LUDIC LOG

Quentin Tarantino's been out of the game for six years. And six years is an eternity in Hollywood. It's a testament to the amount of clout he has that after such a prolonged absence, he can convince a studio to release a movie like Kill Bill. Of course, it makes a big difference that the studio is Miramax, and that Tarantino's outstanding Pulp Fiction is the film that put Miramax on the map. But it's still risky; Kill Bill is a daring, adventurous movie with a rather huge built-in alienation factor, and it's being released in two parts, which insures that if the first part bombs, the second part will instantly become a very big, very expensive albatross around Harvey Weinstein's neck. (The question of whether or not Kill Bill is a two-parter for 'genuine' artistic reasons or simply as a moneymaking marketing gimmick is pretty easily answered, and strikes me as generally irrelevant.)

So what exactly has Tarantino been up to for the last six years? Well, from the look of Kill Bill Vol. 1, it doesn't seem like he's been making movies; it looks like he's been watching movies. Kill Bill Vol. 1is, if nothing else, a document of both the wisdom and the folly of approaching moviemaking as if it was nothing more than taking all the coolest scenes from your favorite movies and re-shooting them -- the filmic equivalent of making a mix tape or a tribute album. The 'folly' part comes in when you realize that what you're doing isn't going to be particularly original or meaningful or profound or intelligent; the pastiche approach, by its very nature, marginalizes the importance of, and almost eliminates the possibility of, those virtues. Kill Bill Vol. 1 isn't original, it's completely meaningless, it's the farthest thing from profound, and worst of all, it's not very smart. That's too bad, because part of what made Pulp Fiction so good was that it was very smart indeed -- it had an intricate plot, a clever script, and genuinely interesting characters. Kill Bill Vol. 1 doesn't have any of those things. Barring some extremely heavy lifting in Vol. 2, the generic revenge plot is as bare-bones as possible; the script, while often very funny, isn't that clever or well-crafted; and the characters rage from two- to zero-dimensional.

The 'wisdom', though, comes in when you realize: who cares? Tarantino is a fantastic director from a technical standpoint, equally adept at staging innovative and complex set-pieces and framing incredibly simple but highly effective two-shots (I've always felt that he doesn't get enough credit for his solid grasp of the basics). So that means that his big scenes are going to grab you and shake you, and that goddamn it, you're going to enjoy them, even as that little voice in the back of your head reminds you that he's just cribbing off someone else's homework. One of the reasons that Jackie Brown -- a film I did not enjoy -- was praised by some critics is that Quentin Tarantino seemed to be growing up as a director; he stuffed the movie full of character development, emotional growth and depth. But you know what? Quentin Tarantino isn't any good at character development, emotional growth and depth. What's more, I don't watch Quentin Tarantino movies for character development, emotional growth and depth. So who am I to complain that Kill Bill Vol. 1 doesn't have any of those things? What it does have is a funny script, a bunch of intense setpieces, skilled direction, a handful of good performances, and tons and tons of outstanding action sequences. It's hard to imagine anyone not having a good time watching the movie, no matter how disinclined they are to do so; it takes hold of you and carries you along the way a good action/adventure movie should, and by the time you start thinking all the smart questions about the flimsy plot, the endless stream of quotes from other movies, and the inherent shallowness of the film, it's too late: the movie is over, and you're just standing there in the parking lot like an idiot, having unwillingly enjoyed the hell out of it.

Tarantino takes a lot of risks, even given his cultlike following. Sometimes it pays off; the anime scene in Kill Bill Vol. 1 could easily have been clumsy and dumb, but instead it nicely set the tone for the scenes that followed. Sometimes it's a push; Tarantino's ability to perfectly merge the right music with the right segments on screen probably keeps you from noticing that those scenes go on rather too long. Sometimes it doesn't work at all, as with cheesy conceits like the goofy opening titles, the cutesy bleeping of the main character's real name, and his endless fascination with '70s kitsch. But he's always willing to try, and from time to time he'll even get a big payoff with something potentially audience-alienating (casting Uma Thurman, one of the sexiest actress in Hollywood, in the lead, he pulls the rug out from under us by making the single scene where she's sexualized a grotesque, impossibly un-erotic rape fantasy).

Kill Bill Vol. 1 isn't a great movie the way that Pulp Fiction is; it's too flawed for that, and Tarantino is not a director in control of his obsessions. But that cuts both ways; his obsessions feed both the downside and the upside of his films. And for all its flaws, Kill Bill Vol. 1 has a hell of a lot of upside. It's one of the most entertaining, thrilling, joyful-to-watch movies I've seen in a while. For good or bad, Tarantino seems more aware of what he's best at, and he delivers in spades. Ice cream isn't the best thing for you, but when you want ice cream, why not order the good stuff? The minute you leave the theatre, you'll start to forget bits and pieces of Kill Bill Vol. 1; all you'll know is that you had a hell of a good time, and sometimes that's enough.