Nate's right. I'm wrong.

I can't believe my eyes... wow... Kearns has just done it... I am nearly speechless... he used the "therefore" symbol in a blog post.

We take you now to a live press conference with Nate Smith, the man who convinced Kearns to give Quentin Tarantino another chance...

Press: Nate, how do you feel?
Nate: To tell you the truth, I'm still in shock.
Press: That Kearns would actually take a second look at Quentin's work or that he didn't believe you in the first place?
Nate: No, no, it's nothing like that. I'm in shock that you guys are interviewing me in my cubicle. I would hope that you'd invite me to a fancy hotel or something. And what's with this bowl of M&M's you brought me. I thought I said I wanted the retro light-brown M&M's to be in there instead of the reds. Don't you know they cause cancer? The media sucks.

-----------

But seriously. I'm glad you had a chance to watch it and enjoy it. The second half is good but doesn't have nearly the same amount of action. In fact, I only saw it once in the theater and I'm starting to regret that now. Maybe I'll see if some place is still running it. If you do go see the second half, I would recommend doing it shortly after watching the first half. Just out of curiosity, at what point during the flick did you realize how good it was? For me, it was shock at the end of the first scene and just before the credits. Or was it the Shaw Brothers intro?

The Shaw Brothers intro did rock. I didn't realize how good it was until it was over and I was watching the making of. That is to say, that's when I confirmed that it was genius.

However, the beeping out of her name is really, really bugging me. So I had better see Part 2 real soon, before I research and spoil the fun...

Yup. The making of, while I thought it was a bit thin, really gives you some idea of the research, dedication and love he had for the genre and this movie. I'm hoping that the special features on the 2nd volume will be much more in depth.

meh. not impressed. actually annoyed. The best parts were the ones that resembled Crouching Tiger with no trace of Tarentino's "style". I liked all his previous movies, but Kill Bill (1 at least) was just "too Tarentino". Much like many of John Woo's movies are "too Woo". These guys create their own stlye and then overdo it to the point that the movie itself lacks or the style becomes cliche.

"in-your-face, disgusting, base, vile, and vulgar."

Isn't Kill Bill Vol. 1 all of the above?

Not in my opinion. Sure it was quite a bit more gore than I would usually like, but the foul language was kept to a minimum, and strangely I can take view severed limbs and heads better than an endless stream of cursing.

Plus, I found the killing in Pulp Fiction to be very callous, and the killing in Kill Bill to be honor-bound.