IMDb > Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Kill Bill: Vol. 1
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Kill Bill: Vol. 1 More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 215:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 2142 reviews in total 

343 out of 585 people found the following review useful:


Author: Emma from Sweden
1 March 2005

A lot of people have come up to me and said "How can you love Quentin that much, he is just too extreme!" or "Oh come on, Kill Bill is just SO not realistic.." Yes. No.

Mr. Quentin Tarantino is rather extreme, yes, and it's lovely! And No. Kill Bill is not realistic, but it's not meant to be realistic! Just like... Lord of the Rings, that's not realistic either! But because it has clear unreal elements, like wizards, it's acceptable?

You don't go to see Kill Bill, or any other Q.T-film to see "Stepmom", in the same way you don't go to a Marilyn Manson concert hoping that they will play some Spice Girls..

Kill Bill, both volume 1 and 2, is absolutely gorgeous! The art direction is beautiful! The camera angles are perfect... just Gorgeous! The lighting, the sound, the dialogs... and of course, the details! No one works with small details the way Quentin does. I must also say that the soundtrack is brilliant and the whole film is just so well casted! Uma Thurman is perfect in the leading role, Darryl Hannah has never been this good before, ever! And Chiaki Kuriyama, even though she has a quite small role, is excellent, even better than she is in "Battle Royale". David Carradine is painfully perfect, Michael Madsen is ALWAYS excellent, but never as good as when he works with Tarantino. I must also say that Sonny Chiba was great. I've never been a big fan of Vivica A Fox until now, and I used to think that Lucy Liu was just your average actor but she turned out to be fierce. Pretty much everyone who is in this film is ten times better than they've ever been.

But above all things, Kill Bill is artistic, beautiful... Perfect colors, perfect everything... gotta love it.

Was the above review useful to you?

253 out of 428 people found the following review useful:

Instant classic, but not for all audiences.

Author: The_Angry_Critic from Kunsan, South Korea
6 March 2005

I know it's a couple years late, but I had to write a review for some of the few people that haven't seen one of my favorite and refreshing I've seen over the last few years. Kill Bill Vol. 1 is yet another quality film of Tarantino's short, but distinguished list.

Kill Bill involves a nameless woman (Uma Thurman) who is slowing seeking revenge on her former hit squad the Viper Squad and her boss Bill (David Caradine.) Her former hit squad wronged her by gunning down her closest friends and family during her wedding and putting her into a coma while being pregnant. A few years later she awakens in a hospital, without child, and tries to track down each member of the squad. As the story progresses (through this film and the sequel), you find out who she really, why Bill wanted her dead and the fate of her daughter.

The movie is really a combination of Tarantino's love for the 70's over-dramatized Kung-Fu movie era and story of revenge with rich dialog. Yes, this movie is violent, but in a cheesy way. This created some controversy and really had audiences stirred up, failing to realize it was supposed to be over the top without no sense of realism. Like I said, it was supposed to be a tribute more so than a gruesome action flick. With all cheesiness aside, I can understand how some people could feel a little woozy after seeing someone lose an arm and having 4 gallons of Kool-Aid red blood shoot out of the body like a whale's blow hole. What really makes this movie is Tarantino ability to make bad to mediocre actors seem like good ones, a smart and hilarious dialog and a good storyline. Of course, this is what he does in pretty much in all of his movies.

There are various plot holes in the story, but we are really meant to ignore them unlike most movies. Just like the gory scenes, come to grips to the fact that the most of the implausibilities are there just to fill in the gaps of the movie. The movie also features a couple of classic Tarantino showdowns, including an unforgettable one with the Japanese infamous crime lord, O-Ren Ishii (Lucy Lui.) Once again, Tarantino puts his imagination at work again in his story telling by using some of his old techniques like jumping timelines and some new ones like adding Japanese animation for character backgrounds.

I wouldn't really recommend this film to someone who is really not from the Pulp Fiction era. This film is really just homage to flicks that frequently appear on Sunday Samurai Showcase, revenge and Tarantino's continuous fascination with Uma Thurman. This film contains extreme violence and sometimes strange dialog coupled with some pretty good acting and directing. If you're not a fan of Tarantino's films, you should pass on this one because it is doesn't stray to far from his other stuff. If you like his other works, this is a must see due to its originality and quality. And, if you just don't like Tarantino himself, and find him annoying like everybody else, I don't blame you but it's still worth your while seeing.

Was the above review useful to you?

199 out of 350 people found the following review useful:

This movie was brilliant!

Author: Rooster99 from Paris, France
14 March 2005

Man, what a film. As a fan of 70's martial arts movies, it was great to see all of the references. I also thought the use of B&W throughout was extremely effective. The cartoon sequences seemed a bit much, but did fit in with the overall feel of the film. I have seen many people posting about the sheer amount of blood and guts, but you have to remember this was Tarantino's homage to Bruce Lee-era action pictures. In those movies, the stories were very similar epics of revenge, and they never had much of a budget for good "gore" effects. It was more or less "throw some fake blood on the guy who just got killed" type of effects, which were duplicated accurately by some of the deaths in this movie. The plot also followed closely the plot of most 70's Kung Fu movies; something despicable happens to the weak hero (whole village razed, family slaughtered, etc..) and the hero goes away for years to learn the secrets of a particular style of Kung Fu. All of these movies contained the "secret move" which the master normally does not teach, except of course, in this rare instance. That move, as depicted in Kill Bill Vol. 2, is always used on the evil leader of the clan whom had brought death and chaos to the hero.

Kill Bill was a terrific modern take on those movies which were always set in ancient China. I was very impressed with Uma Thurman's swordplay, at no point did I feel that it looked scripted or fake. Even when fighting against more than 50 Crazy 8's, it replicated admirably the incredibly one-sided fights from some of the best martial arts movies made 30 years ago.

All in all, a great and original film! R.

Was the above review useful to you?

59 out of 71 people found the following review useful:

Cinema has rarely been this exciting!

Author: gogoschka-1 from wherever good films play
28 October 2015

Having seen Tarantino's 3 previous films, going into the cinema, my expectations for 'Kill Bill' were already over the roof. However, regardless of my high hopes for quality entertainment, I was not prepared for this film. I was dumbfounded. I was blown away. I had quite simply never seen anything even remotely like it.

In 'Kill Bill', the revenge plot serves only as a larger story arc, thus allowing Tarantino to play with as many different genres as he likes, and boy - what a mix he dishes out! With complete disregard for the conventions of filmmaking, he paints an expressionistic masterpiece in his own unique style, the likes of which the world has never seen before. Cinema rarely gets this exciting. With 'Kill Bill', Tarantino proved once and for all that all the hype around his persona is justified: he IS the most daring, original - and entertaining! - filmmaker of his generation. Simply amazing: 10 stars out of 10.

Lesser-Known Masterpieces:

Favorite Low-Budget And B-Movies:

All-Time Favorite Films:

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

Tarantino's Blue Period is OVER!

Author: Roberto Bentivegna from Los Angeles, CA
10 October 2003

Just saw Kill Bill: Vol. 1 and was surprised, to be honest, at how incredibly GOOD this film is. Here is a craftsman (or artist, if you prefer) at the top of his game. Some of the shots are simply incredible; the score is, for the most part, vintage Tarantino selections- and the RZA does a very good job at filling the blanks; Uma Thurman is a great female lead, for sheer presence (and decent acting chops). Even Lucy Liu, who I expected was going to re-hash her Charlie's Angel character, burst on the scene like a flaming nunchuck.

The stringing together of the scenes was impeccable. The transitions, the intercutting between dialogue, the flashbacks... I simply could not get enough. Tarantino IS, indeed, having fun here. He is giving us a film that may not go down as a classic, Pulp Fiction style, but that shows us what is yet to come. I doubt that he's lost his writing talents (as some have claimed), and I actually disagree that the dialogue in the film is "poor", or that there are "no memorable lines" (Empire). The kung-fu genre has never been a particularly good park to display Shakespearean writing virtuosisms. The lines work fine. The plot is simple enough, but Tarantino takes a burger and serves it as "steak tartare with sauce au poivre and asparagus terrine". He basically manages to cram so much information into the film that plot is simply irrelevent. What is relevent is the Bride's thirst for blood, her primal sense of vengeance and our total devotion to her. Bill, of course, is one of the greatest characters to ever NOT appear on screen. Overall, a great movie and an example of how a filmmaker's tool is not his pen: it's his eye.

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

one of the best films of all time

Author: A_Different_Drummer from North America
28 August 2016

Arguably this should not be a difficult film to review. It is nothing less than brilliant. The story, the direction, the musical score, the casting, the acting, the dialog, the fight choreography, the inset homage to past films ... brilliant.

Just brilliant.

What makes this film tricky to review is not the film but ironically the film-maker.

I do not know the deep background here but I am guessing that QT, at the very height of his creative powers, locked himself in a cabin in the woods for a month and put this opus together. And essentially (in the view of this reviewer) not only created one of the best films of all time but essentially defined his own career by setting a bar so high that even his own future work could not equal it.

And there you have it. The hard part of the review.

The film is perfection. But in my view QT has yet to produce anything that comes close either in terms of final product or even in terms of effort expended.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

You can't have one without the other

Author: calvinnme from United States
8 March 2017

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'm only subtracting one star because either part one or part two taken alone seems incomplete, yet satisfying nonetheless. If they could have been merged into one film it would be the perfect combination of mystery, mythology, and exposition.

Uma Thurman was nominated for a Golden Globe as "The Bride," a woman who seeks revenge against the group of assassins, of whom she was once a member, who turned her wedding rehearsal into a bloodbath, killing everybody else in the wedding chapel and putting her into a coma for four years and having her awaken to an empty womb - she looked about eight months pregnant when Bill shot her. In volume one, although all five of the people involved in the massacre are on The Bride's hit list, she only kills two of them.The Bride goes after Vivica Fox's now-married housewife and mother, and Lucy Liu's Yakuza boss, which requires a trip to Japan. Tarantino pays homage to Japanese samurai films and Hong Kong martial arts films to make an entertaining story with excellent editing and soundtrack. A perfect start to what's to be expected in Vol. 2., which is where all of the backstories appear.

If you walk away from both parts one and two wondering if there is any symbolism in there, is what you thought you saw what you really saw, and what on earth does that last scene mean?...consider yourself in good company. And my only spoiler, why didn't Lucy Liu's character want to kill Bill as much as Uma Thurman's did? That is, if what you think you see implied in part one is indeed true.

This is Tarantino's best as far as I'm concerned. Every time I see either part one or part two on cable I'll stop what I'm doing and watch. Not recommended if you are squeamish though.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

Tarantino Can Only Make One Film

Author: nicholls_les from United Kingdom
8 December 2016

Quentin Tarantino is the most over rated movie director ever. He basically makes the same film over and over again with a different title. Excessive violence, vile bad language and childish humor, but absolutely nothing else. What is Kill Bill? Is it suppose to be an action movie? Kung fu? Japanese sword movie? Parody? Spoof? Whatever it is suppose to be it fails at every level.

Uma Thurman is awful and doesn't fit the part at all. Lucy Liu is the only stand out actress but I wish she hadn't made this silly movie as she is much better than that.

Mr Tarantino really needs to grow up and the movie going public needs to stop falling for his silly movies.

Or if you must watch his movies, just watch one because they are all the same anyway.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

About as silly as they get

Author: ljcjpjlj from Western New York
4 June 2004

Kill Bill (the first one) is the silliest movie I've seen in years! It's sillier than Blazing Saddles, sillier than a Monty Python movie. It is very cartoonish. Part of it even is cartoon, (although it's that highly stylized Japanese cartoon). Uma Thurman plays a good role, but I thought she used to be good looking. All the murder, mayhem, incredible martial arts, spurting blood, severed limbs, funny character names, and goofy plot twists will keep you munching your popcorn with great animation. This silly piece of fluff is filled with fantastic violence, totally unbelievable plots and characters. Keeping all that in mind, it is hilarious from beginning to end! I hope the sequel is as cutely charming.

Was the above review useful to you?

26 out of 48 people found the following review useful:

Calling it "Style-over-substance" would be a HUGE overstatement, for it's pretentious and horrid in many ways

Author: patrick_dunne ( from United States
15 March 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I hate this movie a lot. I have been going on about it for a while, so I think it's time to take my anger out by making a review. I think I may have offended some people, and I apologize.

So, here it goes: "Kill Bill" is a very bad movie. I assume that Quentin Tarintino immediately drew in fans with "Pulp Fiction," because of its wit and it was high on the "cool" factor. I saw some of it, and I will say that it was impressive. But, it looks like Tartintino became lazy by making this and co-directing the crappy "Sin City."

The storyline of "Kill Bill" is about its name. Bill attacked a woman who we know as "The Bride." Her name is censored when mentioned. Now, "The Bride" wants revenge on Bill, and members of a gang called "The Deadly Viper Assassin Squad." So, she goes out and finds them and attacks them. The story ends there and it does… well, sort of.

The story is something that was thought up in a few minutes. The Bride wants to kill people, and she does. As simple as that. "Kill Bill Volume One" really is just shallow characters killing each other. First, she battles some woman. I have no clue what her name is though. Then, we find some history of The Bride. After, we find that The Bride was somehow knocked out. I forgot why. When she wakes up, we experience more brutal torture of people. Then, she gets a sword and kills lots of other people. The End.

I find this very similar to "Sin City." It's a gory, shallow and pretentious action film that was made to show off a visual style and action scenes. The only real difference is that "Sin City" had something close to a storyline. This one didn't.

Supposedly, this is Tarintino's homage to martial-arts films. So, that makes it a masterpiece? That makes it get onto the Top 250 Movies? Is that why it's rated so highly? It has plenty of references to other martial-arts films. For example, Uma Thurman wears a suit that looks similar to the suit worn by Bruce Lee in one of his previous films.

Well, "The Ring" has loads of homages to horror films, including "Rosemary's Baby," "Silence of the Lambs," and "Poltergeist." Where's that on the Top 250 movies? Well, the homages seem as a cover-up for the story's' weakness. Why does a bodyguard fight in a skirt? I know people get attacked in a number of outfits, but since when does a bodyguard decide to fight in a schoolgirl outfit? The anime scene is near pointless, and doesn't even look like anime! It looks more like an attempt at drawing realistically, and ends up looking pretty ugly.

Maybe it's because of the action. Well, there are only about two or three fight scenes, and they are only a bit exciting. There are plenty of other movies, which have better action. For example, "Ultraviolet" (Another bad movie) had more action than "Kill Bill" and a number of good fight scenes with good camera angles that gave it some flair. If that had homages to other films, would that be on the Top 250? I must say, even the action in "The Karate Kid" seemed to have a certain wit to it.

All the action in "Kill Bill" is meaningless. It is meant to entertain. But, with loads of blood, what fun could it be? Its fun to watch The Bride slash her way through people, but after severed limbs appear, it loses it's fun. The violence in "Saving Private Ryan" and (I think) the violence in "The Wild Bunch" had purpose. But this, like "Sin City," is just sick, cruel violence.

With that, there are PLENTY of movies with good action such as "Terminator 2: Judgment Day," "Princess Monoke," "House of Flying Daggers" and "The Quick and the Dead." All of these had better storyline that "Kill Bill", even if "The Quick and the Dead" seemed a little weak in that department.

Backing up to horror films, I see that this film plays out like a mix of "Scream" and "Hellraiser: Bloodline." One person repeatedly tortures victims (like Pinhead) with a blade. (Like "Scream") Sadly, it's not as thrilling as "Scream." It's as thrilling as "Hellraiser: Bloodline." The characters are thin. I'm not talking about thin, as in skinny, but lacking detail. Sure, "The Bride" gives a bit of inside info on them (The "inside info" is showing the character killing somebody else.) but the characters usually die after that.

The action seems too unrealistic. Our main character kills plenty of people, but how? She jumps in the air and lands on her sword (It's stuck into the stairs.) but how does she do that? There are some movies with unrealistic action sequences ("House of Flying Daggers," "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon") but those take place in ancient China. This takes place in a modern day setting and doesn't feel like either one of those films.

That's why I hate the film. I can go on and on, but why should I have to? I suppose I hate it for all these reasons. Maybe the hype killed it. Or, it could be because Dan Grant's review influenced me to hate it. Either way, I don't like it.

Yet, there are some good points to this movie. The action can be fun for some. I don't think torture is necessary though. The music was excellent. I liked the "Bang Bang" and "Twisted Nerve" song. I suppose it does seem interesting at parts, like when it turns into anime (even if the scene seemed pointless) or black-and-white. (But, this was already used in MANY other movies.)

But, it still stinks. To me, this is about as bad as "Ultraviolet"; it's shallow and uses style to cover up its crappiness.


Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 215:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history