Stylistic Brilliance

Rating: 10/10 (6 November 2015)

If I may, let me note what a year 1994 was for film. This film. Shawshank. Gump. The Lion King. If someone came up to me and started ranting about how this was the best cinematic year ever, I'd actually listen to them for awhile before asking them why they are getting in my face. Of those films, this and Shawshank stand out, because they were not pre-established blockbusters. Gump and Lion King were expected to be pretty big, and just turned out bigger than anyone could possibly imagine. But these films were smaller, more personal projects. They are also quite different from each other in almost every other way; a notable one being that while Shawshank barely made back its budget at the box office, this film took off. Over the last couple weeks, with Steve Jobs and the like, we have examples of platforming failing. But it can succeed: this film is a prime example of that.
This is important not just if you're incurably a nut about these sort of things, like am I. It means that this is the first exposure a lot of people had with a Tarantino film. I bet a lot of people became fans for life at some random matinée screenings some cloudy Tuesdays. This is one of those films that I would have loved to be there at one of its early screenings. A lot of minds were opened those days.
I hope I'm not overselling this film, but it is one of those films that is so great that it is nearly impossible to oversell, which is a positive for me, as I love my gushing descriptions, as you might be able to tell if you read my review of Mad Max: Fury Road.
One thing that must be noted about this film is that it goes out of order, and not a semi-organized out of order like Memento. This does not make the film hard to follow- it is easier to follow than Memento, at any rate- but it does make you think on your feet. Sometimes, I think that this whole movie is a then-young Mr. Tarantino taking a hunk of dynamite to the usual three-act structure. And it is glorious. No film better encapsulates the rush of exciting new filmmakers that we had in the 90s than this one.
The title describes this film so well. It's not based on the style of blockbuster films. This isn't Jaws or Indiana Jones. This is darker, dirtier, less-universally subject matter. This is the equivalent of those books you keep for a trip to the doctor's office or the DMV just so you can be pulled out of the doldrums of life. It's not trying to be one of those Great American Novels written by Fitzgerald or Steinbeck that is typically only read by 'normal people' when they are in an English class or when they feel particularly scholarly.
Of course, most of those novels were not particularly good, even at being what they are. This film is. It's clever, action-packed, well-written, and so much more. It represents a stark change from the happy-go-lucky (sometimes), subtle (often), and averse from breaking new ground (usually) attitudes of eighties movies and holds up a banner for nineties film. In the nineties, the same techniques that were developed for dark and gritty and serious movies like The Godfather or Apocalypse Now were being played apart the fabric of the mainstream. Yes, kids movies got even cheesier and less legit. But they no longer defined the market like they did in the prior decade.
Artistic exploration became the norm. And few did that more than Mr. Tarantino, particularly in this film. Yes, if pulp fiction is what people expected, pulp fiction is what they got. But they did not get it in the way that they expected. To once more go back to MM:FR, I'm willing to be there were people who went into that film expecting to see just another action film in the style of the dime-a-dozen Die Hard and James Bond knock-offs that pop up so often every year. Their experience with that movie is probably on the level as anyone who came into this film expecting to see a mere piece of pulp fiction. This film is not a part of that 'genre', if you can call it that, but both an homage to it and its leading light. It transcends its grounds, its place in time, and perhaps even the medium of film itself. It is pure artistry.
I cannot exaggerate how much of a breath of fresh air this was. Pretty much every problem with film in the eighties was given an antidote. It's also a good cure for everything from with major filmmaking today, though I argue that a more artsy version of the Hunger Games series would be a better one. But that's just me.
As you might expect from a film that took off like this, it launched several careers and revived others, including that of John Travolta, who for once uses his overacting to his advantage. The soundtrack, of course, is phenomenal and iconic. Enough so that when I wrote the words Pulp Fiction down on the page, the first thing that popped into my mind was the title theme (Misirlou as covered by Dick Dale and the Daletones, in case you were wondering).
Above all, when I watched this film, I felt a love for film and artistry, as well as a desire to build upon the works of the past while making a unique mark. It enraptures you in itself. Honestly, I'm kinda surprised that it took off like it did back then. But I'm not surprised that it's remembered today. It holds a unique place in society and is one of the definitive 90s films. Enjoy.