In film, there are many ways one can tell a story through different forms of narratives. In Quentin Tarantino’s movie “Kill Bill Vol 1 & 2”, he uses what is called a non-chronological narration. Non-chronological narrative or non-linear narratives is a technique used in story telling where the events are potrayed in a non-chronological order. It is known by non-chronological narrative, every storytelling that is not told in a sequential order as beginning, middle, and end, but instead a medium which sets the events although out of a chronological timeline. Usually it is designed in such a way where it will seem like that of human memory although that is not always the case. This technique is a favourite of directors such as Quentin Tarantino and Chris Nolan as seen in films such as Pulp Fiction and Inception.
Originally designed to be a single movie, the saga of The Bride in Kill Bill was later divided in two volumes as required by its developers during the screen time’s length. Inspired by the book The Bride Wore Black from 1940, by the American author Cornell Woolrich,, a film clearly paying homage to the old samurai, kung fu, and western movies. The movie presented an outstanding soundtrack and photography, going further to Japanese animation to complete black and white frames.
Portrayed by Uma Thurman, The Bride’s saga was not only about sword fighting and limbs being ripped off from warriors and assassins, but this impression would just be noted in 2004 when the second volume was released. It was not about a sequence, but part of the same story the previous volume showed. For those who observed the entire structure, Kill Bill had a non-chronological narrative characteristic as previous Tarantino’s works had, mainly Pulp Fiction from 1994. The time factor in a narrative, as Lothe (2000, p. 53) points out, is ‘a factor that constitutes both the story and the discourse’. This allegation finds support in another quote from ten years earlier (STERNBERG apud BAL, 1990, p. 94), in a point where the author refers to previous studies.
The main aspect for this work to exist may be established by Jakob’s concept: ‘Part of what makes the concept of time so complex is that it is linked both to the physical world and to our perception of the world (and thereby of ourselves). Furthermore, our perception of time varies’ (LOTHE, 2000, p. 49). The confusedness in narrative, even disliked among many, is one of the most valued triumphs conquered by this masterpiece.
The relevance of time was taken into consideration, giving space for what Lothe (2000, p. 62) refers as ‘Eisenstein–Bazin debate’. At one hand, Bazin defends spatial dominance when it comes to film theory. Summarizing his words, he believes ‘nature’ must be presented according to its very essence, truly and whole above any other perspective. On the other hand, ‘For Eisenstein it is on the contrary time that is more important, since film images can only be combined sequentially in the projection process’ (Idem). Time may not be, perhaps, the highest in a chart of importance regarding cinematographic stories, but what should one do in cases like Kill Bill?
Having found the significance of time and the non-chronological bearing based in the sources at hand, a deeper assess over the movement in Kill Bill’s narration initiated. Taking Jakob’s studies as reference, who based his discussion on Genette’s previous punctuations, the analyzed film was explored in its analepsis and prolepsis evocations. According to Lothe (2000, p. 54), ‘Analepsis is an evocation of a story-event at a point in the text where later events have already been related, i.e. narration jumps back to an earlier point in the story’. The chapter still shows three divisions made by Genette inside this first evocation. The idea of this work was to find scenes which better represented the kinds of analepsis in the two volumes of the story....