Here's an excerpt from Tarantinos' interview in the November issue of Playboy:
Quote:
PLAYBOY: This film was supposed to be a small movie before your big World War II film. Now Kill Bill is so big it has been split into two movies that cost six times what Pulp Fiction did. How did that happen?
TARANTINO: When Uma's husband, Ethan Hawke, read it the first time, he said, "Quentin, if this is the epic you're doing before you do your epic, I'm afraid to see your epic."
It's become a full-on epic exploitation movie. Hopefully, it's the movie that every exploitation-movie lover has always wished for.
It doesn't have the pretentiousness of a big movie epic. This is made for black theaters, for exploitation cinema that covers the entire globe.
PLAYBOY: Isn't it awkward, splitting a single movie into two parts?
TARANTINO: There were no obstacles. I've always designed movies to be malleable.
For instance, I've always designed different versions for Asia and for America and Europe. I don't make movies for America; I make movies for the world.
In the last month of shooting, when Harvey Weinstein came to the set and brought up the idea of splitting the movie into two parts, within an hour I had figured out how it would work.
We shot two opening sequences, all kinds of stuff.
This is my tribute to grind-house cinema, and something was bothering me about releasing a three-hour grind-house movie.
It seemed pretentious, like an art film meditation on a grind-house movie.
Two 90-minute movies coming out fairly rapidly, one after another--that's not pretentious, that's ambitious.
© PEI, Inc. (Playboy)
|
Like Atomsk said, it seems it wasn't QT's idea at all.
I won't go see them in the theater, but I'm still going to enjoy them when they come to DVD.
My question is: Should they be released as DVDs together as a boxed set, or as stand-alones?