how great is this really?

Rating: 2/10 (7 February 2001)

This film worries me. Is it great as so many say? It's riveting viewing that's for sure. Movies need to satisfy 5 criteria to be truly great (in my humble opinion): totally committed believable acting, technical excellence, memorable scenes that recur in your mind, something fresh to say or way to say it, and a message at its heart that can change people's lives (hopefully for the better). This film has the first four in abundance, but fails completely on the fifth.
The film is a dazzling kaleidoscope of images, sounds and emotions.It is one of the most vital films of the 90s without a doubt. Though there is quite a lot of violence, it's less painful to watch than in other movies (e.g. Goodfellas). Rather there's a constant sense of menace, because you know Mr Quentin always has some ultra-violence and jolts to the viewer, and also the non-linear structure means it's more difficult to figure out who's going to get hit. You get this sense of foreboding right from the off, when the couple are discussing robbing the diner, and the gun goes down on the table with a much louder noise than it should to match the volume of the dialogue.

Best part of the film for me was the dancing sequence - couldn't help thinking so that's how the excellent dancer of Saturday Night Fever ended up!
I have to say that they didn't get proper medical advice for this movie - giving an injection into the heart as for the overdose can't be done through the sternum (breastbone), but it has to go underneath, angled upwards. I'm pretty sure that giving a slug of adrenaline to someone who's overdosed on cocaine would kill the person instantly rather than wake them up. And who decided to call the drug adrenaline (its British name) when it's called epinephrine in the US? I'm left with the impression that this was just another scene that the film makers wanted to include to shock people, rather than trying to make it true to life.
Most worrying aspect is the very graphic depiction of heroin injection. It's made to seem glamorous and seductive. Anybody trying to get off heroin who watches this movie will have a hard time resisting the impulse to follow the example shown on screen. I think this particular scene should not have been included in the movie. Again there's a medical inaccuracy - the blood shown being drawn back into the syringe before injecting is too bright red, that's arterial blood rather than blood from a vein. Maybe they thought bright red makes it look more vivid (and shocking)?
Overall I think this film is worth watching if you know what to expect and like that kind of thing. However it has an empty heart which makes it fall way short of greatness. My opinion is that tarantino is very talented in film making, but this takes a back seat compared to his desire to shock people at any cost.