I mean in Pulp Fiction, there are some good scenes and amazing dialogue. I will admit that some of the best moments are things like Samuel L. Jackson talking about cheeseburgers, John Travolta going out to dinner with Mrs. Wallace, or Tarentino himself just having coffee while trying to figure out the situation. I like these scenes because in a movie that straight up does not care about trying to be entertaining, having a point, or telling a story, at least something memorable is going on.

I hate Tarentino, not because he has no talent, but because the only skill he seems to possess is writing dialogue, and basically nothing else.

My problem is that the movie ultimately doesn't tell a story about Jules and Vince, it just kind of meanders and goes nowhere. Nothing is ever actually done with these characters. Mia bonds with Vince and then has an overdose, so I'm glad we got to spend time knowing her, don't I just feel like we accomplished something there? As for Vince and Jules, Jules quits, Vince dies in a bathroom, oh and some guy named Marvin gets carted off to the deceased African American storage that Tarantino runs, as you can tell from the helpful sign in his front yard.

Who is Marvin? Who's the guy that seems to congratulate Jules and Vince when he comes to pick Marvin's body up? Why do I care about either? Why are Jules and Vince seemingly being exonerated and honored if Marvin's death wasn't supposed to happen? Who the fuck is Marvin?

Oh and something about stolen gold or something. I gotta admit, I don't give a shit what's in the box. I don't care if it's the award Tarentino wanted to win, I don't care if it's Marcellus Wallace's soul.

By the way it isn't: The whole "It's Marcellus Wallace's soul!" theory originated from fanboys trying to pretend the movie is deep. I've looked into the "Oh he has that thing on head, and in this one culture that means your soul was removed!" and the only time I've seen that referenced while looking into to get more details is in.. descriptions of Pulp Fiction. Why would I care if it was?

Marcellus Wallace is the biggest "tell, don't show" in all of fiction. We're supposed to believe he's the baddest motherfucker who ever lived, and we see no evidence of that. Actually we see the exact opposite happen, he gets raped by some hillbillies in a scene that only exists for shock value. Then he just tells Bruce Willis (who I still have no idea why he's in the movie at all) to leave town.

Oh I'm so scared....

I might care if it's the diamonds from Resevoir Dogs, simply because that's a much better movie as things actually happen in it.

I'm fine with counter-culture and subversion, it's just I'd like for there to be some kind of point, some kind of payoff. If the movie doesn't give a shit, I shouldn't be expected to either.

If the point of the movie is that it doesn't have a point, there are much better films that do that.

For God's sake; Freddy Got Fingered is a better film that does that, and that's not a compliment to Tom Green. At least FGF doesn't pretend that it demands or even deserves my respect, therefore as an audience member I feel less insulted by comparison.

Fuck now I'm gonna have "Daddy would you like some sausage?" stuck in my head all day.