Pulp Fiction was original? For somebody who seems to be so well-versed in cinema, I don't see how you could make that claim.

i'm wondering myself... Pulp Fiction and PDL deserve absolutely no comparison in my book... all your reasons are your opinions and nothing more than that... and that doesnt make em right, that's for sure... even if i am one of THOSE people

How is it not? Yes, most everything in the movie is "borrowed" from other films Quentin loves, but that's exactly what makes it original. He took everything he loved and threw them together in a new, exciting way that we've never seen before. It's all about presentation.

Okay, so if a band takes 12 of its favorite songs, slightly changes the chord progressions on each and adds new lyrics to them, have they too come up with something original? I understand thats not the best metaphor, but the gist of what you're saying seems to be that it's okay to ""borrow" (re: steal) from other people's work and pass it off as your own. I'm not saying its a bad movie, but Pulp Fiction is far from original. What do you see that's new in its presentation?

Almost anything anyone has ever done for all time has been based on what someone else has done, it's just a matter of degrees. It's pretty hard, if even possible at all, to have a truely original thought.

I'll concede that point, but Tarantino goes out of his way to rip off other movies. If no one can be completely original, they can at least try to present older ideas uniquely.

Like I said, it's just all a matter of presentation. And if Quentin can manage to package together all of his loves and influences into one unit as excellent as Pulp Fiction, then yes, I'm perfectly okay with his creative thievery.

Can you name one other movie that does this like Pulp Fiction does?

I think Tarantinos films are more a way to paying tribute to certain things he likes, rather than ripping them off. He's said as much in interviews.
It's kind of like Pearl Jam's Binaural album, which has several blatently "borrowed" riffs from The Who (Breakerfall, Soon Forget), but they dont deny they are borrowed, and it's more of a tribute to The Who than a rip off. I think the same is true for many of Tarantino's films.

Well once again I guess it comes down to a matter of taste. I don't find Pulp Fiction to be excellent for the reasons I've already stated, where as you do. I like the film, but just can't take it seriously enough to consider it great. But at the very least, can we both agree that it's really not as original as people make it out to be?

I guess we see things from different perspectives. What frustrates me most about Tarantino is he's talented as hell but still insists on "tributing" other films and filmmakers when all they do is weaken his narratives. And yeah, he admits to it in interviews, but interviews don't mean much to me when I'm watching one of his movies and recognize either a piece of dialogue or a shot that I've heard or seen before. But, alas, he's still one of the more exciting filmmakers out there today, and I can't wait until he breaks from this mold and delivers his masterpiece.

Kill Bill

My favorite QT movie, and definitely the closest he's come. But I think he has something more up his sleeve.

i cant believe noones posted this

werd to yo'mutha

Red X's have been posted at least 12 times.

I can see it.

I find claims that Pulp Fiction is not original ridiculous. Sure it wouldn't exist without other films it references. The very fact that it references classic cinema so openly (see the title) makes it bold and ambitious.

The dialogue, characters, structure, humour, soundtrack were all fresh and engaging. Like claiming the Beatles weren't original as they were influenced by Elvis and Little Richard and Ravi Shankar. Or claiming a chef isn't original because they cook fish or use and frying pan.

Quite absurd and incorrect.

Good; at least I amused myself then.

*writes note to self*:

don't ever talk about pulp fiction again on RM.

For me, Pulp Fiction is to film what the Beatles' She Loves You is to music. To take from works that already existed and glorify them, bringing them to the attention to the masses who until then have not been exposed to the older material.

I don't particularly find Tarantino's works to be all that interesting, having been raised on the Oriental cinema that permeate his style. I can see why his core audience (Western gen-x/y) would enjoy it as much as they do. It's fresh, exciting, just like Crouching Tiger, Hero, and House of Flying Daggers. For me, it's just the ol 'I've seen it all before'.