There are a lot of bad things I can say about "Pulp Fiction."
There is no clear-cut plot. Who is the "main character?" What is the point of not telling us whats in the briefcase? The timeline is all disjointed. How can two hitmen fire like a dozen shots in an apartment building and not have anyone call the cops? How unrealistic is the dialogue with Uma Thurman and John Travolta? For that matter are we really expected to believe ANY man would risk physical harm over UMA THURMAN?? There are certain rules to film-making that are pretty basic and pretty clear, this movie doesn't respect any of these rules.
Then again, if you knew me in college you know that I don't have a lot of respect for rules and regulations.
For all the things that are wrong with this movie, there are some things that are inherently right with it. While I have never been a recreational drug user (not even once) I spent a significant part of my life deeply immersed in the lifestyle and the dialogue in this movie is 100% authentic. The drug dealer HAD to have been based on a real person, everything from the mannerisms to what goes on at their houses in the middle of the night is dead-on. Also, the banter between Samuel L. Jackson and John Travolta is incredible and as much as I dislike Quentin Tarantino's directorial style I think it took a brilliant mind to even think of pairing those two up. Also, I appreciate the fact that there is so much humor- not everyone can find comedic value in such dark subject matter and gallows humor has held a special place in my heart ever since I heard the "Need Another Seven Astronauts" joke following the Challenger Explosion.
"I can't give you this case, it don't belong to me. Besides, I've already been through too much shit this morning over this case to hand it over to your dumb ass." (Jules Winnfield, Pulp Fiction)
Though the entire sequence with Bruce Willis is laborious to endure, the characters he comes in contact with hearken back to film noir pieces from the 50's. Not to mention Christopher Walken's cameo is hysterically disturbing and brings a sense of ridiculousness to an otherwise WAY too serious storyline. Also, while I won't call it character development, the silent physical acting is very commendable in the scene where Bruce Willis decides to rescue Ving Rhames from having his stool pushed up in a completely non-bar etiquette way.
I do think some things are best left to the imagination of the audience, however I honestly don't think the whole "what is in the briefcase" thing was done artistically. Rather, I think it serves as a terrible Spackle job in the hole that is the explanation for why Vincent and Jules survived the bathroom gunman attack. The "666" combination, the possibility of divine intervention, the glow coming from the case, all of these things lend themselves to the possibility that the contents of the case could be anything from a soul to some type of religious icon. If I were going to venture a guess I would say that the briefcase contains the Holy Grail. There is way too much biblical symbolism for me to think it is anything else. I am also comfortable making this assumption because I know that it will never be dispelled or confirmed, as presumably any explanation given for the contents would still leave a hole in the storyline, but leaving it open for speculation ties off all the loose ends without actually doing so. Cop out, Quentin, Cop out.
I vowed I would never watch another Tarantino movie after my major disagreement with "Reservoir Dogs" but I am glad I watched this one. It entertained me and did a much better job of intersecting all the stories together than other films which have attempted this ("Love Actually" anyone?) While I will still never like the non-linear storytelling I can't accuse him of having stolen it from anyone. Also, now that I know it is his "thing" I can safely avoid the rest of his movies- for real this time ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment