pgear83

Widely considered to be the best film of the past quarter-century and certainly the most influential, the second film directed by Quentin Tarantino is a masterpiece of modern storytelling. The film contains multiple and intersecting story lines and popularized this structural technique, paving the way for such excellent films as Magnolia, Crash and Babel. Likewise, the non-linear chronology of the film was also a likely inspiration for many future films, including Christopher Nolan's Memento. But none of these later films come close to Tarantino's original.

The greatest strength of this movie, and indeed all of Tarantino's work, is the writing, particularly in terms of dialog. Characters speak as they do in real life, not just to advance a plot, but about random mundanities as well. Tarantino could have been as great a novelist as he is a filmmaker and it shows in this dialog. Musings on McDonald's in Europe or the level of intimacy involved in a foot massage become funnier and more fascinating than one would ever think. Characters also stutter, trip over their words, repeat themselves and use poor grammar (not just as in colloquialisms) just as people do in unscripted real life. Yet the film is so well acted and absorbing that we do not even notice these linguistic imperfections without applying very close scrutiny.

As an example of the realism of the dialog, take the famous scene (indeed, one of many famous scenes in the film) in which Mia Wallace (Uma Thurman) has overdosed on heroin and Vincent Vega (John Travolta) has taken her to his drug dealer's house for help. The plan is to give her a shot of adrenaline directly to her heart (not a sound strategy according to any literature I've read; you would think they'd have some naloxone on hand for this purpose, but I digress). Vincent needs to make a mark over Mia's heart so that he can stab a needle into it:

Vincent: What I need is a big fat magic marker (pause) You got it? Jody: (after a pause) What? Vincent: A magic marker... (annoyed, desperate) A felt pen, a (expletive)ing black magic marker!

I find this very funny because it is like one of those situations in everyday life where people misunderstand each other because they have different words for things, or they mishear. Of course, in an emergency situation like this one, tempers would obviously flare.

All of Tarantino's films have excellent dialog, but what really sets Pulp Fiction above the rest are the themes of redemption/salvation and the character arc of Jules Winnfield (Samual L. Jackson). The partner of Vincent Vega, Jules is a bible quoting, murderous hit-man. Jules and Vincent sadistically kill a room full of young men to reacquire the mysterious briefcase, belonging to their boss. In finishing this job, however, they escape death themselves only by an extraordinarily unlikely occurrence. Jules believes a miracle has occurred, but Vincent dismisses it as chance. They debate the implications of what has happened first at the site and later at the restaurant that is the site of the first and last scenes of the film. As they debate, the camera cuts back and forth between them, showing them in opposite profiles and highlighting their opposite world-views. In a "moment of clarity" Jules decides to give up crime and "walk the earth." Vincent is skeptical, but Jules shows he is serious by going out of his way to save the lives of the two more amateurish robbers that attempt to steal the briefcase. Likewise, in one of the other story lines we see Butch Coolidge (Bruce Willis) risk his own life to save another human being (who only hours before was trying to kill him) from torture. It is these examples of morality from the immoral and of karma working its fatal purpose that make this an often inspiring film.

Finally, I have to wonder whether Tarantino even knew how great a film he was making. Pulp Fiction is a tribute to the lurid, disposable so-called 'low' art of the mid 20th Century - poorly dubbed Asian crime films, sci-fi magazines and detective stories, etc. Who would have thought that one of the century's last great works of art would have arisen from such material? Perhaps a microcosm of this is the manner in which Jules is a connoisseur of fast-food hamburgers, finding beauty and delectability in the most mundane and disposable of culinary indulgences. This film is indeed, a very tasty burger.