Pulp Fiction through the eyes of an 18 year old
The masterpiece is revisited again, and in a “rites of passage” I’ve longed for.
The masterpiece is revisited again, and in a “rites of passage” I’ve longed for.
As a Quentin Tarantino obsessive I’ve longed for the time that my beautiful teenage lad was old enough, and prepared enough, for the cinematic delights of its master craftsman and then recently, like a five finger death punch from a vengeful Bride, he announced that he’d already seen Inglorious Basterds (twice!) and both without his QT mad Dad. How dare he and, perhaps more importantly, how dare he be so blasé about such things! This is important! This is a rites of passage moment, not a Christoph Waltz “That’s a Bingo!” shout every time he agrees with me on something! But I couldn’t stay mad at him for too long. He soaks up every contemporary classic, masterpiece and psychological horror film his Mother and I throw his way and always responds to being questioned as to what his favourite film is with The Shining so as I say, I couldn’t stay mad at him for too long. We watched Once Upon a Time in Hollywood together and he loved it as much as I really hoped he would and, with a Sunday afternoon devoid of entertainment or outside sunshine, I called to order the “Blackford Film Club” for a Sunday afternoon matinee and after suggesting one of the seven remaining Tarantino films to watch, he plumped for Pulp Fiction.
Now Pulp Fiction is my second favourite film of all time but firstly, I didn’t sway him into watching it today as secondly, Tarantino’s 1997 film Jackie Brown is far better (and that’s saying something) as well as completely confusing everyone, myself included, as Jackie Brown is my favourite QT film, yet it isn’t my favourite film of all time and so how can Pulp Fiction be my second favourite film of all time? You can send an answer on a postcard if you wish, smoke signals, carrier pigeons or fireworks in the sky for all I care, the answer is that JFK is my favourite film of all time (because it is and history will judge it so), Pulp Fiction is my second all time favourite film (because it’s incredible) yet Jackie Brown is my favourite Tarantino film as it has heart, soul, love and an ending to end them all.
So I didn’t sway the young man’s decision and in fact, as is my way, I said we could either watch a film about a robbery you never see but a bloody aftermath we certainly do, or I could cry at the end of Jackie Brown, or we could watch a Samurai sword swinging bride determined to kill a man named Bill, see Kurt Russell get his arse kicked out of shape by three gorgeous ladies or plough through the snow to “Minnie’s Haberdashery” and see if the same Kurt Russell still has a letter from Abraham Lincoln and if he indeed poisoned the coffee. After a lengthy deliberation, as is my son’s way, he simply said Pulp Fiction, and we soon joined “Pumpkin” and “Honey Bunny” enjoying a sexually arousing discussion as to how to rob the diner they’re sitting in.
But after one more cup of coffee.
He loved the opening five minutes with Pumpkin and Honey Bunny.
He recited large passages of the horrific scene as Brett’s “big brain” was sent bloodily to all four corners of the room.
He also naturally recited, almost word for word, Samuel L Jackson’s thunderous use of Ezekiel 25–17.
He bounced and jigged to the dancing in “Jack Rabbit Slim’s” and was horrified and brought crashing down as his Dad’s lifelong unrequited love lay dying and overdosing before squealing at her horrific recovery.
He laughed in all the right places of the Christopher Walken scene.
He reacted to *that* scene with “Zed” and his buddy with “What the fuck is going on?”.
And he smiled with a real recognition of delight as the film wrapped around itself and returned to the beginning at the end.
I was a little worried as to *that* scene and even libertarian old socialist me told him it was best to just say that “Zed’s Dead” and his “Chopper” now had a more grateful owner. Being the Millennial that he is, he didn’t get the joke of watching “Captain Kangaroo” or counting the flowers on the wall (“What bloody wall Dad?”) but I can report he loved the film as well as muttering this phrase continually throughout the film:
“So that’s where that meme comes from”.
He is a Millennial after all and his Dad rather enjoyed watching this masterpiece through his beautiful eyes.
In celebration of this rites of passage moment as well as giving me the excuse to dust down this decade’s old review of this masterpiece, here’s my original take on Pulp Fiction from ten years ago, one of the very first long form articles I ever wrote and I sincerely hope my writing has improved with age!
Pulp: (1) A soft, moist, shapeless mass of matter. (2) A magazine or book containing lurid subject matter, and being characteristically printed on rough, unfinished paper.
Where do you start when describing Pulp Fiction, especially with as few spoilers as possible? Three distinct stories spread across seven interweaving narratives. A fractured time line connecting some of the finest created characters of our age. A neo noir or American Noir, with some of the most quotable and indeed quoted dialogue in film history. A story of gangsters, small time criminals, a boxer, a drug dealer and an all important watch. Some criticised the film’s bloody violence and aggression on release, similar to that of it’s predecessor. Major criticism was reserved for it’s open and graphic showing of continual drug taking. Thankfully sense prevailed early on, and it’s rightfully taken it’s place in the hallowed halls of the “Greatest films of all time”.
Like all Quentin Tarantino films, I love this film to obsessive levels! 18 years on this shows no signs of abating, indeed on re watching specifically for this blog it took me way beyond the two and a half hour run time. Rather than provide a brief premise for the film, I’m going to appraise both the opening scene and the closing scene. Will this not break my “minimum spoilers” edict? Actually no, as it’ll provide roughly 5–10% of the film’s content, and it’s a continuation scene of sorts. Tarantino is meticulous with every scene he shoots and I hope to convey this here. I also hope to convey how it makes me and/or the audience feel or react.
Prologue: The Diner
Beginning with “Pumpkin” (Tim Roth) and “Honey Bunny” (Amanda Plummer) and a wide shot of them which is beautifully lit next to the Diner window and one of only four main camera angles used in the Prologue. With a close up on Plummer, similar close up on Roth, and a zoom close up on Roth, he launches into a tirade against immigrant shop owners who have the temerity to fight back during any robbery. This is preceded by playful, sexual banter, edited quickly between the two close up angle shots, building the tension as the topic of conversation settles on their next robbery. Losing eye contact with each other just once to be corrected that “Garcon” in fact means “Boy”, the split second interlude breaks the tension and is the film’s first amusing aside.
Seemingly egging the other one, the sexual overtones are clear, as is the love and affection they have for each other, despite the frank nature of their conversation. The tension continues to build, especially the sexual overtones, they are clearly being turned on by their decision to rob the Diner, “right here, right now”. The tension is only broken by Roth slamming his gun down on the table and his instructions for Plummer to control the crowd of diners and he’ll look after the employees. The shot of the gun is typical Tarantino, a jolting, tension breaking close up and is the fifth different angle/shot of the entire scene. “I love you Pumpkin”- “I love you Honey Bunny”.
The scene length is 5 minutes.
Tim Roth and Amanda Plummer both give incredible and pulsing performances. The scene length is short but it’s an emotional roller coaster of love, passion, anger, desire and ultimately desperation.
Epilogue: The Diner
Opening on the outside of the Diner we are quickly transported to a single shot of “Jules” and “Vincent”, which remains a single shot and lingers long as they discuss first the greatness of their working colleague “Winston Wolf”, then the merits and demerits of eating bacon! The shot is only broken by a close up on Vincent as he laughs at his Partner for finally relaxing and enjoying himself and coming out of character. A typical Tarantino tension breaker but equally typically this is replaced with another, as close up, quick edited shots of the two are shown discussing that day’s miracle event. Vincent is perplexed that Jules is taking the event so seriously, almost mocking him, but the majority of the screen time is now on Jules. Explaining the miracle and the “touch of God”, the tension again builds, but again broken, this time by a separate shot of a diner shouting “Garcon — Coffee”. Resuming the tension, still with the two close ups quickly edited against each other, Jules holds court before another tension breaker and the iconic “If my answers frighten you Vincent, you should cease asking scary questions”.
A rolling close up of Jules is broken by Pumpkin and Honey Bunny as they begin their robbery, with a manic edited sequence of their crowd control and employee control techniques. Frantic, aggressive and a typical jolting lurch again from Tarantino. A close up of the cash register is also typical Tarantino, but is purely scene setting for the finale’
Pumpkin, collecting wallets from the diners is drawn to Jules, the coolest and calmest of all dining patrons. With a rolling, close in shot of Pumpkin, gun pointing at Jules he demands both his wallet and the infamous briefcase. Only broken by occasional flash shots of the Diner Manager or Honey Bunny, the focus is now on two close in shots, of Pumpkin and of a calm Jules, completely at ease at having a gun pointing at him. The briefcase is opened and whilst distracted, Jules reverses the roles, now with gun pointing directly at Pumpkin, a single shot, never losing eye contact, he screams at Honey Bunny, gradually reducing the scream to a stern command, to a gentle almost whisper. Still with eyes fixed on Pumpkin, but talking quietly to Honey Bunny, Jules is now both holding court, and in complete control. Another tension breaker, talking quietly he requests everyone to be cool and with yet another pop culture reference, this time to “Happy Days”, Jules states “We’re gonna be like three little Fonzies here”.
Now seated, Pumpkin still has a gun pointing directly at him, Honey Bunny, on a table with a gun pointing at Jules, with Jules still talking to Honey Bunny but never taking his eyes away from Pumpkin. The tension has dropped as Jules has taken control, however a typical Tarantino style of a Mexican Standoff is very evident between the three. This is heightened further as the three become four as Vincent returns from the toilet. Any dialogue now is never directed at the person intended, Jules talking but with eyes fixed on Pumpkin, when Pumpkin talks his eyes never waver from Jules, Vincent to Jules, but never wavering from pointing his gun at Honey Bunny.
The tension is broken by Jules, still in complete control, as he demands the return of his wallet (cue typical Tarantino zoom close up of wallet) and by calmly reciting the Bible verse Ezekiel 25:17. Deliberately now, the tension has completely drained away for the film’s denouement. Discussing Ezekiel 25:17 and it’s meaning, Jules has reached his own personal conclusion, his intended path for the future and his determination to see it through. Releasing his gun, he tells Pumpkin and Honey Bunny to leave, which they do, shattered, in each others arms. Leaving, the film ends with Vincent (carrying a book) and Jules (carrying the infamous briefcase), walking casually and calmly to the exit, before tucking their guns into their pants, and calmly leaving.
The scene length is 16 minutes.
Tim Roth & Amanda Plummer are incredible with John Travolta as “Vincent” supporting the scene well, but excels later. However, this is Samuel L Jackson as “Jules” at his very best and it’s a mighty performance. From nonchalant cool to raging anger and back again. His realisation and God moment is brilliantly performed. A master class in acting.
So there you have it! The other 90%? It’s another two hours of flat out brilliance from a meticulous Director at the very top of his craft, and some of the greatest actors of our generation. Go see it. And if you’ve seen it already, see it again. You won’t regret it. The film follows a three act structure very loosely, though as you’ve seen above these rules don’t strictly apply, but are titled “Vincent Vega and Marsellus Wallace’s Wife”, “The Gold Watch” and “The Bonnie Situation” with continuous interweaving narrative strands throughout. The brilliant characters not already named above but who feature prominently include:
“Marsellus Wallace” (Ving Rhames) Gets Medieval on someone’s ass, and other areas of the body too. Also prone to throwing people out of tall buildings if they give his wife a foot massage. This fact remains unproven.
“Mia Wallace” (Uma Thurman) Sexy and sublime temptress. A performance I could watch again and again.
“Butch” (Bruce Willis) A journeyman boxer seeking a final payday. Steals somebody’s Chopper and sings “Flowers on the Wall” in my favourite scene of the film.
“Winston Wolf” (Harvey Keitel) “I’m Winston Wolf. I solve problems”
He can also drive almost anywhere in 9 minutes and 37 seconds.
“Captain Koons” (Christopher Walken) One single, surreal scene from the Master.
There are numerous key supporting cameo performances throughout including “Lance” (Eric Stoltz), “Zed” (Peter Greene), “Jody” (Rosanna Arquette), “Fabienne” (Maria de Medeiros), “Buddy Holly” (Steve Buscemi), “Brett” (Frank Whaley), “Esmerelda Villalobos” (Angela Jones) and Quentin Tarantino himself as “Jimmie”.
The soundtrack is a joy all of it’s own. No musical score to speak of, more an eclectic mix of 60’s/70’s tracks from Tarantino’s own collection. “Misirlou” plays over the opening credits and from there a collection of classics, “Jungle Boogie” by Kool and the Gang, “Let’s Stay Together” by Al Green, “Son of a Preacher Man” by Dusty Springfield, “Girl, you’ll be a Woman Soon” by Urge Overkill and “Flowers on the Wall” by The Statler Brothers are particular favourites and stand outs.
Although I’ve only concentrated on the Prologue and Epilogue, there is a two hour masterpiece from Quentin Tarantino in between. I’ve tried to keep spoilers to a minimum, but moreover tried to critique the Director’s genius in just two small narratives.
18 years on, this modern classic remains as fresh, invigorating and challenging as it’s always been.
Thanks for reading. My three most recently published film articles are linked below or feel free to delve into my archives:
“Thirteen Lives” (2022)
The story that gripped the world in 2018.medium.com
“Brian and Charles” (2022)
Ex Machina in the Welsh Hillsmedium.com
Is “The Prestige” Christopher Nolan’s unloved masterpiece?
For it is a masterpiece and here’s why.medium.com