Quentin Tarantino talks up Kill Bill 3

It could arrive sometime in 2014...

Quentin Tarantino is notorious for teasing future projects. And now, with Inglourious Basterds finished, he's starting to hint about the likelihood of Kill Bill 3.

But don't go staking out your local fleapit just yet. According to QT, he definitely plans to get around to it, but he's planning to give Uma Thurman's The Bride - AKA Beatrix Kiddo - a 10-year break to spend some time with her child and enjoy the quiet life before going back to fighting.

And since his timescale is based on the release of the second film, that means he's likely eyeing 2014 as a release year.



QT made the comments on an Italian TV show, where he was also asked about the Inglourious prequel (maybe) and a Pulp Fiction sequel (never).

And since it's still rattling around only in his skull, there's no sense of what form the movie might take, especially since Bill was - SPOILER! - well and truly killed the last time around.

Beatrix's kids? Surviving members of the Crazy 88s? The possibilities are endless…


Good idea? What would you like to see in a Kill Bill threequel?

 

Comments

    • asfm1

      Oct 2nd 2009, 10:35

      QT first raised this idea during the production of the original Kill Bill films. He proposed the idea of Copperhead's (the black woman) daughter seeking revenge on the Bride, and that the film may well be called Kill the Bride. The daughter looked around 8 or 9 in the film, so the ten year gap would leave her character (and Uma Thurman) at about the right age. QT said that he envisioned Kill Bill as a pretty epic revenge saga that goes far beyond Bill and the Bride. After Copperhead's daughter gets revenge on the Bride, the Bride's daughter will obviously want revenge on Copperhead's daughter. And on, and on, and on... That he didn't mention this in the interview means he may have completely changed his mind about the above, but then again, where else would the story go?

      Alert a moderator

    • agentblackacid

      Oct 2nd 2009, 10:41

      FFS Quentin, why? What's the point? The first 2 films were tortuous.... just I when I thought you had grown up a bit.

      Alert a moderator

    • Ianr62

      Oct 2nd 2009, 11:19

      I am so fed up with QT's potential future film ideas! Here is a man who created two of the best films of the ninety's, a genre to themselves in Resevoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. I love both those films immensley and had such high hopes for a the young up and commer. Since then he has become a parody of himself. Self referential pop c**p movies. Boring, boring, boring. I felt totally ripped off watching Basterds, Brad Pitt got what 30 mins screen time in a two and a half hour film. The best thing QT could do, although im not sure if he's up to the task! Would be to make a propper film, a thriller and out and out horror. A drama something with a strict plot line, with fleshed out characters. We all know he has the clout to attract a great cast. So why does'nt he prove that he can compete with the big boys, Scorsese, Spielberg, Fincher, Anderson and Nolan? Make a propper film man, and make it something that you hav'nt ripped off from another source. Rant over, I just feel so let down by a man who at first appeared to be the maverick for a new generation!!

      Alert a moderator

    • DanielMcA

      Oct 2nd 2009, 12:34

      Let's call a moratorium on remakes, prequels and sequels. Spielberg: Oldboy? Nolan: Besides the Prestige, everything since Momento has been unoriginal (brilliant, but unoriginal). Thank beelzebub for Mr Anderson. On an entirely unrelated point, who would win in a fight between Malick and Anderson? Malick is more of an outdoorsytype, yes, but Anderson has the years.

      Alert a moderator

    • Bojangles17

      Oct 3rd 2009, 8:08

      DanielMcA. With no remakes, prequels or sequels, I can assure you, you'd see a hell of a lot more Uwe Boll-esque adaptations of other mediums...

      Alert a moderator

    • DanielMcA

      Oct 3rd 2009, 21:34

      I disagree. Setting self-imposed restraints wouldn't necessarily be the route I'd take (we don't need another dogme95 manifesto) but perhaps some degree of seperation is needed. Remember when the British pop charts were overwhelmed by collection albums? The top 10 was hijacked by Now..s and Greatest..s. The BMI (or whomever) simply removed them to another chart. For a while we had a healthier, more interesting chart, which also sent out a signal to the record producers - don't be so f###ing lazy. Of course, the charts have turned to s### since but that's another story. People pay attention to Top 10s and positioning lists. Even in a slow week like this week there is a remake at number 1 and a third-tier sequel at number 7. What if they simply didn't make the list? Sure, who ever owns the ticket for that franchise or product would complain but when they sit down to green light projects afterwards they'd hesitate before inflicting Saw 7 on us.

      Alert a moderator

    • BobbyTwoTimes

      Jul 23rd 2010, 12:51

      lanr62 - what the hell are you going on about Bonehead??? Tarantino is going through a phase of trying his hand at a number of different genres and you're complaining about it? If he had spent the next 15 yrs after Pulp Fiction doing 'cool guys in suits with guns talking cool dialogue' movies you'd be sitting here complaining he was a one-trick-pony too. The fact is he's tried a number of different things - an adaption of an Elmore Leonard novel (which are notoriously difficult books to bring to film hence the fact that L.A Confidential has been the only true success), a martial arts movies (which if you had ANY knowledge of the old Kung Fu movies of that era would know was made to total perfection by QT in terms of style, action, editing, story), a homage to the Grindhouse movies from the 50's (which was originally meant to be a short film but had to be extended when the studio demanded it be two seperate films - making it too talky and long) and then a war film (which surprisingly is not just a film about Brad Pitt!) QT loves making films that are just a series of different stories and set pieces that all link together - just like Travolta, Willis, Jackson etc only had a limited amount of screentime in Pulp Fiction - so your comment about Brad Pitt is just pathetic. People like you irritate me because you're always so quick to dismiss peoples efforts. QT hasn't even been on the scene for 20yrs yet and he's still in his 40's. There's no reason why over the coming years, he isn't going to attempt a horror, thriller, western, sci-fi - but people like you expect him to churn out 'Gold' with ever film he makes. At this same stage in his career, Spielberg made Jurrasic Park AND Schindlers List in the same year - and since then has gone on to make numerous great films like Saving Private Ryan, A.I, Minority Report, War Of The Worlds, among others that show he is simply trying to experiment with different genres too. Not all of them are hits obviously (The Terminal) - but lets not forget that in the first 20yrs of his career, he also made a series of misses (1941, Always, Hook) so for you to say that QT, in the space of only 7 films - has failed as a director and is already considered a waste of good talent is complete bollocks! Tarantino is the kind of director that leaves you wondering whether the next film he makes might possibly be a work of genius - just like all the directors you mentioned (Scorsese, Spielberg, Fincher, Anderson and Nolan) who have all had their fair share of turkeys and masterpieces (Nolan being the exception who has obviously had a pretty solid run so far). You need to stop thinking every film QT brings out is going to be another Pulp Fiction and just learn to enjoy one of the most exciting directors of our generation playing around with his trade. It could be another 20 yrs before we see QT make another Schindlers List or The Departed or Fight Club, so let his crazy little mind do the thinking, we'll do the watching and just go along for the ride.

      Alert a moderator