140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW
Very clever. Possibly too clever for its own good, as the hugely stylized film can come off as pretentious (which it is). Still brilliant…
Spoiler-free Movie Review of Pulp Fiction:
Ahh, Pulp Fiction. Hard to remember a time when we didn’t know of this movie or feel its influence. It was a huge wake-up call to old Hollywood when it dropped in 1994. Does it still work as well twenty years later? Hell, I’m not sure it was still as effective twenty months later.
It’s so stylized and affected that it was kind of born with a short shelf life. Without wishing to take anything away from what is still a very fine film, I’d argue that Pulp Fiction achieved more with its shock value than it could sustain with its quality.
It’s just such a weird film of contradictions; the dialogue feels so hip and of the moment that it is almost instantly dated, which makes no sense when you consider that the whole style of the film is retro-pastiche. It’s heralded for its visionary originality even while virtually every part of the picture is a homage to something that has come before.
Which raises the question is it still theft if you tell everyone about it? Director & co-writer Quentin Tarantino has always been extremely forthcoming about his influences, positively delighting in drawing a spotlight to unheralded works that he loves. Possibly no filmmaker has been more complimentary to the cinematic legacy before him or more generous with praise and resources, using his fame to further support his influences. But is that something we should congratulate him for or demand from him? Is he doing a good thing or merely the right thing considering how freely he appropriates the work of others? Even if you give credit, isn’t Pulp Fiction just a cinematic mix-tape?
Putting aside these considerations, Pulp Fiction is still a fantastic picture. The non-linear story structure was really refreshing, even if it led to many other lesser filmmakers trying it on. The same can be said for the “too cool for school” dialogue and characters, and it is probably this reason that leads me to view the film a little harsher in retrospect. Nothing in the film is necessarily any more self-aware or intentionally cool than that in Tarantino’s previous effort, Reservoir Dogs, but it all combines for an overwhelming effect here.
The casting of John Travolta was a stroke of genius, even if it did inadvertently lead to Battlefield Earth, and the rest of the casting is similarly inspired. Not only did the film revive the career of Travolta, it signaled a new direction and credibility for Bruce Willis. Incidentally, the first choice for the character of Vincent Vega was Michael Madsen, not Travolta. It’s hard to imagine that Madsen was ever anyone’s first choice for anything, ever, anywhere, but can you even picture him in this role? I’d go as far as to say that the picture would have been dead on arrival. That’s how important I think the casting was to this picture.
The picture is quite simply startling in its frank visualizations of violence, if perhaps less so than Reservoir Dogs. I guess I’d have the same comment about a lot of the elements of this film; great, but less great than Reservoir Dogs. I just frankly think it’s a better picture – more direct and less image-conscious.
Pulp Fiction gets credit for bringing independent film to the multiplex and kicked off a golden age for same. This is complete nonsense, of course – the film was backed by Disney-owned Miramax and featured Bruce Willis. But is is completely true that it brought an indie sensibility to a larger audience. Unfortunately, it brought a whole lot of baggage with it, not least of which being amoral anti-heroes, violent shoot-outs with “cool” criminals and casual use of the n-word. But it did create an environment in which edgier material could find a home, and for that we should all be grateful.
Pulp Fiction has been with us for twenty years and it’s still a good movie. At least I think it is. I’m not watching it again to find out since I saw enough of this movie in college to last me a lifetime. Seriously, if this movie came out when you were in school you’d know you couldn’t walk from one end of a dorm hallway to the other without hearing the music, film or somebody quoting it. Maybe that’s the real reason I seem sort of down about the film that I once loved so much. For my money, though, I’d go with Jackie Brown…
Poster:
Trailer:
Bechdel Test:
Pass
The Representation Test Score: D (3 pts)
(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)
[schema type=”movie” name=”Pulp Fiction” description=”The lives of two mob hit men, a boxer, a gangster’s wife, and a pair of diner bandits intertwine in four tales of violence and redemption.” director=”Quentin Tarantino” actor_1=”John Travolta” actor_2=”Uma Thurman” actor_3=”Samuel L. Jackson” actor_4=”Bruce Willis” actor_5=”Ving Rhames” actor_6=”Tim Roth” actor_7=”Frank Whaley” actor_8=”Eric Stoltz” actor_9=”Harvey Keitel”]
| Main Cast | John Travolta Vincent Vega, Uma Thurman Mia Wallace, Samuel L. Jackson Jules Winnfield, Bruce Willis Butch Coolidge |
| Rating | R |
| Release Date | Fri 14 Oct 1994 UTC |
| Director | Quentin Tarantino |
| Genres | Crime, Drama, Thriller |
| Plot | The lives of two mob hit men, a boxer, a gangster’s wife, and a pair of diner bandits intertwine in four tales of violence and redemption. |
| Poster |  |
| Runtime | 168 |
| Tagline | Girls like me don’t make invitations like this to just anyone! |
| Writers | Quentin Tarantino (story) and, Roger Avary (story) … |
| Year | 1994 |