Rating: 
Summary: A classic COMEDY
Review: I think most people who do not like Pulp Fiction, just don't get it. They complain about the language, they complain about the violence, they complain about the dark story. Let me tell you folks...THIS IS A COMEDY! Sit back and laugh! Sometimes I even invite friends over to just sit around, drink beer, and watch this movie. Laugh at the language, laugh at the violence. You're supposed to! Its a comedy, not a drama.
Rating: 
Summary: Chapters on Suffle Mode
Review: Since this was the first time I ever saw a non-sequential movie like this it was exciting for me to try to make sense of what was exactly going on and when it was exactly going on. It also helped me to see the story the way real life events happen, by happening with no seemingly connection to one another but upon closer inspection everything is connected.
However, I'm not sure that's exactly what was intended but that's what I walked out with.
Another thing that shocked me about the movie was the callousness of the characters. It made me almost disgusted on how their are real people out there who have such little value for anything except money and power.
There's not much else to say on this film since the story line isn't really that interesting and the characters are fairly one dimensional. Certainly worth watching one or two times but I wouldn't call it a classic.
Rating:
Summary: Pulp Fiction: Quite possibly the best film ever made.
Review: This is one brilliant, amazing and well thought out movie in which has everybody interested! Quentin Tarantino impressed us with 'Resevoir Dogs' but Pulp Fiction stunned people. With Tarantinos second (and best) film as a director, he focuses amoung the criminal lives of several stars, such as John Travolta, Samuel l. Jackson, Uma Thurman, Harvey Keitel, Bruce Willis, Eric Sholtz, Rosana Arquette, Ving Rhames, Christpher Walken, Steve Buscimi, and many many other of todays top stars. The main focus is on Vince Vega (Travolta), and Jules (Jackson),in out of order scenes, their hell of a day is shown. In this day blood, sex, drugs, violence, and guns are seen tons of times. And with a Tarantino Film, you never get tired of it. Tarantino himself even played a cameo. This film is stocked with pop cultural references such as what they call a quarter pound with cheese in Amsterdam. But what stunned most people about this film is not its ruthlessness, not its introducing famous stars without a blink, not its drugs, but its unique and exelent filming and story line. If you are one of the 5 people in America who have not seen this masterpiece, go out and rent it...NOW!
---Dylan M.
Rating:
Summary: If Elmore Leonard wrote "Three's Company..."
Review: Quentin Tarantino cops a little from about a million different sources, mixes in some clever (and occasionally overwritten) dialogue, about a billion ..., some standout performances from John Travolta, Samuel L. Jackson (one super-bad cat!), Uma Thurman and Bruce Willis, and comes up with one of the freshest, most influential films in recent years.
Travolta and Jackson play two dangerous men in black, paid killers for local kingpin Marcellus Wallace (a glowering, muttering-in-basso Ving Rhames) and they provide the film's central narrative thread. This bantering pair weaves its way from an early morning hit that ends with a very freakish occurence to a grisly accident to a date with Wallace's lovely wife Mia (Thurman). Told in a non-linear fashion, the story also manages to incorporate Willis as a pug fighter Wallace has ordered to take a dive (and who has other plans), a death-obsessed cabbie, a pie-loving potbelly-desiring cutie, sexual deviants, and a dance contest at a kitschy 50's-style restaurant. And then there's the briefcase...
Weirdly enough, the film amounts to a kind of hipster/mob sitcom. Characters get themselves into outlandish situations, and a lot of the film's humor derives from their frantic dialogue as they attempt to extricate themselves. It's full of quotable quotes, most of which I can't list here, and memorable bits by Christopher Walken, Steve Buscemi, Tim Roth, Eric Stoltz, Rosanna Arquette and Harvey Keitel as Mr. Wolf, a guy who fixes problems.
What's in the case? It doesn't matter. What matters is, like that fabled macguffin's mysterious contents, this film dazzles. It even created a genre, and helped spawn an indie film renaissance of sorts. Of course, we're probably all a bit weary of smart-alecs with guns popping off rounds and dialogue referencing 70s tv. And don't worry: "Pulp Fiction" is not nearly as violent as its reputation; for the most part, Tarantino actually cuts away from the gore and leaves a lot to the viewer's imaginations. That in itself can be a bit off-putting for some. For others, bite into this slab of cinema that's as meaty and tasty as a Big Kahuna burger.
Rating:
Summary: Movie Great DVD Not
Review: Overhyped? You bet, especially in late ' 94 when this movie was all the rage. Unfortunately, that may turn off some people who have never seen this movie. One of the best films of the decade, this thing started a wave of ' gritty/cool, pop culture/guns-blood-drugs-sex ' movies, all of whom pale in comparison. Completely, totally entertaining, this movie has quite literally helped to define Generation X. Anyone in 2002 between the ages of approximately 25-43, probably has a soft spot for this movie..Like alot of people, I saw this thing about 5 times in the theatre and it was always a great experience..the audience was electric, caught up in the rush of this movie..and that's something I've rarely felt since, if ever. I'm not going to get in to what this movie is about, because if you've seen it, you certainly know, and if you haven't..I envy you! It's one of those movies I'd love to see again for the first time. Forget the hype, forget the notoriety that this film has, just sit back and experience it..I doubt you will not enjoy it. As for the DVD version..well, they better get a collector's series out soon, because the stripped-down DVD is the one reason I haven't bought it..in fact, my only copy is one that I taped off of pay-per-view in like 1995, so I am eager to once again see it in its widescreen, dolby-digital glory..but I refuse to pay for this lousy... DVD. Come on guys, let's get a real version out there ( 2-disc set? please? ). My advice? rent it..and save your green for the eventual collector-type DVD version.
Rating: 
Summary: Pulp Trash
Review: I do NOT understand why so many folks think this is such a good project. If you enjoy a film where practically every other word is a swear word then here's your film. If you enjoy watching people shoot heroin in their bodies then get this film. If you enjoy watching senseless violence then be sure to get this. Pulp Garbage would have been a better title.
Rating: 
Summary: Beware! Must watch at least twice!
Review: The reason you need to see it twice; first, it's a good movie, I'll be honest. It has some pretty intense stuff. Second, this movie jumps all over the place. It's really, really hard to follow the first time, so the second time you watch it you'll understand it a little bit more. It's still a good movie, fun to watch with anybody.
Rating:
Summary: One of the greatest american films ever made
Review: Tarantino has out done himself here. I loved this movie because the entire thing was like a shot of pure oxygen. Samuel Jackson is the best as his character Jules, a spiritual hitman with some big anger management issues. Uma Thurman is good for her two scenes,a nd Bruce Willis and Ving Rhames are hilarious. Travolta is quyite good, and plays his character well. This is far superior to anything Tarantino has even been associated with. This is truly a cinema gem. anyone who wants to work in showbiz should look at this. Buy it now.
Rating:
Summary: Breath of Fresh Air, and Nourishment for the Soul.
Review: John Waters recently produced a countercultural personal manifesto, "Cecille B. Demented," in which he specifically targets two of the most depressiingly bad, yet representative, films of the 90's--"Patch Adams" and "Forrest Gump." But Waters' strained, juvenile ranting, for whatever therapeutic value it contains, is ultimately as lame and ineffectual as the films occasioning his rage. The only effective response to the mind-deadening, sedating Pavlonian formulas that pass for movies these days is a truly fresh, well crafted, yet perpetually playful, cinematic statement like Tarantino's dazzling "Pulp Fiction." Whatever you've heard, it's no "Citizen Kane," but in the context of the films of the day, its style and methods are certainly analagous to Welles' breakthrough film. If any proof of "Pulp Fiction's" singular artistry is needed, just compare it to "Natural Born Killers," Oliver Stone's subsequent, over-the-top attempt to beat Tarantino at his own game. Whereas Tarantino knows how to amuse and delight by using familiar patterns (the variation on the buddy theme, for example) which engage our human interest despite the unexpected contexts, Stone merely distances us from all the mayhem on screen, which generates about as much interest as watching someone else play a video game. But now I'm going to suggest something shocking, especially to all those hip critics and postmodern types who insist "Pulp Fiction" is a statement against meaning and interpretation, that the whole point of the cinematic experience is the experience, that "Pulp Fiction" is a 90's cinematic fun house, a celluloid carnival ride on which you go with the flow and miss the trip if you attempt to question any of the moments comprising its visual rush: The film has a potent message. As retro as Jules looks with his Afro-do, he's also a questioning Samuel, a wayward Old Testament prophet trying to sort out the meaning of justice, righteousness, and grace. When I ask young people about the film, they see Jules' "transition" as proof of a character who changes for the better, who for one moment at the end of the film stops being a self-appointed executor and takes on the role of the protective, forgiving Good Shepherd. Truthfully, I find the foregoing interpretation reductive. What's significant, however, is that many young viewers make an intepretation at all. In a culture that has for all appearances rejected the unexamined life in favor of measuring identity by MacDonald's vs. Burger King consumer tastes, Jules' act of interpretation is all the more noteworthy. And he offers not one, but no less than 4 interpretations of Ezekiel 25:17 before reaching the one that forces him to acknowledge both the thoughtlessness and arrogance of his previous interpretations. It's a moment, perhaps, that does not convince us of its lasting impact. But then again, Jules, like most of us, makes no claim to being "saved": he's in a state of "transition," doing the best he can to be a "good Shepherd" as much of the time as he's able. What more could any of us ask of Jules--or, for that matter, of ourselves?
Rating:
Summary: The best movie ever made.
Review: I've seen Pulp Fiction about a hundred and a half times and it just doesn't get old. Tarantino pulled out everything he could think of for this one. It's got some of the cleverest humor, most suspenseful suspense, and exciting action. The acting is absolutely superb. Samuel L. Jackson was amazing. John Travolta was phenomenol. Every actor in the movie, no matter how minor the part, was excellent. Even Christopher Walken was Oscar-worthy in his five-minute role. I hold this movie as a standard to which I compare every other movie I see. It's that good.
|
