MOVIES
PULP FICTION
FIGURING IT OUT
Actually, I have to check the script. I did a search
and couldn't find it. What I DID find was Ebert's site
which was quite interesting - he and a group did a frame
by frame analysis.
A guy at work said he was going to correct me and show
me how all the scenes fit together. Well, in my search
I DID find a site that quoted another site that he forgot
where he even got it. You may find it on a search.
In brief, I skimmed the thing and wondered where on earth
the restaurant was. And THAT's the reason the movie plays
with your head so much:
When we watch the movie onscreen - obviously, everything
is out of sequence - but what we literally see is the movie
opening in the diner and closing in the diner.
The reason I couldn't find it in this guy's time sequence
is because it was exactly where I wasn't looking for it:
In The Middle!!
The actual time sequence of events places the diner
smack dab in the middle of the whole thing.
I think that's why it messes with us so much - because
something that time-wise is in the very middle - gets
shown to us at the beginning and at the end.
That's the secret. (that had eluded me all these years!)
What I want to find in the script - or try and catch
the next time I see Pulp (they were showing it in wide-
screen just the other week...) is what name Vincent
says at the table over dinner to Mia - the person
Marsellus threw out the window for the supposed foot
massage - because I was thinking it was the guy
Zed in the basement. That's why I wrote what I
did below:
We love to get our senses freaked out.
Watching Pulp Fiction for the first time is a little like
watching Planet of the Apes for the first time.
I think.
You see, a friend of mine told me at the end was the Statue of Liberty.
So the whole movie - I'm just wondering - when do we see it?
You can enjoy watching Apes again, but like
watching Pulp Fiction again and again
you won't be surprised by the surprises - but you do enjoy
going along for the ride one more time.
Apes has only "one" punch line at the end. Tarantino does this at least twice.
The first time is a jolt.
The second time is a shock!
We realize we're in a film where things are jumping around -
but as we approach the end - we're thrust back into the beginning,
as we see Jules (Samuel L. Jackson) turning his head yelling,
"And I will strike thee with GREAT vengeance..." then the shooting occurs.
Wow. We've been brought back to the beginning of the movie. Remember that?
All that chit-chat about burgers and foot massages and the culmination of
the hit they set out to do in the first place.
But this isn't going back to the beginning of Pulp Fiction to get to the end, is it?
What we're brought to is another Magical Mystery Tour -
the gun going off in the car as they debate the "miracle,"
stopping at "Jimmie's" house where we meet the intriguing
"Mr. Wolf," (who, by the way, is it any coincidence that
Harvey Keitel was in a similar movie years earlier called
Bad Timing [1979] where events were similarly toyed with?)
We come to, "Your future... I see a cab!" And they're off
to breakfast for yet more interesting banter:
While Jules is going to "walk the earth,"
Vincent informs him the proper way to put it is
"You're going to be a bum!"
And then it happens:
Garcon! Coffee!!
Double wow.
We had just been time warped when we were brought back to the apartment of
the delinquent business partners we were introduced to at the beginning
of the movie...
But now, after all this time,
after we were initially freaked out, we're brought back to the Genesis
of the movie while we were lulled to sleep watching the "ending."
Is it getting confusing?
You're supposed to be confused.
Unlike the one trick pony Planet of the Apes, we were freaked out
by the once return to the past only to be EVEN MORE freaked out
to realize we've arrived at the diner after all this time and
are now only at the beginning once again in a more Surrealistic way.
It's like before some baseball games when they're having fun:
One stunt they do is put their head on a baseball bat and run
around in circles getting very dizzy - then they try and walk.
In essence, that's exactly what Tarantino has done.
We've been run around the bat: we were thrust back to the
beginning in the middle -
only after traveling even much further before -
we're spun around and thrust back - traveling much further
to finally reach the VERY beginning. Time warp.
Now try and figure out the movie as you stagger away.
I suppose many of you have tried to do just that.
Sort of like the Sixth Sense, you HAVE to watch it again to see
how he got away with it. Same with Pulp Fiction, you want to
figure out how it fits and make it tick.
You've watched it again and again to try and figure out the
genius behind it.
I have tried to put the scenes in their proper sequence.
My first try came out something like: 3,4,5,2,7,6,1.
I really forget, exactly, but you get my drift.
Were you in the same boat I was?
I realized a friend of mine was at a loss - he had only
enjoyed the movie once.
You have to have seen it a few times to start figuring it out,
in my opinion. But I suppose there's people out there smarter than me.
But I think when you come up with a similar sequence order like
I just mentioned - you missed it. You can't put the puzzle together
like that.
Quentin is laughing all the way to next script.
Why?
Because Pulp Fiction IS absolute - pulp - fiction.
There's NO WAY these things could have happened the way they did.
Why?
Well, you can chart and figure this and that out in a time line,
but here's the linchpin that lynches the story:
Vincent
If you think about it - you'll get it.
I'm not going to take away your fun and spoon feed you the answer.
If you watch enough, I'll think you'll eventually get it like I did.
Clue - if you really need it:
We conclude that Butch and Marsellus in the basement is the reason
why the guy was thrown out the window.
Correctomundo?
Why can't it be discussed by the hit men as a foot massage,
or with Mia, who simply shook the guy's hand at her wedding.
(Gee, you guys are worse than a sewing circle when you get together)
Why is it IMPOSSIBLE for those conversations to have occurred?
(this is where the spinning dizzy bat analogy shines.
We were spun around so much in the plot, the banter,
and the timing - we're worn out and can't put it together)
If you're going nuts and can't take it anymore - write and I'll write back.
I'll have to spoon feed you the answer as medicine to cure your pain.
Hey, I've watched the movie for years.
Don't feel bad if you don't get it.
send
me an email
On 4/15/99,
I went to see SAVING PRIVATE RYAN.
What an experience to see it in
the theater. You are there. I don't know how long the
movie is, but it seemed like only
five minutes went by. I had eaten before I went in, and
when I got out I was hungry.
It is long. But it didn't seem it. Actually, I'm surprised
I
was hungry as mostly I was in shock.
I think I had PTS (post traumatic stress) for two
or three days afterwards.
I walked around in a daze. Matter of fact, I was non plused
when I saw Rollye James walking
through the food court. As she walked by me I just
said casually "Hi Rollye" and she
stopped for a few words. (She was on her way to get a
couple egg rolls) I told her
I had just seen the movie and how it affected me. I asked her
if she had seen it, and right there
you know I was off because she doesn't go to movies
at all. But I really wasn't
thinking all that straight at the time. I let her go - I usually
don't
even talk to celebrities or even
look their way and say "hi" - I like to let them be and
live their life. Unless there's
something I have to say to them - and that is rare. I don't
know how many celebrities the average
person meets in their lifetime or what you would
consider a "celebrity". But
it seems like I've met more than my share. Being in New York
for a few years certainly helped.
If you spend a lot of time there you have to run by
somebody you've seen on TV or in
the movies. Perhaps I should make a separate
list of that...
MEN IN BLACK - Don't ever ever ever
ever give away the ending of a movie.
Sometimes I will say something about
the end of a movie if it's ten years old. Nathan Lane
was on Lettermen (I was going to
write a nasty letter but never did. I still should do that...)
and he did a skit on THE SIXTH SENSE
and gave away the crux of the movie like it was
some joke. The movie was still
playing in theaters! Bad. Very bad. I'll give you another
example. The original PLANET
OF THE APES my friend told me that they saw the Statue
of Liberty at the end. Can
you imagine how that would have hit me had I not known it?
Instead I'm waiting the whole movie,
"when we going to see the..." And I heard on the radio
last month, they were talking about
the oscars and this girl was a Kevin Spacey fan and
she gave away the ending of AMERICAN
BEAUTY. THAT'S still in theaters now.
I don't know if I was going to go
see it, but sheesh! Anyway - it's a quick subtle thing,
or maybe not so subtle, but the
ending to MEN IN BLACK is a real flip out. Don't drop
acid before the show. (As
if you would)
ANALYZE THIS Billy Crystal with the
mobsters in the warehouse. Classic. Funny movie.
SIXTH SENSE Best original screen
play. Did it win? Who cares. It's the best.
Saw it twice in the theater.
(We ALL did)
THE UNBELIEVABLE TRUTH One of my
favorite movies. Adrienne Shelly and
Richard Burke. When I used
to see it listed in the paper it was referred to as
"the cult classic". Great
segues and unique scenes. "This is the sun gear"
"That girl is crazy. She's
leaving town. So I've heard..." "Say, are you a priest?"
IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE Makes me cry
every time.
Any Nick Nolte, Jeff Bridges or Mel
Gibson film from the 1980's. Well maybe not "any".
48HRS I just like it.
THE TWELVE CHAIRS Mel Brooks Frank
Langella; Dom DeLuise; Ron Moody I mention
it because it is a little known
picture that I find funny and entertaining. I'll just copy from the
jacket:
"Set in Russia in 1927, this much-loved,
hilarious Mel Brooks comedy classic (it's actually based
on a Russian story written by two
Soviet journalists) is the tale of a former aristocrat who is
now a Russian clerk under the new
Soviet regime. When he learns that his dying mother-in-law
sewed a fortune of family jewels
into one of twelve dining room chairs, he sets off across Russia
to find it - with an opportunist
(FL), a priest (Dom) and his former servant (Mel)
all in equal pursuit." 1970
Let me just say, too, at this point
- sometimes I go into a video store and I'm overwhelmed.
There are just so many movies.
And I think a lot of them are good. And I know a lot of
them are bad. A lot of good
classics get forgotten, or copied and made lousier. I heard
a knowledgeable movie critic say
the current film "Skulls" is a rip off of a very good movie.
But the movie Skulls is terrible.
They make too many movies nowadays. And you can't
believe all you hear, either.
I liked ISHTAR. Then again, I'm a songwriter.
send
me an email
back to Tom's
Take on Things
back to HOME
PAGE