All I know is that I don't know. |
|
|
All I know is that I don't know nuthin'.  Links and whatnot Blogs and FriendsPreacherman Johnny Payphone Mr. Nosuch Teresa Strickland radiohodgepodge Just Cheap Dirt xpurple Fairly Crass Babble Book Staircase Wit Pezman Jack Jackson's Dirty Pictures 2000 Jgrrl's LJ lfirebrand Funny, yet true The Onion Modern Humorist Something Awful X-Entertainment Seanbaby What's Better? Homestar Runner Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog Get Your War On Maakies A Softer World News and stuff Plastic Google News Movies IMDb Roger Ebert Cinema Confidential Rotten Tomatoes Music and Art Pitchfork They Might Be Giants Bongwater Taffy Rate Your Music Rocket From The Crypt The All Music Guide 2.13.61 Publishing Tha Friendly Gangstaz Committee The Wooster Collective Star City Scene OLGA The Terminals oh my god The Zyklon Bees Strawberry Burns Lone Prairie Records eagle*seagull Genuinely Useful Stuff The Straight Dope Adbusters SpamCop Pandamail h2g2 Download.com Analog X The Free World Pilonidal.org 
 Mail me AIM: RawkStah My Profile My MySpace Space  
HOME Archives:  
|
Saturday, August 17, 2002
Got the Pulp Fiction Collector's Edition today.
Some thoughts on the movie, after not having seen it for most of a decade. 1) It's still damn good. Some of the tension is gone, simply because I know what's coming next, but, it's still a very good movie. It should have won Best Picture instead of Forrest Gump -- which was a good flick, too. Just not the Best Picture. 2) The twist contest is not subtle. At all. Which leads me to point 3. 3) I'm not sure that Tarantino is much of a filmmaker. Don't get me wrong -- I adore his work. I want him to hurry the hell up and finish Kill Bill (which may or may not have both Vincent Vega and Vic "Mr. Blond" Vega on screen at the same time!). Pulp Fiction was the only movie I've been to that got a standing ovation. I love the stories he tells. I love the pop-culture references. I love the dialogue and the characters. I'm just not sure how much of what we see is a result of his direction instead of the skill of the actors. (Jebus -- I almost feel bad writing this...) He's clearly in love with cinema, albeit a different sort of cinema than Spielberg is in love with. He loves the 'underground' cinema -- blaxploitation, chop socky, things like that. He takes noir and mixes it up with what he loves, and we get wonderful movies. I'm not sure how good he is at being a 'subtle' director -- Jackie Brown was a good step in the right direction. He's a damned good writer and director, but I'm not sure that he's a 'filmmaker'... Comments by: YACCS |