Pulp Fiction and the Power of Characters

Last week I had the not so fun experience of getting my wisdom teeth removed. Getting teeth ripped out of your mouth or drilled out in multiple pieces, as was the case with me, is a pretty awful time. Certainly not the way you want to spend the last week of summer break. But I had big plans for this week, plans that involved smoothies and movie binging, with Quentin Tarantino's Pulp Fiction being at the top of my list. Many view this as one of Tarantino's top films and I was tired of the criminal look flashed my way when mentioned that I hadn't seen it. So I popped a few pain killers, pressed an ice pack to my cheek and settled onto the couch for this 2 hour 34 minute film.

A lengthy Tarantino movie is not unusual as most of his recent films are over 2 hours, sometimes pushing 3. I personally struggle at times sitting through long dragged out movies, but have never really had a problem with Tarantino. Both Django and Inglorious Bastards had a rich plot that carries the viewer through the experience, so I was unfazed by the long run time of Pulp Fiction.

The film draws you in quickly with it's strong dialogue and early action, bringing you into this dark and seedy world. Each seen brings a new circumstance that makes you question who's good and who's bad, what the consequences will be for each character and overall where is the plot heading? Every time I tried to convince myself that the story was leading to something big, it cut to something else, something new. It wasn't until around the 1 hour mark that I accepted the fact that plot was secondary in this film.

The thing that makes Pulp Fiction so captivating are the many personalities throughout. Each scene is pretty much used as a character piece giving the actor a spotlight to shine. Every character is so interesting and unique in their own way that as a viewer you stop thinking about the plot and more about the people. Tarantino doesn't diverge completely from formulaic story arcs as each little part of the film has a climax that is resolved before moving on to the next sequence. And things throughout the film are not actually in chronological order which is nowhere near as confusing as it sounds. Tarantino does a great job in navigating the viewer through by breaking up the different plots by titling each sequence change. For instance we see "The Golden Watch" flashed over black before jumping into Bruce Willis' story. Thanks to strong writing and direction all the actors in this piece were able to shine in this film.

What Tarantino has also done well in past is his ability to write and make a movie within a genre. A recent example is his most recent release, Django. In this film he was able to create a new and creative twist on the old school Spaghetti Westerns. With Pulp Fiction, Tarantino does a great job of creating a film that falls within the Pulp Noir genres. For those like me who didn't know what that means I looked it up. According to the internet, "Pulp noir locations are often seedy, run-down and degraded urban landscapes, where the lack of law, morals and even the proliferation of crime and drugs are common themes. Another common trend in pulp noir is the glorification and/or demonization of its urban locations." This definition almost perfectly represents the world created within the film. In Pulp Fiction, Tarantino was able to create an all time great movie built on it's characters and setting.

Quentin Tarantino

Recently I have become quite obsessed with Quentin Tarantino films. Although I have seen some of them in my past, it was not until quite recently that I became in fascinated with the infamous Tarantino. All of his films are amazing because each of them are unique in their own way. It is hard to pick just one as a favorite, but if I had to pick my favorite, which is very hard, it would most likely be Django Unchained mainly because of the character Dr. King Schultz. 

Recently I re-watched Pulp Fiction, Django Unchained, and Kill Bill Volume 1 and 2. All three of these Quentin wrote. He also directed these three as well. After re-watching these movies there were connections that I never originally noticed. For anyone that has never seen the Kill Bill series, which you should, the group of people in the movie include, a kungfu master, a blonde leader, a demolition expert, a french fox, and as well as the deadliest woman in the world with a knife. After re watching Pulp Fiction, there was a scene that I had never really put much thought into. In the dinner scene between Mia and Vincent, Vincent asks her about the pilot episode she starred in. As she goes on to explain it, she is explaining the group of people in Kill Bill. This blew my mind because Pulp Fiction came out in 1994, where as Kill Bill did not premiere until 2003. I loved how Quentin added this little part into Pulp Fiction, describing basically the draft of Kill Bill. Maybe he did not even know he was going to write that as a movie, or maybe he did but either way I found the connection interesting. Another connection he had was in Pulp Fiction, the character Captain Koon, has the same name that is on the Wanted sign in Django Unchained. The wanted sign displays the name Crazy Craig Koons. 

Yet another one is the character of Vincent Vega in Pulp Fiction, is brothers with Mr. Blonde in Reservoir Dogs. Tarantino mentioned wanting to make a separate movie with the two brothers, however Vincent Vega dies at the end of Pulp Fiction, so it would of had to of been a prequel. 

 

Obviously this is nothing new, Tarantino is known for having these small connections put in his films. All of these connections are small and subtle and Tarantino adds small little witty lines that hint at all of these connections. Many people have found other small hints in his film and have theories of which character is related to who, and what not. 

One theory I found interesting is in Django Unchained. While searching the web for these connections I found a theory on the Miramax website that speculated about Dr. King Schultz and why he was in the bounty hunting business at all. In the beginning of the movie, Django asks him how long he has been a dentist

and he answers with he had given up dentistry almost five years ago to become a bounty hunter. Dr. King Schultz never talks about family much, but it is speculated that his wife, PAULA, left him and that is why he took up the business. Later his wife realizes the terrible deed

she has done and goes out seeking him, only to find he has been killed by Calvin Candie. After hearing this she is so devastated she never gets married again, and keeps Dr. King Schultz’s last name. Finally she dies in 1893, buried with the tombstone that says PAULA SCHULTZ 1823-1893. Sound familiar? That’s the same grave that Beatrix Kiddo is buried alive in almost one hundred years later. This I found really interesting. Although there is no evidence to prove that Paula Schultz was intact Dr. King’s wife, the name is the same, and the date matches the time she could have possibly died.

Quentin Tarantino is possibly one of my favorite film makers. Not only are the stories he writes creative, hilarious, and captivating, they keep the audience wanting more. And because he knows how to insert descriptions of random people, he can build of that and create other films that connect to each film he has made. 

Watch the video below, many of Tarantino's best movie scenes are put together 

Here are some links on the interesting connections, theories, and comments of Tarantino films!

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/01/17/the-intricate-expansive-universe-of-quentin-tarantino

http://geektyrant.com/news/2013/6/15/quentin-tarantinos-pulp-fiction-and-kill-bill-connection.html

http://www.miramax.com/subscript/how-django-unchained-is-linked-to-pulp-fiction/

MacGuffin

“The main thing I’ve learned over the years is that the MacGuffin is nothing. I’m convinced of this, but I find it very difficult to prove it to others.” –Alfred Hitchcock

Other wise known as McGuffin or maguffin, a MacGuffin is a plot device that is usually given little or no narrative explanation. It can be in the form of a goal, desired object, or other kind of motivator, and can be either a person, object or place. Sometimes, you might not even notice what the MacGuffin is in a film, but it's always there, and it's the driving force behind the main character's actions in a film.

Alfred Hitchcock is famous for using this term throughout his films.

MacGuffin use in Hitchcock films

Vertigo: Carlotta Valdes' character never appears in the film, and her death isn't important at all to the audience. However, because she is apparently possessing Madeleie Elster, it starts the case for Scottie to investigate and drives the entire film's plot. Some also have noted that the necklace or Scottie's vertigo is also a MacGuffin.

The 39 Steps: Mr. Memory's memorization of plans for an airplane engine. 

Rear Window: the "murder" committed by Lars Thorwald.

Notorious: the uranium ore that is in all the vintage wine bottles.

The Birds: the reason why the birds are attacking everyone.

Psycho: the $40,000 in the envelope. 

His famous method has also inspired other films to use this method in their films. Some examples are:

Pulp Fiction: the briefcase

Avatar: the mineral unobtainium

Mission: Impossible III: the rabbit's foot

Casablanca: the letters of transit

Citizen Kane: the rosebud

Django Unchained and Christoph Waltz

Over the holidays, I managed to make it to the movies three times. Two of those three times were to see the new Quentin Tarantino spaghetti western flick “Django Unchained”. Django was an absolutely brilliant film, combining all the qualities you expect from a Tarantino flick and then some. You were given the proverbial Tarantino gore, witty banter, and slew of absolute brilliantly written characters, but also saw the intertwining of an unforeseen amount of humor (the KKK scene? BRILLIANT) with a compelling love story that drove the film’s protagonist throughout this entire elaborate and entertaining plot. All while taking place in the cruel and slavery infested era that is the 1850’s south.

What made “Django Unchained” even more incredible, and what I personally loved about it, was the absolute exceptional casting and performance by the actors. While they were all brilliant, Christoph Waltz (Dr. King Shultz) was on another level as far as I’m concerned. What astounded me about Waltz’s performance was that he was not only able to portray this very intellectual character so fluidly with his unconditional charm and enunciated vocabulary, but also capture the roughness and danger that is the bounty hunter. As you know, he won the Golden Globe for best supporting actor for this performance and still awaiting to see if he can go for two for two with his Oscar nomination in the same category. Waltz won the Oscar two years ago for his role as “Hans Landa” in Inglorious Basterds. I think it’s safe to say that if Waltz should work exclusively on Tarantino films for the rest of his career, well he’d be just fine.

How many F**ks Do You Give?

Profanity seems to be increasingly more acceptable in the media as time goes on. The question is, does this help or hurt the final product? South Park released an episode in its fifth season that literally had a "shit-couter" that went up every time the uncensored word 'shit' was used. In total, there were 162 spoken shits, and 38 written shits, making an even 200 occurrences throughout the half hour time slot. This became one of the top ten South Park episodes that changed the world, according to a 2006 exclusive documentary. This pushed the boundaries of uncensored profanity in television, and set a new standard for producers in comedy. Now, in movies, 'shit' is a common word in any movie from PG-13 and up. 'Fuck,' however, is the more controversial word. According to a chart I found on Wikipedia, there is one movie that uses the word 824 times in its 93 minutes. This, however is a documentary about the word itself, so I don't think it should count. Second on the list, though, is a movie called Gutterballs, that uses it 625 times. Now, this is not a widely popular movie, however, if you continue down the list, you'll find some very well-known, and in some cases, award-winning movies.

For example:
Casino (398)
Goodfellas (300)
Jarhead (278)
Reservoir Dogs (269)
Pulp Fiction (265)
The Big Lebowski (260)
Boondock Saints (239)
The Departed (237)
American History X (214)
Scarface (207)
8 Mile (200)
and even Good Will Hunting (154)

The rest can be seen here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_that_most_frequently_use_the_word_%22fuck%22

As you can see, these are some very famous and successful movies that gave a lot of fucks (mostly gangster movies). But, in contrast to this, I skipped over quite a few movies that were far less successful, and that you've probably never even heard of. So, the moral of the story is that if you're going to fuck a movie, make sure you fuck it well. Back to my question - how many fucks do you give?