Anyone else here not like Pulp Fiction?

Probably gonna get crucified for this but I found the film not terrible but mostly boring. It had memorable moments and great actors but as a film it just felt drawn out and not that engaging. Like the thing it gets the most praise for is the diaologue but a lot of it felt like it needed to be trimmed. A lot of it felt dragged out and lost its punch for me (an example would be when Marsellus gave a speech after being saved by Bruce Willis's character). A lot of the dialogue also feels forced to me and comes off as scripted diaologue attempting to sound improvised. Like im not offended by Tarantino using the N word but his rant just sounded unnatural to me like he came up with that line and had to have it in there even if it didnt fit.

Besides that most of the scenes just drag for me and from a plot perspective its just not engaging for me. I dont mind that its a series of pointless events but most of what happens just isnt interesting enough to drive a movie for me.

I like Pulp Fiction, but I don't think it's the mindblowing masterpiece everyone makes it out to be. I think it's good or decent overall, and maybe one of the best movies of 1994, if I saw some of the other contenders but I don't think it's one of the top best movies every made as it's often treated as.

It's not meant to be a plot driven race against time thriller though, of course, but something more along the lines of American Graffiti, where the stories don't really matter that much or perhaps are not every important, and you just get to sit back and relax and enjoy the ride.

Nothing wrong with that perhaps.

You have to to appreciate how Tarantino came up with a completely new concept of story telling. Something that has never really happened since.

Shawshank, Forrest Gump, and Lion King are the other big films of that year. There was also natural born killers and Speed.

What concept is that though? Wouldn't movies like American Graffiti or Easy Rider, also have a similar concept?

it's the greatest thing ever when you're 14 but it descends rapidly when you're older. Well to me anyway, nothing to do with the quality of the film but similar to Breaking Bad i've found it not very rewatchable, less than Reservoir Dogs even which is by far my fave Tarantino.

How is it a new concept? You mean how its non linear?

A film starring Travolta, Willis, Jackson & Thurman is obviously what he meant!

I never really liked it.
It had it's moments, but overall it wasn't very appealing (not because of the violence since I thought Reservoir Dogs was good).
Probably my favorite part was the Bruce Willis / Ving Rhames sequence (and bringing out the Gimp!)
I didn't care for the jumping timeline.

Is it really the first non-linear movie?

Strange, I thought Pulp Fiction would be enjoyed by an older crowd since more older people of today seem to enjoy it than younger, unless teens were into a movie like that, back then.

Another thread full of whackness, which we've discussed dozens of times, but I'm one of the older crowd. Yippee.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

Definitely not the first non linear movie. Reservoir dogs was also non linear.

Was Pulp Fiction considered notable for its use of violence? I think i heard the violence was controversial but it seemed fairly tame even for the time.

Whackness?

That was my favorite part as well partially because it was bizarre and out of nowhere though I still stand that speech wouldve been better trimmed.

I can't stand Pulp Fiction. The movie isn't that good, the dialogue is boring and overall it is way too hammy. It doesn't have much of a plot and it emphasizes style way too much over substance.

Also, Natural Born Killers, which is a much better movie with a much better director came out the same year, but nobody paid any attention to it because they were all fawning over Pulp Fiction. That was really annoying. The editing, the cinematography, the directing and the acting were all so much better in Natural Born Killers. It also had a plot, a message and cohesion.

I consider Pulp Fiction the (early) Justin Beiber of movies; lots of acolytes fawning over the new pretty boy on the block, coos and cries and screams of how gorgeous it was, but nobody saw just how shallow and devoid of any substance it was. It was just "fresh, new and different", so it had to be good, yeah?

Sorry, but when it comes to Pulp Fiction, The Emperor has no clothes.


P.S. Yes, I know that the original story for Natural Born Killers (the original screenplay) was written by Quentin Tarantino. That just goes to show how important proper vision via direction and re-writes of a screenplay is to a story.

I'm 25 dude, not older crowd yet at least i hope.

That was savage. Im kinda surprised at how much people are in agreement with me here so far. I was afraid i might get called a troll but this is a film where its not just me thinking itsoverrated as much as I just dont get it lol.

Also i havent seen NBK in forever but from what i recall that seemed more fresh, new, and different.

You've established yourself in the shoutbox to me or i would have called troll as Pulp Fiction is hilariously the biggest button pusher, probably coz kids don't care about it anymore and it meant so much to people of a certain age in other decades.

I really,really,really hated NBK the first I tried to watch it.