Rating: 
Summary: the best film of the 90s
Review: pulp fiction in the best film of the 90s. It very original. You really have to view it as a comedy because if you take it to seriously you wont like it. Almost every thing they say is hilarious (especially the scene with chritopher walken). The film was better than Forrest Gump and should have one best picture of the year in 1994.
Rating: 
Summary: Groundbreaking, but will it last ?
Review: I saw this film at the cinema when it was first released; having seen it again on video I enjoyed it even more. Pulp fiction is above all groundbreaking. In the first instance the juxtaposition of scenes is disconcerting. This forces the viewer to reassemble them in his/her head (...but I thought Vince just died?.....) This forces to the viewer to think (novel in itself). The dialogue and directing are also counter-intuitive. Big scenes are played-down and under-acted (Samuel L. Johnson either shooting when he should be talking or talking when he should be shooting) whereas irrelevant issues (such as Tarantino's coffee or Vince's love of Pork or his views on European hamburgers) are given much space. This further disorientates the viewer and provides a 'fresh' cinematographic experience. Finally, the idea of having three separate stories whose characters make cameos in each other is, I believe, new to mainstream cinema. The viewer is constantly forced to review where he/she stands vis-a-vis the movie, which is in strong contrast to most films - where you can make a fair guess at the ending after the first five minutes. In Pulp fiction there is no beginning, middle or end (the film ends with the same scene with which it begins). Added together, these various components combine to make one of the most eye-catching films of the decade. The key point is will it last? Will Pulp Fiction be remembered for its intrinsic merits or solely for its innovative style? The two are not the same. "Tron" is largely regarded as the first computer generated film but few people would argue that it is a classic. I am willing to bet that in twenty years time, people will still enjoy Pulp Fiction. Not because of its style (by which time will seem passe') but simply because it does what all the best films do: it holds your attention. For two and half hours. Talking about nothing in particular.
Rating: 
Summary: Nice exercise in film making
Review: I would advise anybody intending to see PULP FICTION, to reflect carefully about it's title, and the explanations given by the author at the beginning of the film. This is NOT a film about real people, because most probably Quentin Tarantino does not know more than we do, about mobsters, mafia characters and the like. This is a film about fictional movie characters, in the same way "Breathless" (Godard, 1957) was a film inspired by American movies. Godard had never met a little gangster, I'm quite sure about that. There is not much else to say about PULP FICTION. A nice exercise in film making, perfect acting by Samuel Jackson (he deserves an Oscar), Harvey Keitel, Bruce Willis and John Travolta, some funny dialogues from Tarantino, a lot of violence, and that's it. The "complicated screenplay" is not complicated at all, it does probably not exist, even in the mind of the director, and does not need to exist either. The best scene is the last, it has some redeeming values, and succeeds to save not only the character, but the film itself.
Rating:
Summary: Pulp comix come alive!
Review: this is not a rip-off of anything you....miss- informed person. It is PULP, like the definittion in he begining of the film. If you are a comicfan and you like Frank Miller's "Sin City" you will LOVE Pulp Fiction. Its sense of style is perfect and the scene with the twist competition is absolutly classic. This one's in my top 5.
Rating:
Summary: an instant classic movie
Review: This was a terrific, thought-provoking movie that needs to be multiple times to fully digest. However, the DVD offers no special extras. :-(
Rating:
Summary: One of the most overrated films ever
Review: Pulp Fiction LOOKS and SOUNDS great, but its heart and soul are empty. All form, no substance. This is much ado about nothing. However, I can't deny that it is entertaining in a superficial way. You should see it at least once or twice and make up your own mind.
Rating:
Summary: great movie with a lot of depth
Review: i thought that this film was extremely well done with an awesome soundtrack that keeps you in the movie. The way that the detail is given to every character is great, you get to know about why this person acts a certain way. its definitely going to be remembered for years to come as a classic.
Rating: 
Summary: Horrid.
Review: A pointless mess of a film. There's nothing really more I can say. I try to write in-depth reviews, but I just hated this movie.
Rating:
Summary: Some people don't get it
Review: Why does every numb nut believe that Pulp Fiction had to be told to you in chronigcal order for you to understand? You need to wake up, movies aren't ment to always be there for you to escape into fanasy land with as soon as you pay your ticket. It's there for those who enjoy a stimulating story whether it's an in your face joke or not.
Rating:
Summary: Need a hint -- it's about redemption
Review: The movie is about REDEMPTION, turning one's back to evil and chaos and discovering meaning, as hard as that may be in the greys of today's modern world. Or in the dirty underbelly of organized crime. Sure, Tarantino uses small-time gangsters as his subjects, but that too is for a purpose. They're entertaining and allow him to use bright, flashy strokes on the canvas. Without divulging too much plot to the unititiated, think about Travolta's reaction to the divine intervention of the missed gunshots. He ignores it, and his fate is sealed. Jackson's character, on the other hand, turns his back to crime and finds a purpose -- even if it is "Walking the earth like Kane in Kung Fu." Even Bruce Willis' character finds redemption in a small way -- his father's watch. An unassuming token, the watch's history (humorously told by Christopher Walken, brilliant as usual) elicits a nobility of purpose to Willis' actions. Preserving his lineage and upholding his word enables Willis to conquer evil, knightlike, and find peace. He even gets to ride off into the sunset, albeit on a motorcycle and not a horse. As for Tarantino's directorial style, I find it marvelous. Note the intended double meaning of "Pulp Fiction" -- the material is seedy, graphic, as the pulp fiction of old, and the style of its telling, its "fiction," is pulped -- jumbled, nonlinear. In a word, brilliant. There is so much more to this movie -- the realistic, amusing dialog, the riddle of the briefcase, the soundtrack, a performance by Jackson that should have earned him an oscar for best supporting actor -- I could go on forever. In a word(s) -- see it. Be patient. This movie rewards thought and multiple viewings.
| 
