasons not to take
you at all seriously, but that one'll do for now.
Dusty
--
"The Devils' Right Hand" by Dusty Rhoades COMING from St. Martin's/Minotaur
PAVELB1
We don't know that about the water. And yes I 'get' the point. I'm
literalizing things for those sci-fi crybaby's who can't understand
the workings of an alien mind so wah about how it couldn't have
happened.
PAVELB1
>>>
>>
>>
>> Guess you missed the O-ren flashback sequences in the first movie,
>> particularly the part of the anime sequence where she puts a bullet into
>> the guy in the limo. Or the part where she kills the Yakuza boss who
>> insults her.
>
>
>Guess so. Anything involving the titular character? I don't think so.
Bill? sure...didn't you see him kill O-rens parents....guess you
didn't catch that either.
WareWolf
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 12:38:30 GMT, WareWolf <dus...@nc.rr..com> wrote:
>
> >Yeah, that didn't make any sense to me either. I was scratching my head
> >and going "what'd they do with the other body, then?"
>
> Did we see how decomposed the other body was by this point or if there
> was a difference between the casket they pulled out and the one she
> was in; I can't recall?
Hmmm...ISTR that the casket was lying to the side and pretty rotted. I remember
seeing the corpse inside, also badly decomposed. So maybe they did pile the
fragments back on top of Uma's casket and she dug her way through that, too.
Blecch. But could be. It is after all a comic book. Done with live actors, sure,
but these people were basically dark and twisted super-anti-heroes, which is why I
found Bill's "Superman" speech so appropriate.
I'd assume they'd either:
>
> -Put Uma in the same casket they'd just pulled out, maybe dumped the
> corpse on top on the casket, and then covered the whole thing with
> dirt.
No, it was definitely new wood.
Death Adder
>
> It is, considering the "assassins" don't exactly do anything in the
> film, except kill each other.
The film's not about them in their professional capacity. That's just
the backstory. The film is about revenge and the consequent implosion of
the whole band of assassins. Delving into their professional work would
be a completely different movie. And it has nothing to do with the
revenge and betrayal arc.
Death Adder
> We don't know that about the water. And yes I 'get' the point. I'm
> literalizing things for those sci-fi crybaby's who can't understand
> the workings of an alien mind so wah about how it couldn't have
> happened.
Umm, so tell us about the workings of an alien mind.
BTW, the aliens were lucky it never rained anywhere on earth during the
time of their invasion...
trotsky
Go fuck yourself, Dusty. The only time we get to see them as a "gang of
legendary assassins" is when they're assassinating one of their own.
Agree or disagree, schmucko?
Nothing about the
> "titular character" in that claim, now is there, Greg? I pointed out that O-ren
> killed two other people on screen in her "professional" capacity that were NOT DVAS
> members or their henchmen. (She also killed the non-DVAS Yakuza who killed her
> parents, but that could be considered more a family-honor killing, not a
> professional one.)
Dusty, you're clearly afraid to have an actual discussion about the
movie. Just type "I'm afraid" and we can move on.
> So guess you were wrong, eh, Greg? Guess you're so into trashing QT movies that you
> can't be bothered to get your facts right. There are plenty of reasons not to take
> you at all seriously, but that one'll do for now.
Ouch, that hurt. What kind of an idiot throws his shoe?
trotsky
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't go into enough detail. I'll try it in all caps
for emphasis: A LEGENDARY BAND OF ASSASSINS IS PRESENTED TO THE AUDIENCE
BUT WE NEVER SEE THIS BAND OF ASSASSINS DO ANYTHING EXCEPT KILL EACH
OTHER. THEREFORE, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE LEGENDS IN THE APOLOGISTS' MINDS.
WareWolf
> That wasn't what you were claiming, Greg. Look up a few lines. "The assassins don't
> > exactly do anything in the film except kill each other." Remember?
>
>
> Go fuck yourself, Dusty.
Ah, the joys of intellectual debate with Moby Sikh the Comic Book Guy. I
knew you'd start losing it, I just didn't know how soon. How long is it
before you start pulling the stunt of starting multiple threads trolling
me? That bit always cracks me up.
> The only time we get to see them as a "gang of
> legendary assassins" is when they're assassinating one of their own.
> Agree or disagree, schmucko?
Disagree, Mama's Boy. O-ren is clearly shown assassinating a
governmental figure. With a rifle. From long distance. So you're wrong.
Why is this so hard for you to grasp? Is it that Mommy has never told
her precious baby boy that he made a mistake? Is that why you're such a
pathetic fucking loser?
>
>
> Nothing about the
> > "titular character" in that claim, now is there, Greg? I pointed out that O-ren
> > killed two other people on screen in her "professional" capacity that were NOT DVAS
> > members or their henchmen. (She also killed the non-DVAS Yakuza who killed her
> > parents, but that could be considered more a family-honor killing, not a
> > professional one.)
>
>
> Dusty, you're clearly afraid to have an actual discussion about the
> movie. Just type "I'm afraid" and we can move on.
Trotsky is afraid. Wow, you're right that was fun.
Some of us in this thread and others are having an actual discussion
about the movie. It's you who's falling back into your tired old song
and dance where you shrilly demand that people answer inane questions
posed by you.
Face it, Mama's Boy. You got the facts in the film wrong.
>
>
> > So guess you were wrong, eh, Greg? Guess you're so into trashing QT movies that you
> > can't be bothered to get your facts right. There are plenty of reasons not to take
> > you at all seriously, but that one'll do for now.
>
>
> Ouch, that hurt. What kind of an idiot throws his shoe?
Incoherent to the last, eh, Trots? Maybe it's a blood sugar thing. Go
ask Mommy to make you dinner, she's right down the hall.
Melquiades
We see them after they've all retired... what's the big deal?
First example that comes to mind... Donnie Brasco is about an aging mobster
well past his prime. We don't have to see his prime to get that.
Nick Macpherson
trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't go into enough detail. I'll try it in all caps
>>for emphasis: A LEGENDARY BAND OF ASSASSINS IS PRESENTED TO THE AUDIENCE
>>BUT WE NEVER SEE THIS BAND OF ASSASSINS DO ANYTHING EXCEPT KILL EACH
>>OTHER. THEREFORE, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE LEGENDS IN THE APOLOGISTS' MINDS.
>
>
>We see them after they've all retired... what's the big deal?
>
>First example that comes to mind... Donnie Brasco is about an aging mobster
>well past his prime. We don't have to see his prime to get that.
>
>
Another example is Jackie Brown. Everyone in that movie is past their prime.
The same for John Travolta's character in Pulp Fiction. Despite being a
director in his peak years, Tarantino's fascinated by people who are losing
their moves.
PAVELB1
Speak of the Devil.
Geir Friestad
|gms...@email.com says...
|
|> The only time we get to see them as a "gang of legendary assassins"
|> is when they're assassinating one of their own.
|
| governmental figure.
Since when did one person constitute a gang?
--
Geir Friestad || ge...@portman.org || www.portman.org
"My readers are intelligent: I don't write for stupid people."
- Philip Pullman
trotsky
Death Adder wrote:
> trotsky wrote:
>
>>It is, considering the "assassins" don't exactly do anything in the
>>film, except kill each other.
>
>
> The film's not about them in their professional capacity. That's just
> the backstory.
What back story? Who did they assassinate? At least when John
Carpenter used the line "Snake Pliskin, I thought you were dead" it was
done for comedic effect.
The film is about revenge and the consequent implosion of
> the whole band of assassins. Delving into their professional work would
> be a completely different movie. And it has nothing to do with the
> revenge and betrayal arc.
Nail soup.
trotsky
Death Adder wrote:
> PAVELB1 wrote:
>
>
>>We don't know that about the water. And yes I 'get' the point. I'm
>>literalizing things for those sci-fi crybaby's who can't understand
>>the workings of an alien mind so wah about how it couldn't have
>>happened.
>
>
> Umm, so tell us about the workings of an alien mind.
Are you making fun of "Pavel's" nationality?
trotsky
WareWolf wrote:
> In article <40917AA6...@email.com>, gms...@email.com says...
>
>> That wasn't what you were claiming, Greg. Look up a few lines. "The assassins don't
>>
>>>exactly do anything in the film except kill each other." Remember?
>>
>>
>>Go fuck yourself, Dusty.
>
>
> Ah, the joys of intellectual debate with Moby Sikh the Comic Book Guy. I
> knew you'd start losing it, I just didn't know how soon. How long is it
> before you start pulling the stunt of starting multiple threads trolling
> me? That bit always cracks me up.
Right, I use Tarantino-esque language and I'm "losing it." You just
indirectly called the fanboys a bunch of assholes--kudos!
>>The only time we get to see them as a "gang of
>>legendary assassins" is when they're assassinating one of their own.
>>Agree or disagree, schmucko?
>
>
> Disagree, Mama's Boy. O-ren is clearly shown assassinating a
> governmental figure. With a rifle. From long distance. So you're wrong.
> Why is this so hard for you to grasp? Is it that Mommy has never told
> her precious baby boy that he made a mistake? Is that why you're such a
> pathetic fucking loser?
Are you "losing it", Dusty?
>> Nothing about the
>>
>>>"titular character" in that claim, now is there, Greg? I pointed out that O-ren
>>>killed two other people on screen in her "professional" capacity that were NOT DVAS
>>>members or their henchmen. (She also killed the non-DVAS Yakuza who killed her
>>>parents, but that could be considered more a family-honor killing, not a
>>>professional one.)
>>
>>
>>Dusty, you're clearly afraid to have an actual discussion about the
>>movie. Just type "I'm afraid" and we can move on.
>
>
> Trotsky is afraid. Wow, you're right that was fun.
Actually, I'm pretty sure when you realize you just criticized me for
using Tarantino-esque language you'll realize how fucked you are. That
didn't take long.
> Some of us in this thread and others are having an actual discussion
> about the movie. It's you who's falling back into your tired old song
> and dance where you shrilly demand that people answer inane questions
> posed by you.
>
> Face it, Mama's Boy. You got the facts in the film wrong.
No, that's not correct. And I doubt I'm the only one that makes a
distinction between the live action and the cartoon.
>>> So guess you were wrong, eh, Greg? Guess you're so into trashing QT movies that you
>>>can't be bothered to get your facts right. There are plenty of reasons not to take
>>>you at all seriously, but that one'll do for now.
>>
>>
>>Ouch, that hurt. What kind of an idiot throws his shoe?
>
>
>
> Incoherent to the last, eh, Trots? Maybe it's a blood sugar thing. Go
> ask Mommy to make you dinner, she's right down the hall.
I don't think quoting a line from "Austin Powers" would be considered
"incoherent" on a ng about current films. You're really fucking up a
lot here, Dusty. Did you really mean to insinuate Quentin fanboys are
assholes?
trotsky
Melquiades wrote:
> In article <40917EAE...@email.com>, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>PAVELB1 wrote:
>>
>>>>>Guess you missed the O-ren flashback sequences in the first movie,
>>>>>particularly the part of the anime sequence where she puts a bullet into
>>>>>the guy in the limo. Or the part where she kills the Yakuza boss who
>>>>>insults her.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Guess so. Anything involving the titular character? I don't think so.
>>>
>>>
>>>Bill? sure...didn't you see him kill O-rens parents....guess you
>>>didn't catch that either.
>>
>>
>>Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't go into enough detail. I'll try it in all caps
>>for emphasis: A LEGENDARY BAND OF ASSASSINS IS PRESENTED TO THE AUDIENCE
>>BUT WE NEVER SEE THIS BAND OF ASSASSINS DO ANYTHING EXCEPT KILL EACH
>>OTHER. THEREFORE, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE LEGENDS IN THE APOLOGISTS' MINDS.
>
>
>
> We see them after they've all retired... what's the big deal?
Well, the big deal is that even if you have an encyclopedic knowledge of
film like Quentin the goings-on of a "legendary band of assassins" isn't
well known. You might as well say, "that character is from outer space"
and think that's enough of an explanation.
> First example that comes to mind... Donnie Brasco is about an aging mobster
> well past his prime. We don't have to see his prime to get that.
The goings-on of mobsters has been done to death in films--that's the
exact opposite scenario. And a way better movie, in my not so humble
opinion.
trotsky
That's an interesting observation, and probably true. But it's
different when the average filmgoer can use their filmgoing experiences
to fill in the blanks versus the complete inability to do so with a
"legendary band of assassins."
trotsky
Geir Friestad wrote:
> WareWolf <dus...@nc.rr> wrote:
> |gms...@email.com says...
> |
> |> The only time we get to see them as a "gang of legendary assassins"
> |> is when they're assassinating one of their own.
> |
> | Disagree, Mama's Boy. O-ren is clearly shown assassinating a
> | governmental figure.
>
> Since when did one person constitute a gang?
Thank you.
Jay G
> Death Adder wrote:
> The film is about revenge and the consequent implosion of
>> the whole band of assassins. Delving into their professional work
>> would be a completely different movie. And it has nothing to do
>> with the revenge and betrayal arc.
>
> Nail soup.
Looks like trotsky found a new catchphrase. He typically uses
these when he doesn't have any actual comeback to someone's
argument. I wonder how long this one will last.
-Jay
Jay G
>> We see them after they've all retired... what's the big deal?
>
>
> Well, the big deal is that even if you have an encyclopedic
> knowledge of film like Quentin the goings-on of a "legendary band
> of assassins" isn't well known. You might as well say, "that
> character is from outer space"
> and think that's enough of an explanation.
Assasins are shown all the time in films, as well as their goings-on.
And didn't ET use "that character is from outer space" as the only
explanation for it's titular character? It seemed enough of one in
that film for people to accept that ET could make bikes fly.
-Jay
Jay G
> WareWolf wrote:
>> In article <40917AA6...@email.com>, gms...@email.com says...
>>
>>
>> Ah, the joys of intellectual debate with Moby Sikh the Comic Book
>> Guy. I knew you'd start losing it, I just didn't know how soon.
>> How long is it before you start pulling the stunt of starting
>> multiple threads trolling me? That bit always cracks me up.
>
>
> Right, I use Tarantino-esque language and I'm "losing it." You just
> indirectly called the fanboys a bunch of assholes--kudos!
The idea that simply swearing constitutes "Tarantino-esque language"
is laughable. Tarantino didn't invent swearing, and there's nothing
distinctinve about "go fuck yourself." You might as well have called
it Kevin Smith-esque, or hell, even "Kuffs"-esque.
-Jay
Jay G
> WareWolf <dus...@nc.rr> wrote:
>> gms...@email.com says...
>>
>>> The only time we get to see them as a "gang of legendary
>>> assassins" is when they're assassinating one of their own.
>>
>> Disagree, Mama's Boy. O-ren is clearly shown assassinating a
>> governmental figure.
>
> Since when did one person constitute a gang?
Except that's not what trotsky originally asserted.
trotsky: The "assasins" only kill each other.
WareWolf: Not true, O-Ren killed several non-assasins, both
professionally and non-professionally.
trotsky: She's not the titular character though.
WareWolf:: That's not what you said. You're still wrong.
trotsky: Yeah, well... they only work as a gang in one scene!
Last I checked, assasins don't typically work as a gang. In
the three assignments shown in the film, all are solo jobs.
The wedding rehersal massacre was most likely an exception,
not the standard.
-Jay
Jay G
> somedude wrote:
>> She had just found out that he "killed" Beatrix the previous
>> night, on the phone. She immediately drove to Budd's trailer
>> (presumably Elle lived around L.A., since she obviously drove to
>> Barstow in a matter of hours) and then things got nasty.
>
>
> Except this significantly lessens the legend of Bill the legendary
> assassin with custom made truth serums at his disposal. Maybe he'd
> been keeping his truth serum business a secret and Elle wasn't that
> worried about him finding out the truth.
I don't think Bill goes around giving everyone truth serum at
random intervals. The only time he would use it is if he suspects
someone would otherwise lie.
> Maybe Elle thought she was smarter
> than everbody else, and the mere fact that she was shown as
> subservient in the rest of the film was a red herring.
She definately thought she was smarter than, and better than,
Budd. That is shown in the film.
> Maybe the fact that she
> poisoned people like Pei Mei never was investigated.
He was around 100 years old, after all.
> I found that whole think puzzling. Why bother telling Bill he
> pawned the sword in the first place?
Just to piss Bill off. Bill said they hadn't talked in a long time,
and the last time they had wasn't pleasant.
> If he actually had a conscience, why
> would he bury Kiddo alive and act like that was no big deal?
"That women deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die. But
then, so does she."
-Jay
WareWolf
Dusty
--
Russert: The night you took the country to war, March 17th, you said
this: "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no
doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the
most lethal weapons ever devised."
President Bush: Right.
Russert: That apparently is not the case.
President Bush: Correct.
Jay G
> frater mus <frat...@softhome.net> wrote
>>
>> My wife predicted a snake; I was bettting on a scorpion.
>
>
> Unless you were watching a bootleg tape or had a private screening,
> I will assume you and your wife chit chat during movies. Shame \
> shame!
Maybe they discussed what they had been expecting after they
had seen the film.
-Jay
trotsky
Fanboys typically allow for "filling in the blanks" much more than is
reasonable, hence the term "nail soup". Now, if you want to be a
fucking child holding his hands over his ears that's fine, but basically
you're just saying that you lack the maturity to discuss a topic on a
newsgroup. Sorry.
trotsky
Jay G wrote:
> trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
>>>We see them after they've all retired... what's the big deal?
>>
>>
>>Well, the big deal is that even if you have an encyclopedic
>>knowledge of film like Quentin the goings-on of a "legendary band
>>of assassins" isn't well known. You might as well say, "that
>>character is from outer space"
>>and think that's enough of an explanation.
>
>
> Assasins are shown all the time in films, as well as their goings-on.
Name two, and put a special emphasis on the ones with "legendary gangs
of assassins". TIA.
> And didn't ET use "that character is from outer space" as the only
> explanation for it's titular character? It seemed enough of one in
> that film for people to accept that ET could make bikes fly.
Okay, since ET was essentially a modern day fable aimed at children, I
take this to mean you must be seriously suffering from arrested
development to take KB seriously. Put another way, jayg, can you tell
the group what the movie's flaws were. Take as much time as you need.
trotsky
Jay G wrote:
> trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
>>WareWolf wrote:
>>
>>>In article <40917AA6...@email.com>, gms...@email.com says...
>>>
>>>>Go fuck yourself, Dusty.
>>>
>>>
>>>Ah, the joys of intellectual debate with Moby Sikh the Comic Book
>>>Guy. I knew you'd start losing it, I just didn't know how soon.
>>>How long is it before you start pulling the stunt of starting
>>>multiple threads trolling me? That bit always cracks me up.
>>
>>
>>Right, I use Tarantino-esque language and I'm "losing it." You just
>>indirectly called the fanboys a bunch of assholes--kudos!
>
>
> The idea that simply swearing constitutes "Tarantino-esque language"
You're a dickhead too, jayg. If you're discussing a profanity laced
film it shouldn't be surprised when profanity is used.
> is laughable. Tarantino didn't invent swearing, and there's nothing
> distinctinve about "go fuck yourself." You might as well have called
> it Kevin Smith-esque, or hell, even "Kuffs"-esque.
Bad example, dude. Kevin Smith has gone mainstream. Do you follow
current films at all?
trotsky
Jay G wrote:
> trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
>>somedude wrote:
>>
>>>She had just found out that he "killed" Beatrix the previous
>>>night, on the phone. She immediately drove to Budd's trailer
>>>(presumably Elle lived around L.A., since she obviously drove to
>>>Barstow in a matter of hours) and then things got nasty.
>>
>>
>>Except this significantly lessens the legend of Bill the legendary
>>assassin with custom made truth serums at his disposal. Maybe he'd
>>been keeping his truth serum business a secret and Elle wasn't that
>>worried about him finding out the truth.
>
>
> I don't think Bill goes around giving everyone truth serum at
> random intervals. The only time he would use it is if he suspects
> someone would otherwise lie.
I see, so in your nail soup view of the film, he has used sodium
pentathol at various times in his legendary assassin's career, and then
in later years got around to doing the chemistry needed to come up with
a serum that is "twice as good." Does he do a lot of interrogating on
his way to his assassinations? For some reason, Denzel duck taping a
guy's hands to a steering wheel and cutting him off has a little more
intensity to it. Maybe it's just me.
>>Maybe Elle thought she was smarter
>>than everbody else, and the mere fact that she was shown as
>>subservient in the rest of the film was a red herring.
>
>
> She definately thought she was smarter than, and better than,
> Budd. That is shown in the film.
Yes, of course. And did she or did she not know about Bill's truth
serum abilities? You're kind of fucked on that one, jayg.
>>Maybe the fact that she
>>poisoned people like Pei Mei never was investigated.
>
>
> He was around 100 years old, after all.
Oh, at least. How long after her eyeball was plucked out did she kill
him? That would speak to motive, to be sure.
>>I found that whole think puzzling. Why bother telling Bill he
>>pawned the sword in the first place?
>
>
> Just to piss Bill off. Bill said they hadn't talked in a long time,
> and the last time they had wasn't pleasant.
And didn't Elle allude to his saying the sword had been pawned too? Was
he trying to piss her off, or did Bill perhaps tell her on the phone,
"I'm pissed off. Budd pawned his Hanzo sword."
>>If he actually had a conscience, why
>>would he bury Kiddo alive and act like that was no big deal?
>
>
> "That women deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die. But
> then, so does she."
Good line. What would his reasoning be for saying she deserves to die?
WareWolf
>
>
> Jay G wrote:
> > trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
> >
> >>WareWolf wrote:
> >>
> >>>In article <40917AA6...@email.com>, gms...@email.com says...
> >>>
> >>>>Go fuck yourself, Dusty.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Ah, the joys of intellectual debate with Moby Sikh the Comic Book
> >>>Guy. I knew you'd start losing it, I just didn't know how soon.
> >>>How long is it before you start pulling the stunt of starting
> >>>multiple threads trolling me? That bit always cracks me up.
> >>
> >>
> >>Right, I use Tarantino-esque language and I'm "losing it." You just
> >>indirectly called the fanboys a bunch of assholes--kudos!
Dear God, do you ever STOP lying about what people just said?
> >
> >
> > The idea that simply swearing constitutes "Tarantino-esque language"
>
>
> You're a dickhead too, jayg. If you're discussing a profanity laced
> film it shouldn't be surprised when profanity is used.
And if you're discussing anything with Mama's Boy, you shouldn't be surprised when
the bloated failure melts down and starts spewing incoherent nonsense when his
credibility is challenged.
"Tarantino-esque language.." HAHAHAHAAA! That's one of your real gems.
Hey, trots! I'm waiting for the moment when you forget who you're replying to then
try to blame it on cold medicine. That's always good for a chuckle.
>
>
> > is laughable. Tarantino didn't invent swearing, and there's nothing
> > distinctinve about "go fuck yourself." You might as well have called
> > it Kevin Smith-esque, or hell, even "Kuffs"-esque.
>
>
> Bad example, dude. Kevin Smith has gone mainstream. Do you follow
> current films at all?
Missed another point entirely, eh, trots? Are you stupid or just dishonest? As you
say, take as much time as you need.
Dusty
--
Understanding today's complex world of the future is somewhat like having bees live
in your head. But, there they are!
-The Firesign Theater
EA
> guy's hands to a steering wheel and cutting him off has a little more
> intensity to it. Maybe it's just me.
So he couldnt flip denzel off after he cut him off on the freeway?
What a heartless bastard!
Jay G
> Jay G wrote:
>>
>> She definately thought she was smarter than, and better than,
>> Budd. That is shown in the film.
>
> Yes, of course. And did she or did she not know about Bill's truth
> serum abilities? You're kind of fucked on that one, jayg.
She either didn't know or didn't think it'd ever apply to her.
Either way, same outcome.
>>> Maybe the fact that she
>>> poisoned people like Pei Mei never was investigated.
>>
>> He was around 100 years old, after all.
>
> Oh, at least. How long after her eyeball was plucked out did she
> kill him? That would speak to motive, to be sure.
It depends on if anyone ever thought to check he was
poisoned. As I said, he was very old.
>>> I found that whole think puzzling. Why bother telling Bill he
>>> pawned the sword in the first place?
>>
>> Just to piss Bill off. Bill said they hadn't talked in a long
>> time, and the last time they had wasn't pleasant.
>
> And didn't Elle allude to his saying the sword had been pawned too?
> Was he trying to piss her off, or did Bill perhaps tell her on the
> phone, "I'm pissed off. Budd pawned his Hanzo sword."
Elle said "Bill said you had [a Hanzo sword] of your own once."
So Bill told her.
>>> If he actually had a conscience, why
>>> would he bury Kiddo alive and act like that was no big deal?
>>
>> "That women deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die. But
>> then, so does she."
>
> Good line. What would his reasoning be for saying she deserves to
> die?
She was an assasin. She doesn't have much moral ground to
stand on. If Bill and crew deserve to die for trying to kill her,
than she deserves to die for all the deaths she's dealt out.
-Jay