MovieChat Forums > Pulp Fiction (1994) Discussion > Not aging well at all

Not aging well at all

posted 3 years ago by Heisenberg (6288)
67 replies | jump to latest

Every time I rewatch it, it becomes less interesting and more cliched.
I loved it when it came out and was fresh and amazing.
Now it just sound like Tarantino speaking his pop obsessed overworked dialogue with every single character, cramming in way too many little accidents and "original" bits to feel pertinent or confidently crafted.
It feels now overly manufactured and trying way too hard, I guess after losing its sugar gloss all that's left has too little nutrition value to hold my interest over decades, like a good joke that has now become stale and outdated.

[–] TylerAArse (2652) 3 years ago

I 100% disagree. This shit is great.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7397) 3 years ago

I dislike the TC's thinking. A lot of my favorite movies are from more than 20 years ago. I also like movies from 90 years ago. I don't like this jaded way of thinking that a movie is bad because it has dated things in it. You are missing out on a lot of good movies by having that way of thinking.

[–] Heisenberg (6288) 3 years ago

I totally agree with you.
What kind of idiot would think like that?
It's like disliking a brand new Ferrari because the metals in it are ancient.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7397) 3 years ago

Huh? A new Ferari has new metals. What the heck?

[–] samoanjoes (50822) 3 years ago

I know what you mean. This was my favourite movie back in the 90s, but after watching other Tarantino movies, you become more aware of his sameness that it sort of loses its magic.

[–] Heisenberg (6288) 3 years ago

Yep, right on the money.

[–] Jones70 (6195) 3 years ago

Sounds like you just got older and more cynical.

[–] Heisenberg (6288) 3 years ago

I doubt that's got anything to do with how PF is aging.

[–] PrincessTutu (76) 3 years ago

Films don’t age, only people do. If you don’t like this film anymore that’s fine. However, a lot of people do and, as far as I can tell, the praise this film has received holds up quite well indeed.

[–] Fandango (534) 3 years ago

Love it or hate it, Pulp Fiction came at a time when film-making was nearing its centennial. What Pulp Fiction did, inadvertently or not, was mark a new trajectory in cinematography, taking it into the 21st century. It is the postmodern manifest realized in its purest form.

In postmodernism old elements are taken and formed into something new. If we look at Pulp Fiction as a whole, we see that it is a collage of all of these older elements in film. From the typified characters, represented as symbols (Bruce Willis is not just a random man with a sword, he is Bruce Willis from Die Hard; Travolta is not just dancing to Chuck Berry at the club, he is Travolta from Saturday Night Fever), to the soundtrack that does not contain a single new or original piece of music. Furthermore, while the film's colorized and superficial message is violent, cynical, and amoral, the film contains within it the culmination of American film-making, as it sews Christian ethics into a seamless composition.

Pulp Fiction's message is that of forgiveness, the most Christian message of them all. Samuel L. Jackson, forgiving the couple at the restaurant, and then walking outside with a white shirt on highlights resurrection and being born a new man. Bruce Willis, forgiving the person who wishes him ill-will and giving him a lending hand, also reifies this notion. John Travolta, on the other hand, dismissing Jackson's message as a form of shock, is killed.

In the end, Tarantino managed to synthesize the defining elements of the passing era in film (morality, love, wit, humor, style, action) and form it into something original.

[–] Wuchak (8081) 3 years ago

Bruce Willis, forgiving the person who wishes him ill-will and giving him a lending hand, also reifies this notion. John Travolta, on the other hand, dismissing Jackson's message as a form of shock, is killed.

After Butch (Willis) saves the humbled Marcellus (Rhames) from the gross rapists, he rides away on the borrowed motorcycle with "Grace" clearly written on the gas tank.

[–] Wuchak (8081) 3 years ago

Not aging well at all

That's funny, because I didn't see it until a full 20 years after it's release in 2014 and it blew me away, which means it must be aging just fine.

Despite its popularity, I waited so long to view it because the title, the genre and the plot just didn't trip my trigger. But then I saw "Inglourious Basterds" and appreciated it for its unique approach, so I thought I'd give "Pulp Fiction" a chance. I'm glad I did because it's Tarantino's best flick and one of my all-time favorites.

[–] TheArgentinian (6425) 3 years ago

There's nothing dated about it. It could have premiered last week.

[–] Heisenberg (6288) 3 years ago

I didn't say it's dated, I said that it looks more and more like a long, forced, uninteresting Tarantino sketch.
If you release it today (or think of Pulp Fiction 2, just more of the same), that would be exactly how it's viewed.
I never have the same problem with Reservoir Dogs or Jackie Brown, which aged like fine wine.

[–] TheArgentinian (6425) 3 years ago

>I didn't say it's dated

You said it didn't age well. That's the same thing.

[–] Heisenberg (6288) 3 years ago

No, dated means it's something typical of another era, whose standards don'thold up any longer (like, they talk, act funny or artificially, outdoors filmed on a set, stagey camera, goofy editing, cheesy music, silly story etc- all stuff that back then was normal or even new, and now looks weird).
Pulp fiction is still modern and current. It only went from hot stuff to wrinkly old fart.