Dated

Rating: Null/10 (26 March 2002)

I can understand the praise this movie has received (in my experience mostly from the under-30 male population) mostly because of the society into which it was released. In 1994 film makers, musicians, and artists of every shade were into "pushing-the-envelope" art. Each generation,as they find their own voice, seems to want to shock the generation that came before it, and my generation chose senseless violence and base language to express their coming of age.
In the first place, I believe this type of behaviour is silly, and non-productive. Secondly, if it is entertaining, it is simply because it seems novel. I do not herald Tarantino as the next great philosopher...in fact, his subsequent attempts at film making have proven Pulp Fiction to be part of the early nineties phenomenon of transforming violence, language, and sex into cool. To get moralistic, I doubt if anyone who saw the movie would want the movie to be their reality. So if you don't want to live it, ask yourself, why do you want to watch it?
I have had arguments with people who have loved Pulp Fiction (many of whose opinions on other films I usually agree), and one thing seems to be a mainstay in their laudation of it: it was different, it was the first, it captured the imagination. However, those kind of movies -- much like the blockbuster action movies of the 80s a la Van Damme, Schwarzenegger, Segal -- have had their time and have passed away from the centre of attention. Pulp Fiction had its chance, but it failed the most enduring test of all...the test of time.