Pulp Fiction isn't even the best movie Tarantino made in the '90s.The real answer is Jackie Brown.

Fixed.

I agree as I really enjoy Shawshank Redemption, but people talk about it like its a great as The Godfather.

This is correct.

Pulp Fiction changed the game - I was so blown away by it when I saw it at the theater. I also loved Shawshank Redemption - thought it was an exteremly well made film but, to me it is without question overrated - The film was praised, I mean like damn near worshiped for years after its release - never understood that level of exictement for it.

Jackie Brown was pretty good - too drawn out though. I actually don't get the drooling over this one either.

Nah, it was this one:

They're both excellent films. Pulp Fiction is the kind of movie I can watch over and over again and not get tired of though.... so I'd lean toward PF.

I think Pulp Fiction is the better movie as far as performances go, and it was very stylish and innovative.

I really liked Jackie Brown, but I putting aside 'personal tastes' you have to say that Pulp Fiction is a better made film. My favorite Tarantino film is Reservoir Dogs, but I readily admit that Pulp Fiction is the better made film of the two. Pulp Fiction is Tarantino's masterpiece, as it is very well written, and all of the stories are woven together perfectly.

I guess my best analogy is that Goodfellas is my favorite Scorcese film, but Raging Bull is a better made film and probably Scorcese's masterpiece.

Man-on-man ass-rape?

Slightly off topic --- why is Andy over 6 ft. tall and why isn't Red Irish? I always wondered about these changes. Other than that it's exactly like the source material. It's still a good flick but not better than PF.

Not at all. Jackie Brown is the less gimmicky, more assured and confident work of the two. Easily the "better made" of both films, in my opinion.

It's Tarantino's most "mature" film by far. It's quieter when it needs to be, more melancholic, and gives things a little more room to breathe.

Red clearly states in the movie that he's Irish. That's why he's called "Red".

http://www.popmatters.com/post/14982...nos-best-film/

This is why Jackie Brown is Tarantino’s best “film.” It represents everything a writer and director needs to do in creating a masterpiece without being obvious or invasive. There is an organic flow to this film that’s lacking in his other work, while the performances aren’t pushy or forcibly flashy. In fact, had Tarantino walked into the world of motion pictures with this as his resume reel, people would be calling for his canonization. It’s the perfect realization of everything the artform has to offer - approach, actualization, and aesthetics. Nothing is out of place or overdone. It should be his calling card. Instead, because it followed Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, it was seen as a bit of a letdown before his next boffo explosion.

Until last week, JACKIE BROWN was the only Tarantino film I liked that I didn't have on DVD. While visiting Book Off, I found a used copy for $5 and remedied that.

It would be interesting to know how many of the posters making negative comments about Pulp Fiction are over 40 years old.

Don't look at me. I own it and voted for it in this poll.

I don't think it's a matter of age as it is sensitivities... I'm 44 and I think Pulp Fiction DESTROYS Shawshank, but I don't think all THAT much of the latter movie. It's good but it's a Lifetime movie with a budget, at best.

I'm 45 and I agree with this.

I own them both on blu ray and love them both in their own way. Calling one better than the other is a fool's errand. Each film does what it does extremely well. We might as well compare Forrest Gump to The Lion King while we are at it.

I said the same thing about Silver Linings Playbook and was told by my friend that I was a curmudgeon who didn't like it because it was happy and I was full of shit .

Who's making negative comments? Saying Jackie Brown is a better movie doesn't mean Pulp Fiction sucks.