Lavishly Praising Bloodbaths
Published September 29, 2004
A postscript. I sat through 2/3 of Kill Bill Vol 2, and just walked out and left. I said to myself, do I really need this? How is watching this making my life any easier or more enjoyable? It's not. I peeked in several other movies on my way out. Hellboy seemed fun escapist comedy trying too hard; Ella Enchanted seemed syrupy, Scooby Doo 2--well, I passed by that quickly, and then I stopped inside a screening of a film I'd never heard of before, "Connie and Carla." I had no idea what it was about, but laughed my head off. (And the 6-7 other people in the audience were doing the same). It was about 2 would-be singers running away from some gangsters and hiding in a nightclub for drag queens. The attitude towards drag queens and gay culture was a little cliched and condescending, and there was a terrible subplot involving Dave Duchovny, but all in all the movie was great fun; plus, there were some delightful renditions of old Broadway showtunes and great one-liners. (It reminded me a bit of Earth Girls are Easy , that classic campy musical comedy).
Now here's the rub. This movie was universally panned by the critics. Why? Roger Ebert wrote, "The plot is creaky, the jokes are laborious, and total implausibility is not considered the slightest problem." (Apparently, the Kill Bill scene where Uma Thurman is shot in the chest and buried alive, and has to claw through the several feet of soil didn't bother him in the slightest). The movie was called "a retread of Some Like It Hot (says Ebert), and was accused of "steal(ing) an additional gender-bending twist right out of Victor/Victoria" (says Village Voice).
I see. When Quentin Tarrentino rips off Sergio Leone and King Hu, that's ok, but when a movie about drag queens (who, incidentally, are in the very business of ripping off icons of mainstream culture) does it, we are supposed to turn up our noses.
Connie and Carla is no masterpiece. It lacks the edginess of independent films like American Movie or Eating Rauol, and I only watched it after stumbling in by accident (I also enjoy watching the random B Movie comedy on WB's Sunday afternoons for precisely the same reason). But if I had read a writeup about the film beforehand ("starring Nia Vardalos of My Big Greek Wedding!"), I would have never deigned to see it. De gustibus non est disputandum. Going to the movies can be a crapshoot sometimes, and no matter how many reassuring reviews you read, there are no guarantees when the lights dim and the opening credits start rolling.
- Lavishly Praising Bloodbaths
- Published: September 29, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Video
- Filed Under: Culture: Media, Video: Action, Video: Art House, Video: Comedy, Video: Film and TV Business
- Writer: Robert Nagle
- Robert Nagle's BC Writer page
- Robert Nagle's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
I guess the above turned out to be a short review - I expanded it and posted it here
I disliked Kill Bill 2 as well. I thought the first one was at least fast paced enough to hold my interest. Here, not even the trademark Tarantino dialogue served a purpose. The only high point was Carradine. See here (shameless plug alert):
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/08/15/035226.php
What disappoints me about this is not that you didn't enjoy "Kill Bill 2" (which is Tarantino's take on spaghetti westerns, and if you don't like it, don't see "High Plains Drifter" because it has midgets - and I think Tarantino was restrained compared to what he working from - watch "How the West Was Won" or HPD, or "Fist Full of Dollars" or "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" or even "The Searchers" and tell me KB2 wasn't totally in line with them) but because you expect Hollywood, which already panders to low expectations, to make product which has no challenge to your expectations at all.
Maybe the reason critics said "Connie and Carla" was a bland mish-mash of "Some Like It Hot" and "Victor-Victoria" was because that is all it was.
i think missing the first one (Kill Bill 1) prolly made ur confusion too great to get the style change and hence the greatness of the fabric of this film.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/20405)
much to absorb here, Robert, thanks! I am fairly sympathetic your your perspective, but I really do think Kill Bill 2 is great, on an entirely different level than the pure stylistic exercise of Kill Bill 1, which was about as relentlessly bloody as it gets.
KB2 isn't a ripoff of its obvious influences, but a summation and examination of their underlying meaning. The violence in 2 for me had real weight and import, was the opposite of the kinetic exploitation thrill-ride that was 1.
For me KB2 is deeply character-driven, takes on Fate and Will with a clear eye and seriousness of purpose, and Uma, first among all the excellent main characters, is quite astonishing.
The long, slow scenes with Carradine at the end are almost unbearable in their gentility, accumulating tension and inevitability. I thought this was the fulfillment of Tarrantino's promise - far less glib than his previous high-point Pulp Fiction.
KB2 had a real and lasting impact on me - it has penetrated my psyche with the force of myth and I have had dreams about it.
KB2 isn't perfect - Tarrantino still can't resist the impulse toward too-clever-by-half dialogue, but here it is the exception rather than the rule. Above all, he has created something profound.
Oh, and I also love Ella Enchanted, but in part because of how excited my almost-5 year-old daughter gets about it.