Quentin Tarantino Month: "Pulp Fiction"

Pulp Fiction

5 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 2 out of 5 stars
Rated R
-Some mildly descriptive sexual content (mentions of oral sex).
-One disturbing depiction of male-on-male rape. It is shot from the back, and the men are wearing their clothes. However, it is still graphic in that the action itself is shown.
-One scene of sensuality, and a scene in which a man taking a shower barely covers his private parts.
-Strong language throughout including f-words and n-words.
-I rate it up a little bit in this area because it has an uplifting, religious message to it.


Watching "Pulp Fiction" is like listening to a catchy song. It is a pleasurable experience that sticks with you the first time and does not disappoint in subsequent viewings.

It is not a typical film with one central plot. It has three stories told out of order that relate to each other. Each is about someone involved in a gang led by Marsellus Wallace (Ving Rhames).

One story is about two hit men, Jules (Samuel L. Jackson) and Vincent (John Travolta), who have to retrieve a briefcase from an apartment. Another story is about Vincent taking Marsellus's wife, Mia (Uma Thurman), out to dinner at the gang leader's request. The third story is about a boxer named Butch (Bruce Willis) who is told by Marsellus to throw the next fight but decides not to do so.

To someone casually watching, the stories seem completely random. In fact, when I saw it, I was not sure what they have to do with each other. After some thinking, I figured out that the movie has one central theme of redemption, which can only be understood after watching the movie in its entirety. In each story, something goes wrong, and the characters have to deal with it. Each person has a different motivation for wanting to do the right thing. Only one has selfish motivations behind his actions, and his fate is different than the other two. More about this is explained in the spoiler section of this review.

I have heard people say they get bored watching this movie. I assume this is because most of the film is dialogue. There is some action, but it is mostly people talking. It is not the type of movie to watch with chatty friends who make it hard to focus. In order to get the full experience, one needs to listen to every word the characters say.

Like in his other films, Tarantino uses dialogue to establish characters and detail situations. Although a lot is exposition, it never feels forced because it is in the form of banter between two people. An example of this is in the beginning. Vincent and Jules are introduced as regular guys going to work. They do not talk about what they are going to do so much as they are talk gossip about what happened to a certain gang member for overstepping some boundaries with Marsellus's wife.

Not only does this detail why Vincent is nervous about taking Mia out to dinner, it establishes the culture of the gang as something relatable. It is not just gangsters who gossip, it is any group of people. It reminds me of when I served a Mormon mission. I had a lot of conversations about issues going on with other missionaries.

My favorite story is the one in which Vincent takes Mia out. I consider myself a movie fan, but there are often a lot of aspects about I overlook. One such thing is set designs, but there is one set in this movie that I am impressed with. It is the restaurant where the two characters eat. It is a beautifully-crafted set, and Tarantino takes time to show everything in it using one long take of the camera following Vincent.

It does not hurt that Uma Thurman's Mia character is in that scene as well. A combination of the way her character acts and the way she looks makes her attractive. She is an outgoing woman with a fascination for understanding the world around her. There is an extra layer on her that is never really explained. She never says she is dissatisfied with her marriage or her husband's decisions, but her excessive drug use paired with her flirtatious attitude with Vincent suggest that she might be a little sad about the way her life has been going. Part of what makes her character great is the fact that it is never explained. It is one of those things the artist puts out there to let audience members interpret themselves.

There is one scene in the Vincent story that is both intense and hilarious. It is set within a drug dealer's house as characters are frantically trying to take care of a situation. Tarantino adds to the intensity by taking one long take in which the camera is constantly moving to every character when he or she speaks.

Every performance is phenomenal. In the Blu-ray special features, John Travolta expresses gratitude to Quentin Tarantino for casting him in such a great role. It was filmed in the early '90s when Travolta's career was not very good. The movies he was being cast were dumb "Look Who's Talking" films, and since "Pulp Fiction," he started to get taken more seriously.  Judging from his performance as Vincent, he deserves to be successful. He does a great job as a hit man who is just trying to do his job without any trouble.

Samuel L. Jackson is another actor who needs to be recognized for this movie. He brings a lot of personality to his character, especially when he confronts the men in the apartment. Jules is intimidating to them, but to the audience, it is obvious he is playing. Jules undergoes a rapid change that transpires after a certain event. Jackson does a great job showing this change in a way that does not seem forced.

It helps to watch "Pulp Fiction" multiple times. The stories are out of chronological order, and part of what makes it fun is realizing how consistent every little detail is. For example, there is a part in which Jules and Vincent go into a bar wearing gym shorts and t-shirts as opposed to their classy tuxedos in previous scenes. There is a reason for this, but it is never shown until later in the film.

The message of redemption (spoilers)

When I first saw this movie, I liked it. It is an example of how entertaining a film can be without blowing a huge budget on expensive action scenes. However, I knew there is a lot that I did not completely understand. The main question I had was "Why are these particular stories in the movie?" As stated earlier, this question is something I thought about the next day, and I came up with a tentative answer that it is about redemption. This section goes more in depth with this. It may not be what Tarantino meant, but it is my interpretation of it as an audience member.

When Vincent and Jules are in the apartment, they shoot everyone in the room except for one man named Marvin (Phil Lamarr). Meanwhile, there is another person in a different room listening to the whole incident. Enraged, he jumps out and fires six shots in close range at the hit men. All six miss and hit the wall behind them.

Jules is amazed. Not one bullet hits them. He sees this as an act of God, a miracle. Vincent, however, does not believe it. He thinks it is a strange coincidence but not divine intervention. Jules tells him he cannot be so picky about miracles. What God chooses to show is not always some big flashy sign.

In the end, Jules decides to give up his life of crime. He shows he is a changed man when he helps two bandits realize they should change their lives too.

Vincent should have changed because of the miracle at the apartment, but he stays the same. He is a heroin junkie, who only cares about himself. He finds Mia attractive, and he is afraid of succumbing to his sexual desires. This is not because he feels adultery is morally wrong but because he is afraid of what Marsellus would do if he found out. She ends up overdosing on Vincent's heroine, thinking it is cocaine. This worries him, but it is more out of worry for his own life than out of general concern for her. His reward for being self-absorbed and not changing his ways is he gets shot by Butch.

Butch's story is seemingly the most disconnected from the rest of the film, but even it is about being the better person. Not only does Butch win the fight, he accidentally kills his opponent. Marsellus is angry, and Butch knows it. In fact, he has an escape plan. He and his girlfriend are hiding in a motel, and they are to run away in the morning. Things get complicated when the fighter realizes his gold watch -- which has been in his family for generations -- is still in his apartment. Knowing there are more than likely gang members there, he goes back to retrieve the valuable item.

This leads him to find Marsellus on the street. They get into a fight, and Butch almost kills the gang leader before being stopped by a perverted pawn shop owner named Maynard (Duane Whitaker) who captures them. They end up in his basement where they are to be taken advantage of sexually by the captor and a cop named Zed (Peter Greene).

Marsellus goes first, and Butch manages to escape. He is just about to leave the shop when he realizes that there are some horrific things happening to a human being downstairs. Even though he has had some disagreements with that particular person, he goes back and saves the man. Because of this, the gang leader promises Butch that he will not send anyone to look for the fighter under the condition that he leave the city that day and never return. Had Butch not helped Marsellus, the gang leader's men would have eventually tracked and killed him. In the end, the fighter's good deed is rewarded.

Like my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher

Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

Quentin Tarantino Month:

Introduction
Kill Bill: Vol. 1
Kill Bill: Vol. 2
Django Unchained
Inglourious Basterds
Jackie Brown
Reservoir Dogs

Quentin Tarantino Month: Introduction

While I will still be doing reviews of new movies in July, this month will also be dedicated to films that are directed by Quentin Tarantino.

Parents may know him as a man who seeks to corrupt the youth with super-violent films like the "Kill Bill" movies, but critics know him as a master of dialogue and storytelling. When I had first heard of "Pulp Fiction," I only knew that there are some edgy scenes for the time it was made. However, when I actually saw it, I found a movie that is kept entertaining by mostly showing a few characters talking to each other.

In the review for "Jackie Brown" by Siskel and Ebert, Gene Siskel said it is obvious that Tarantino listens to people because he is good at writing dialogue. Roger Ebert talked about how he uses it, combined with small, behavioral details, to create unique characters.

This is exactly what made William Shakespeare's plays so famous. Like Tarantino, he was able to write dialogue that was interesting to listen to and create realistic characters through it. However, these two artists are very different from each other. While the playwright is known for sophisticated, poetic dialogue, Tarantino's is gritty and realistic. There are a lot of curse words back-to-back, and his use of the N-word has been a topic of controversy. He has justified it by saying he writes how people talk, not necessarily what he says himself.

It is not the foul language that makes his dialogue interesting. He sometimes does it by using simple trivia like in "Pulp Fiction," when Vincent (John Travolta) talks about what France calls a Quarter Pounder. Other times it is simple, yet deep, observation, such as the speech at the end of "Kill Bill: Vol. 2" that compares Superman's identity to what is going on in the story. These tactics, along with keeping the dialogue realistic, is what adds a lot of depth to his characters. Anyone who studies creative writing in any form should be required to watch Tarantino films.

The first review I will do is not his most recent nor his first film. It is the "Kill Bill" movies, which I will lump into one post. They are the last I saw and therefore the freshest in my mind. I will then decide where to go from there. I plan to get reviews for all his major films done by the end of July, which include "Reservoir Dogs," "Pulp Fiction," "Jackie Brown," "Kill Bill," "Inglourious Basterds" and "Django Unchained."

Quentin Tarantino Month:

Kill Bill: Vol. 1
Kill Bill Vol. 2
Pulp Fiction
Django Unchained
Inglourious Basterds
Jackie Brown
Reservoir Dogs

The Top 5 Things a Movie/TV Show Needs to be Great

There are times when a string of mediocre or bad movies come out that I ask myself "Why do I subject myself to this kind of torture?"

It is when I see a truly great movie that this question is answered. There are films out there that blow my mind. They not only tell a story, they make me feel what the characters are feeling. They are not necessarily realistic in any way, but they seem real to me, the humble audience member sitting in a dark room. 

There is a quote I read in several places on the Internet that is commonly attributed to Roger Ebert. I do not know whether or not he actually said it because I have only found it on social media posts. Despite this, it is still a good quote:

"It is said that the human brain divides its functions. The right brain is devoted to sensory impressions, emotions, colors, music. The left brain deals with abstract thought, logic, philosophy, analysis.

"My definition of a great movie: While you're watching it, it engages your right brain. When it's over, it engages your left brain."

In other words, it should appeal to the senses AND it should make you think even after it is done. While there is no definite formula on how to do this, there are five things I have noticed both great movies and great television shows have.

5. Believable performances

Viewing a movie should be an emotional experience. In order to be effective, we as audience members need to relate to the characters. Therefore, the actors should do their part to be as realistic as they can in showing how they would react to the given circumstances. 

The Matrix is an exception. It is
 a great movie, but some of
 the performances are just okay.

There needs to be a balance. They should express more emotion than just "Wo" when seeing a man leap from one building to the next.

In "47 Ronin" Rinko Kikuchi tries so hard to be
villainous that her performance is laughable.

But they should not be so over-the-top that it is hard to watch without laughing.

They need to reflect real people who have real emotions. An example of a show with great acting is "Breaking Bad." Bryan Cranston has won several Emmys for his performance as a high school chemistry teacher who uses his expertise in science to make methamphetamine to support his family. In the beginning, he is a normal family man, who has a ton of moral hang-ups. By the end he is a hardened criminal, who does not mind killing to get what he wants. Cranston does such a great job executing this through every phase of the character's downfall that it is hard to notice just how much the character has changed by the end.




A great, memorable scene from the show is when he talks to his wife, Skyler (Anna Gunn), about how dangerous a man he has become. Both actors do an excellent job. Cranston is angry and intimidating while Gunn is legitimately scared for her family's safety.



"Breaking Bad" was created by Vince Gilligan and is owned by AMC Networks

4. Well-developed characters

If you read or watch reviews, chances are the term "character development" has come come up, but what exactly does this term mean?

According to the Collins English Dictionary online, it is "The portrayal of people in a work of fiction in such a way that the reader/audience seems to learn more about them and watch them develop."

Whenever storm troopers in the Star Wars movies get shot, do you really care about them? Of course not. That is because they are not developed at all. To the audience, they are just there to be shot. There is no insight into who they are, where they're from or how their relationships are.

However, the scene in which Darth Vader reveals that he is Luke's father is one of the most iconic in film history because the audience knows these characters. Vader was developed as the ultimate bad guy and Luke as the lovable hero who had been told his father was dead. This revelation would be tough to take in.

3. Quality writing and dialogue

Writers who do this right will not only create unique situations and concepts through the storyline, they establish interesting characters through the dialogue.

An example of this is "Her." It is set during a futuristic time in which a new operating system is invented that has artificial intelligence. Joaquin Phoenix plays Theodore, a lonely man going through a divorce, who needs some company. He buys the new operating system and becomes friends with the AI, which he names Samantha (voiced by Scarlett Johansson). Their friendship eventually leads to an intimate relationship.

It sounds like a weird concept, but it is a great movie because of the writing. It gives both Theodore and Samantha distinct personalities through their dialogue. Theodore is likable, and we want to see him happy. Samantha is witty and funny, and it is easy to see why Theodore would fall in love with "her."

The film takes events that would seem very weird if they happened in real life and makes them believable to the audience. They all lead to a theme about how to approach relationships that is very insightful.

At times, the regular plot structure the audience is accustomed to is flipped on its head, which is the case with "Pulp Fiction." This film does not have a normal beginning, middle and end. It is comprised of three stories that connect but are not in chronological order.

Furthermore, the dialogue is not always used to further the story but to establish character. Some of it is thought provoking and some is just there for the audience to further understand who the people are.

One thought provoking piece of dialogue is between the two characters, Vincent (John Travolta) and Mia (Uma Thurman). They are simply eating a meal in a restaurant when Mia says something very interesting:


NOTE: This film is Rated R. I edited out the F-word for anyone reading this who might
find it objectionable. However, there is another four letter word, which is the synonym of
"feces" that I did not take out.

2. Excellent direction

A movie can have great writing, excellent characters and superb performances but still fail if it has sloppy directing. The director is who determines the look of the film, how it will be put together and the performances.

A director can be responsible for making great actors, like Natalie Portman, deliver monotoned or cheesy performances.









But he or she can also be responsible for making mediocre actors, like John Travolta, deliver a performance worthy of an Oscar nomination.




1. Attention to detail

Since movies and television shows are fictional, filmmakers have to lie to the audience. In real life, the most believable lies that have been told to me are as detailed as possible. This means going beyond the story. Don't just show a beginning, middle and end to a plot. Show a world that is made believable by the little details in it.

"Her" is an excellent example of this. Not only are the characters given depth, the world in which it is set is as well. For example, Theodore works as a writer of personalized letters for people who hire him to do so. This is a very small part of the story, but it is a detail that suggests how impersonal the world has become.

One of my favorite animated shows is "Avatar: The Last Airbender" because of all the details behind it as well as the character development. The world it is set in is so different from our own that talking about the storyline involves explaining the details

It involves four nations, each with people who have the ability to manipulate a specific element: air, water, earth and fire. Only one living person has the ability to manipulate all four, and he or she is known as the Avatar. When that person dies, another one is born.

The story is about an Avatar named Aang, who is only ten years old. When he is burdened with overwhelming responsibilities, he runs away and is frozen underwater for 100 years. During that time, the fire nation takes over the world. When Aang wakes up, he sees what has been done, and he goes on an adventure to restore the nations with two people from the south pole: Katara — who has the ability to manipulate water — and her brother Sokka.

Throughout the series, there are a lot of details that make this world unique. For example, the nations are all different in size and culture, the earth kingdom being the largest, and the air nomads technically being the smallest because Aang is the only one living by the time the show starts. There are also different animals within this world, which are normally combinations of real ones like the platypus-bear. It gets detailed even down to myths behind the show. One episode discusses one such myth that explains how the city of Omashu got its name.

"Breaking Bad" is another example of a world full of little details. The concept behind it is not so far fetched that it cannot be done, but there are fictional businesses like one described in the first season called Tampico Furniture. This business is mentioned as Walter White is deciding whether or not to kill a man named Krazy-8 (Max Arciniega), who Walter finds out comes from the family that owns the store. In the conversation, it is revealed that Walter had bought his son's crib there years before the show starts.

Not only does this add depth to the world of "Breaking Bad," it adds character to Krazy-8. He is not just some guy involved in the drug business, he has a mother and father, he had a childhood, he is a person. This information helps the audience feel the gravity of the situation Walter is in.

Like my Facebook page www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher

Follow me on Twitter @ChrisCampbell02