That's how RR described this. How is that?
If you've got a problem with this post, go post yourself
what? that makes no sense. pulp fiction is so far from being a kids movie, that a "pulp fiction for kids" would be impossible to imagine...
shareBecause it was told in a series of "shorts", out of the order in which things actually happened. I don't know if this was really necessary in the grand scheme of things. I think the creator thought it would make it more interesting.
shareComparing Pulp Fiction to Shorts just because there both non-linear, is like comparing The Dark Knight to Hancock cos there both about super-heros
NATHAN GAMBLE, Bobby Coleman, Jimmy Bennett and Jackson Bond. All AWESOME actors
He wasn't talking about the film, but rather the format of the film when he described it as Pulp Fiction for kids.
"That's also the format that the story is told in: a series of shorts, and we tell them out of order, so it's like Pulp Fiction for kids, and you have to figure out the whole puzzle."
http://blastr.com/2009/08/why-shorts-is-pulp-fictio.php
We made a land where crap is king, and the good don't last too long.
great idea
share