KTIK

William Fuld

My advice to Rypro would be to read negative reviews at Rotten Tomatoes. Just by reading the blurbs he should get enough of an idea why some people dislike it for a minute review.

Lokimok

I don't remember.

Jackskeleton

then I disagree with the statement. there was plenty more films that made an impact that have effected the film industry more so then pulp fiction. did it spawn off a lot of copy cats? yes. But that fad is normal for any filmed that is loved at the time.

flyboy

Then you do not recognize film history.....end of my discussion.

RyoHazuki

digitalfreaknyc doesn't like any Tarantino movie. Ask him.

Jackskeleton

What? BAW HA HA HA HAH AHA HAHAH AHA AH AHHAH AHAHA


oh man, that's some funny shit right there. Here let me make an unfound, unproven statement much like yours.


"Well then, You must be blind of anything that is remotely interesting in film history!"


Can I prove it? No. So it has to be true.

shill66

I almost hate Pulp Fiction. Bits of it are okay. But I can't really help, because I can't explain why I don't like it. Everything I can think of is not enough on its own... For example, yeah, the rampant drug use probably has something to do with it - but I have no problem with the same in other movies. The violence? No, no issues there. Tarantino backlash? I liked Reservoir Dogs a lot. Maybe I think the movie is too clever for its own good? In other words, I wasn't wowed and blindly dazzled by the non-linear structure thus I didn't think the movie was anything special? (Just like I found Memento to be an average film.)

Sod it, it's probably mostly because of Travolta.

shill66

I'm glad he said "arguably" the most influential. Because I'd certainly argue. If I had the energy...

Jackskeleton

No no no shill.. if you did you would be in the same boat I am in. That is lack any and all knowledge of film history.... end of discussion.

what a stupid thing to say.

jaeufraser

No offense Jack, but to claim that Pulp Fiction wasn't an incredibly influential film from the 1990s and since Star Wars is silly.

The guy made a valid point, I'm not sure why you have to be so obnoxious in your replies to people's arguments especially when they're correct. I know you're going to rant about how rude I'm being saying that, but quite frankly you can be quite rude to many many people regarding their posts and come off as exceptionally arrogant.

His statement has a lot of merit...a lot more than claiming Back to the Future was more influiential than Pulp Fiction. So, anyway...blast away Jack. You've got a lot of good points but God...sometimes you have no tact and make debating you more like arguing with a three year old.

Regarding Pulp Fiction, it truly was quite a revelation and proved to be quite the influence in the types of films made, but also in the independant movement and in also helping Miramax find its footing and many other things. It really was a very important film.

Jackskeleton

To say that it was as big as say Star wars or was the biggest influence in film SINCE 77 is really a stretch. That is what I read into his comment and that is what I responded to. Being corrected is something I'm always open to if it is pointed out to me. To add further that I lack any knowledge of film history simply because I disagree or do not fully back that statement up is the real obnoxious aspect of it.

I mentioned a few films that were of influence to film since star wars. JP was clearly something of great importance to film or we wouldn't be were we are today with effects.

Now Miramax breaking down the door.. Yes, that was start of it all. Now can we say that LOST IN TRANSLATION is one of the most influential films of the 2000's? I mean this is the start of focus features run. Miramax has turned the way of the studios with the treatment it offers some of it's imports.

His statement has a lot of merit, but to go to the extreme and refuse any sort of discussion by simply "ending the discussion" makes debate with him pretty non existant.

As for the Back to the future. It was tossed in as one of those random titles that put time travel into a new light and like pulp fiction made it mainstream. It also offered a mainstream use of going back be the original and filming in some sort of missorder. It's sort of like saying that Nirvana was more influential then the pixies were. You have to go to the source. Now am I saying BTTF was the source of anything? No. I'm saying that Pulp Fiction wasn't the end all most influentail thing since star wars. Clerks had the same sort of dialouge that QT offered. Can we say that Clerks was the end of all ends mega influential film for film scripts? No, it made it's impact and for it's budget it really hit the mark.

I put it up front that I'm always up for a debate. Have me be wrong or right I'll be glad to show my down falls while putting what I believe is something of merit. I see going "END OF DISCUSSION" "YOU KNOW NOTHING OF FILM" more of the act of a three year old.

I agree with your first part. it was incredibly influential.. but it's odd you ment no offense because...
that sounded pretty offensive. If you want to debate sure, but if you are going to toss in condecending jabs then don't bother because it will turn into a bigger personal attack. I read his response and frankly, if you are going to toss out someone's views simply because they disagree with you and make bold statements about everyone who disagrees with you then I would much rather laugh about it. So that is why I just toss in the comment at those who may share or take a even deeper stance against Pulp Fiction. You lump a group of people into film ignorants simply because they dislike or do not feel that a film had as much influence as you claim it does without any debate, discussion or statement to back your claims up then it's better just to laugh about it all.

I may have missread that cop out of "arguably the most influential" yet when I do try to bring up a discussion that I disagree with the statement when I read into it that it was the biggest since star wars that I got the child like response that I know shit about film history. I'm up for a debate. Especially if I missread it. Now the main issue is why is it since? I could think of a few films. I tossed out some that played around with time and all that aspect. Pulp Fiction used a film trick that worked. It's like saying Momento and it's backwards story telling is influential and is being used in every day film somehow.

It worked great in that film but after it's splash down it really just went away.

jaeufraser

Jack you're the only one who does the BIG LETTERS LOTS OF EXCLAMATION POINTS YOU'RE ALL MORONS I'M RIGHT!!! type of thing. Yet you you claim you're mocking it when you're the only one who does it.

No, his end of discussion wasn't childish. You were being rude, you said outright he was wrong, Pulp Fiction was not influential, and sarcastically mocked him as if he were stupid. Your tone is rude, insulting, and you didn't even bother to make an argument until after my post. I wouldn't blame anyone for not wanting to argue with that, it's just pointless sometimes. Now, you're not an idiot you have a lot of good points and you know what you're talking about a lot of the time. But if anyone is playing mister E tough guy, it's you. If you honestly think you were mature respectful one in that or our exchange than...well...ok.

I'm not intending to throw personal attacks. I just read your posts and it comes off that way a lot. I won't continue on this, I just wanted to point it out that in this thread, and quite a few others, that's exactly how it reads.

Jackskeleton

That's funny Jaeufraser, lets take a look at my original text:

I don't see any part of that saying "You are Wrong". I do see that I asked if there wasn't any other film in that time period that was influential.

When it was pointed out that he didn't mean that this was the only film SINCE I restated my side

Again, I'm not saying Pulp Fiction did shit for film. But I first disagree. this would start off a discussion of why I believe so. I then state that there was more films to do so. He comes back with


Pretty bold statement not knowning me or anything right? who's acting like a child here? I wanted to get into a discussion about it. Would my stance be as solid without any doubt? No, I'm sure if I listened to him stating why he felt Pulp Fiction was as influential as it was then I'm sure I could agree with a lot of what he said and also disagree with a lot. But it would have been a shit lot more interesting then "Well then, you don't know shit about film history."

Me Sarcasticlly mocking him came after he just tossed out any thought of telling us why he felt the way he did. My tone may be rude and yes, I like to joke around a lot like that on this forum. Much like Groucho's comments you need to realize what is a joke and what is not. I didn't make an argument because there was nothing to argue about. He left the discussion with "You don't know shit about film history" that's it. What is there to debate with that?

If it's pointless then why the hell are you still debating about debating? How silly is that? I can honestly say that I wasn't mature after the fact that he told me I know shit about film. I admit that clearly. Why should I be mature about it if he wasn't going to? He went to that level first. I would have gladly went into a discussion about the matter but after that I'll just enjoy myself with the fact that anyone who disagrees with it is blindly lacking any knowledge of film history.

as for this
I've explained many times now. When I see something like his statement to close out the discussion it reminds me of the typical "OMG!!11" type of internet comments. I then go into a sort of Something Awful mode and well I play it off as a mocking text simply because I find humor in that. I would much rather laugh about it then get pissy about it. I do that by exaggerating it out. Now if you don't get it that is fine. It really doesn't concern me who gets it or not. It is a way for me to not take it as seriously as the guy is trying to make it.

Honestly. to end a discussion by saying "end of my discussion." that is just flat out funny right? Especially when you have made nothing but a blanket statement. be honest. It's just a little funny right? That is why I took the ball and ran with it in a mocking manner. Cause it was the start of the discussion. I was already. I just rephrased my statement and said I disagree. It could have been a pretty good discussion from then on but to cop out like that, I just had to laugh a little about that. Have it come off as rude or e-tough, fine. I just found it beyond funny.

ArchibaldTuttle

I have never met someone who hated it?

Rivero

The #1 reason why anyone would say they HATED this movie is because it was very popular, influential and for a long time people wouldn't shut up about it. And there are the movie afficionados who despise the fact that Tarantino borrowed from dozens of other films for this one, in paying homage, and that THOSE films aren't as well known as Pulp.

Rivero

What are the Jurassic Park ripoffs? The Back to the Future ripoffs? The Terminator 2: Judgement Day ripoffs? The Abyss ripoffs? When it comes to Pulp Fiction knockoffs very quickly off the top of my head I can list Things to Do in Denver When You're Dead, 2 Days in the Valley, 32 Short Films About Glen Gould, Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, etc. etc. Pulp is no doubt the most influential American film of the 90's. From a British perspective, Trainspotting has certainly influenced British films since its release, but then we're talking about completely different social contexts. Trainspotting is kind of considered part of a rash of (so-called) 'ecstasy literature/films', yet it's about heroin. Still a highly influential film which has been felt on both sides of the Atlantic. Other films I would call highly influential in recent years are Breaking the Waves, Goodfellas, Sex, Lies and Videotape and Die Hard.

Save Ferris

I didnt hate the movie but I didnt like it.
My reasons:

-- I didnt like any of the characters. The 'funny' parts just didnt work for me mostly because of this. I didnt like hardly any of the ACTORS so maybe this affected my judgement. Maybe this would of been a better movie with different actors?

-- The plot went places that didnt interest me. Now Ive only seen this movie once so I cant give you specifics but it just seemed overall that the plot was just a silly freak show that was way too aware of itself and tried too hard to be funny. The drug use and gore didnt bother me.

-- The hype was/is definately too high for this movie IMHO

tdilia

I've know a few people that hated PF. The #1 reason, "I didn't understand it, what's with all the going back and forth and all the flashbacks, blah, blah, blah,blah". All of Quintin's movies are edited that way, and how could somebody not understand it, it's not rocket science. I love this movie, one of my all time favorites and it is not overrated, the only thing that I didn't like about PF was QT performance.

King Jaspo

I don't hate it. But it is close.

QT's movies are like underground comic books. Simple, graphic and dystopian. His characters are two dimmensional and cartoon like. You never really get to know them and most importantly care about them. There isn't really a lot of conflict between people. It is mostly conflict among weapons.

I do think many that hate PF have issues with QT in general.

I certainly do not care for his work.

Debaser

I have this personal critera that I use to judge people and it's based around wether or not you like Pulp Fiction. I can be best friends with someone or have a relationship with a woman but if you like Pulp Fiction deep down I'll think your a fucking idiot.

That out of the way what I despise about the film is a) popularity for a movie that is complete and utter ass b) the fact that it blatently rips off other films and calls it 'homages' c) the acting skills of Quentin Tarantino d) the 'hipness' of the film when to me it comes off as 'forced' and 'cheesy' e) the basic structure of the film is almost identical to a Japanese film from the 80's f) the people who universally like it tend to be complete fucktards I've met personally g) the Uma Thurman scene with the needle is a straight lift from another movie so I don't see how the hell that is considered an homage.

Since sometimes it's hard to read between the lines of a post in a thread I'd like to say right off the bat that I'm not personally attacking anyone for liking the film. Everyone has personal preferences and I'm not going to force my opinion on somebody's else's equally valid opinion.

Rivero

I think you mean one-dimensional. Underground comics rule.

Groucho

Which movie?Which movie?

Rivero

Deep down anyone this close-minded who honestly felt this way would be the true idiot. I don't think you're an idiot, just one of those guys who can't stand anything that becomes too popular. Kinda like some people I know who saw Titanic opening weekend and said they liked it. Flashforward five months, it's the #1 film of all time and has 11 Oscars, these very same people say they don't like it. People like this simply equate popularity = shit. THESE are idiots.

Groucho

I'll admit that I like Titanic, and still do! Leo is dreamy.