--- title: "Kill Bill: Vol. 2: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/kill-bill-vol-2/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/kill-bill-vol-2" critics_score: 71 critics_reviews: 7 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004): what the critics said Critics' score 71 from 7 reviews: 5 positive, 0 mixed, 2 negative. Most critics take Vol. 2 as the slower, talkier half of the story and like it for that. The praise clusters on David Carradine’s Bill and Uma Thurman’s Bride, on the long dialogue scenes, and on a finale several reviews find more moving than the first film gave any reason to expect. The shift towards a Sergio Leone western pace is noted approvingly more than once, and a few reviews argue the two volumes only make full sense taken together. The reservations are mostly about length: even admirers find padded scenes and a middle stretch that drifts. The spread is wide rather than narrow. The New Yorker calls it a shapeless mess and objects to Tarantino treating his own trash aesthetic solemnly; The Times finds the retro shtick stale and the revenge without savour; Eye for Film sees a fanboy unwilling to grow up. Almost nobody sits in the middle: the reviews are either won over or not. ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Rating 4/4. 16 April 2004. Ebert calls the film an exuberant celebration of moviemaking that he liked even more than the first volume, viewing it as a completion rather than a sequel that gives the story greater resonance. He singles out the developed characters and the hypnotic final dialogue meeting between the Bride and Bill for particular praise. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/kill-bill-volume-2-2004) ## The New York Times — Elvis Mitchell Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 16 April 2004. Mitchell hails the film as a deliciously perverse and operatic comic-book movie that is rich and substantial. He singles out Uma Thurman's performance and the long, languorous dialogues for praise while noting its shift from the first volume's blood lust to more emotional depth. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/16/movies/film-review-vengeance-still-mine-saieth-the-lethal-bride.html) ## Los Angeles Times — Manohla Dargis Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 16 April 2004. Dargis praises the film as an adrenaline shot of pure pop pleasure and a great American movie that proves Tarantino has more to offer than pyrotechnics. She singles out the personal vision, actor wrangling, and shift to a slower Sergio Leone western beat for praise. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-apr-16-et-dargis16-story.html) ## The AV Club — Nathan Rabin Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 12 April 2004. The film succeeds by melding the rambling, monologue-heavy style of earlier Tarantino with bursts of stylized action, delivering an emotionally satisfying conclusion centered on the complex relationship between The Bride and Bill. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/kill-bill-volume-2-1798199500) ## Slant Magazine — Keith Uhlich Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 15 April 2004. Vol. 2 shifts into more solemn, mature territory with fewer fights and greater moral and thematic depth, highlighting yin-yang contrasts, strong performances from Thurman and Carradine, and a profoundly moving finale that rewards hindsight. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/kill-bill-vol-2/) ## The New Yorker — David Denby Fi1m's normalised score 35/100 (inferred from the text). 12 April 2004. Denby finds the film a shapeless mess that is at least less monotonous than the first volume but still fails to deliver coherent action or substance. He singles out the self-referential allusions and Tarantino's solemnizing of his own trash aesthetic for criticism. [Read the review](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/04/19/chopping-block) ## Empire — Colin Kennedy The critic notes that the split into volumes damages the intended structure and surprise of Vol. 2 compared to the original screenplay, but praises how the film supplies character interiors and intensity as the emotional yin to Vol. 1's kinetic yang. The intimate third-act ending provides perfect balance and emotional payoff despite not competing on action or iconography. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/kill-bill-vol-2-review/) ## Screen Daily 5 April 2004. Festival review. The review praises the verbose drama and brilliant fight sequences that make Vol. 2 seductive, completing the Bride's revenge story in a talky, character-driven manner. It positions the full Kill Bill as a grand, mythology-rich achievement akin to major epics. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/kill-bill-vol-2-review/4018070.article) ## The Guardian — Peter Bradshaw 23 April 2004. The critic praises the film's pedal-to-the-metal exhilaration, style, and energy as it concludes the revenge saga with flair. David Carradine's performance as Bill is singled out as a particular triumph that justifies splitting the story into two films. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/News_Story/Critic_Review/Guardian_review/0,4267,1200653,00.html) ## The Telegraph — Sukhdev Sandhu 23 April 2004. The critic calls it enjoyable and visually dazzling with strong performances and references, worth seeing despite not being Tarantino's best. It singles out the sound design, cinematography, and Carradine's menacing performance for praise while noting it is too long with padded scenes. [Read the review](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/3615767/Bloody-marvellous-movie-making.html) ## The Times — Cosmo Landesman Rating 1 star. 25 April 2004. The review deems the film unnecessary and old-fashioned, with retro shtick that no longer feels fresh, and argues the revenge story fails because evil triumphs over evil without moral contrast or enjoyment. It singles out the bloated length and lack of savour in the revenge for complaint. [Read the review](https://www.thetimes.com/culture/tv-radio/article/film-something-borrowed-hc6kmmmnrzk) ## Time Out — NB 3 May 2011. The review notes that Vol. 2 broadens and deepens the tale with more genre shading, character, and dialogue alongside action, though questions its coherence and finds the pathos a stretch. It admires the chutzpah of Tarantino's approach. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/kill-bill-vol-2) ## Eye for Film — Keith Hennessey Brown Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 22 April 2004. The critic finds the film to be the work of a consummate fanboy unwilling to mature as a filmmaker, highlighting its excessive intertextual references and lack of originality. They single out the postmodern approach as laziness rather than innovation. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/kill-bill-volume-2-film-review-by-keith-hennessey-brown) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/kill-bill-vol-2.md