![]() |
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
Originally Posted by hanshotfirst1138
(Post 12067461)
QT has outright said that he never wants to write another adaptation, and I can't see him writing another screenplay with anybody else again at this point.
|
Yes, but that was before his ego was comfortably capable of housing the population of Australia :p.
|
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
For every ten unnecessary thread bumps, there's one like the discussion contained in the last 22 posts that makes it all worthwhile.
|
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
Originally Posted by inri222
(Post 12066910)
They are not even, Butch put them in that situation because he did not do what he was told. Two people are dead, one man is out of money and his tuckus was violated. LA privileges ain't shit compare to what Marcellus lost.
|
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
Originally Posted by Sean O'Hara
(Post 12067567)
Why would Marcellus care that some nobody palooka's dead? It's not like he's friends with the boxer -- he just put a bet on the guy.
(who is at the end of his career) retires with some money in his pocket. He pays Butch money in advance, Butch accepts it and says he has no problems accepting Marcellus' terms and conditions. "In the fifth my ass goes down." |
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
If Butch had gone out the front door of the shop, he would have gotten clean away and Marcellus would have died. Instead, he risked his own life to save Marcellus, by saving the boss who intended to kill him. Then he put the decision of whether he would live or die into Marcellus's hand. Look at Butch's body language. He's submitting to Marcellus's will. It was a powerful gesture of medieval fealty, and Marcellus was honor-bound to grant him his life.
|
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
Originally Posted by Nick Danger
(Post 12067641)
It was a powerful gesture of medieval fealty, and Marcellus was honor-bound to grant him his life.
|
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/D2zMwtolhmY?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
|
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
^ I think #8 was the only one I didn't know/hadn't heard before...still, a nice little video.
Man, I need to watch it again - its been a while. Remind me again how this didn't win Best Picture? Oh yeah, that damned Forrest Gump. |
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
Originally Posted by Shannon Nutt
(Post 12365099)
^ I think #8 was the only one I didn't know/hadn't heard before...still, a nice little video.
Man, I need to watch it again - its been a while. Remind me again how this didn't win Best Picture? Oh yeah, that damned Forrest Gump. |
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
(Post 12365746)
To add even more irony to that, Travolta was in line to play Gump before Hanks.
Actually, I might have liked FORREST GUMP if Travolta had played the lead. Of course, no one would have gone to see it and it would never have won the Oscar, but there'd be diehard fans of it lamenting the fact that SHAWSHANK (or whatever was actually up for it that year) won Best Picture and Travolta's masterful comeback went unnoticed. |
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
Originally Posted by RocShemp
(Post 12365000)
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/D2zMwtolhmY?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The Ezekiel 25:17 speech did not come from the mind of Tarantino, but from a Sonny Chiba movie <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8LYT4JC2dd4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> |
Re: Pulp Fiction question?
Originally Posted by RocShemp
(Post 12365000)
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/D2zMwtolhmY?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:42 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.