#1  
Old 06-28-1999, 12:12 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I just rewatched Pulp Fiction (on video) and it's still as good as when I first saw it in the theater.

Spoilers if you still haven't seen it.

-------------------

Any ideas on what was in the attache case?

Why did Jules and Vincent take Marvin with them? They apparently were sent to the apartment to kill everyone. If they were supposed to take Marvin alive for some reason, why weren't they concerned when Vincent accidently killed him?

Does anyone with a medical (or drug abuse) background know if the whole adrenaline thing was realistic?

Why was Kathy Griffin credited as Herself in the end credits? Was Tarantino saying that the woman who helped Marcellus after the accident was supposed to actually be Kathy Griffin the actress and not just some anonymous woman?
  #2  
Old 06-28-1999, 05:41 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Ahhhhh - one of my favorite movies.

Quote:
Any ideas on what was in the attache case?
One of the most common interpretations is that the attache case held Marcellus' soul. Remember the scene filmed from behind (no, not THAT scene) that showed the bandaid on his neck? Supposedly, that was the place the soul was sucked out.

[qoute]Why did Jules and Vincent take Marvin with them? They apparently were
sent to the apartment to kill everyone. If they were supposed to take
Marvin alive for some reason, why weren't they concerned when Vincent
accidently killed him?[/quote]

I always thought that the only reason they didn't kill Marvin was that Jules believed that divine intervention saved both him and Vincent from being shot and (as we find out later) he felt that it was a sign from God to get out of the *Killing Business*.

Maybe they were driving around with him until they could figure out a way to take care of him (as a witness) without killing him.

My feelings however, is that there is no answer. In true Taratino form, he knew that Marvin would be killed anyway, so he didn't worry about an explanation of something that wasn't going to happen.

Quote:
Does anyone with a medical (or drug abuse) background know if the whole adrenaline thing was realistic?
Don't know for sure but I have heard this long before Pulp Fiction.

Quote:
Why was Kathy Griffin credited as Herself in the end credits? Was
Tarantino saying that the woman who helped Marcellus after the accident
was supposed to actually be Kathy Griffin the actress and not just some anonymous woman?
My guess is that it is Tarantino just being Tarantino - doing the little off the wall things for no other reason other than causing viewers to try to determine deeper meanings.

As all Taratino fans know, there are always open ended situations in his films that don't have explanations or answers.

I once read that part of what makes him successful is that his audiences spend so much time becoming involved in the logic of his films when there really isn't any logic to be found.


------------------
>^,,^<
KITTEN

He who walk through airport door sideways going to Bangkok. - Confucius
  #3  
Old 06-28-1999, 05:41 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Tarantino has said that there is no definitive answer to what's in the attache case, but one theory is that it's Marsalles' soul. Don't ask me.

Marvin was an informant who helped them find the case by selling out the other three. When Jules and Vinnie are taking the guns out of the trunk, they are wondering how many of them there are, and one of them asks "including our guy?" in reference to Marvin. I guess they were just giving him a ride, or just getting him out of there so the cops wouldn't pick him up, but they just didn't care that much about him when he got shot. Maybe they were going to shoot him later anyway so he wouldn't sell them out. And notice that Marvin is there to open the door at the prescribed time.

I've heard of the adrenalin shot happening, but I don't have any Official Medical Documents handy to back it up. The most high profile case I've heard of was Motley Crue bassist Nikki Sixx being revived by paramedics this way.

I never noticed the Kathy Griffin credit. It was most likely done on a whim when they were putting together the titles, like the Emil Sitka credit ("Hold hands you lovebirds"). That's from a 3 Stooges episode BTW.
  #4  
Old 06-28-1999, 05:57 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
My interpretation has always been that Marvin was a plant. He worked for Marcellus same as Travolta and Jackson, and was in the apartment posing as a buddy of Brad and the other guys in order to keep an eye on them. This seems particularly true because at one point either Travolta or Jackson asked Marvin "Why didn't you tell us there was another guy in the bathrooom?"
  #5  
Old 06-28-1999, 06:13 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I had heard that the suitcase was supposed to have held the diamonds that were stolen in Reservoir Dogs. I dunno if that's true or not.
  #6  
Old 06-28-1999, 06:13 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I once wrote an entire exam essay claiming that the Holy Grail was in the briefcase. (It was a lit theory class -- it didn't have to make sense.) Unfortunately, that was almost four years ago and I can't remember what my arguments were. BTW, did any culture ever REALLY believe that souls could be sucked out of the back of the neck, or did the folks who made up that theory just think it sounded good?

I've read that the adrenaline shot thing probably wouldn't work in real life -- the Washington Post ran an article on this shortly after the movie came out. Then again, they might have just been trying to discourage people from trying this at home ...
  #7  
Old 06-28-1999, 06:48 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I'd heard the Reservoir Dogs theory also, but like Harvey claims, Tarantino said in an interview that he intended the briefcase to be open to the audience's interpretation, that even he had no real answer to what was inside.
Something very precious, that's it. The radiant glow it gave off I think was just a cinematic affectation.

My favorite part of that movie will always be Walken's monologue ... love that guy.
  #8  
Old 06-28-1999, 06:55 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Along the lines of this thread, anyone know why it was called "Reservoir Dogs?"
Dunno about the briefcase or Marvin, though.
  #9  
Old 06-28-1999, 06:58 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Resevior Dogs:

It's a blending of a corruption of the title of a French film (Aurevior Mes Enfants, IIRC), and Straw Dogs.



------------------
'They couldn't hit an Elephant from this dist...!'

Last words of General John Sedgwick
  #10  
Old 06-28-1999, 10:57 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Everybody's already said what I'm going to say, but I can't help putting in my two cents. Marvin was obviously working with Marsellus Wallace....he's the guy who let Jules and Vincent into the apartment at the appointed time and he should have told them that there was a guy hiding in the bathroom, but forgot to in the heat of the moment. Part of the fun is the question of whether Marvin was originally part of Brad's gang and then sold them out or whether he was planted by Marsellus. Tarantino said that what was in the attache case was supposed to be left up to the imagination of the viewer. My imagination says that I like the idea of the loot from Reservoir Dogs. There are connections between the two movies....Vic Vega in Reservoir Dogs (the Michael Madsen character) was Vincent Vega's brother. Being realistic, Mr. Pink, the Steve Buscemi character in Reservoir Dogs, got busted by the cops as he tried to flee with the loot from the warehouse after the final shootout, so we should assume that the diamonds were taken as evidence by the police. However, as any reader of James Ellroy novels knows, the LAPD is notoriously corrupt....
  #11  
Old 06-29-1999, 08:17 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thank you to everyone for the responses.

I've heard the theories about the Holy Grail and Marcellus' soul before. Personally, I'm going with Tarantino's statement that the contents of the case is unknown.

I always thought the "Including our guy?" remark was referring to Brett (the apparent leader of the group). But the Marvin-as-turncoat theory certainly makes a lot more sense.

As for Kathy Griffin, I believe she and Tarantino were in a relationship at the time Pulp Fiction was made. This might explain why Tarantino singled her out in the credits but doesn't really tell us why he chose this method to do so.
  #12  
Old 06-29-1999, 03:55 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
This is on a tangent, but...
If you read the orignal script, the death of Marcus is a lot more disturbing, and funny, if you're sick.

Marcus gets shot in the neck, and doesn't quite die, but it's obvious he's gonna die soon. So he's in the back moaning, and bleeding, and Jules and Vinnie are trying to figure out what to do. Vinnie wants to shoot him again just to put him out of his misery, but Jules doesn't want him to, since it's daylight and the suburbs. Marcusis still moaning, and it freaks Vinnie out a little. So they decide to count to 3, and then Jules will honk the horn, and Vinnie shoots. After some discussion as to whether they're counting up or down, it works out, and Marcus's head explodes just like in the theatrical release.

And the whole dancing contest was added after Travolta was cast.

-Quadell
  #13  
Old 06-29-1999, 05:42 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Tarantino also cut out the entire introductory conversation between Vinnie and Mia where she asks him various questions. There is a reference to this conversation later, when Mia calls Vinnie "an Elvis man".
  #14  
Old 06-29-1999, 07:55 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Esmerelda and Bruce Willis' conversation is noticibly shorter, as well.

------------------
Lissa*

* Name has been changed to protect the guilty.
  #15  
Old 06-30-1999, 12:49 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
[quote]I've read that the adrenaline shot thing probably wouldn't work in real life -- the Washington Post ran an article on this shortly after the movie came out. Then again, they might have just been trying to discourage people from trying this at home ...{/quote]

It's not actually adrenaline, it's Narcan, an opiate antagonist that works exactly as shown; nearly instant reversal of depressant effect.
Though I doubt most people would suddenly leap up off their deathbeds in that manner.
(If you freeze frame part of that scene, you can read the label on the bottle.)
  #16  
Old 06-30-1999, 03:08 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
The drug of choice for opiate overdose is indeed narcan, but it can go into any vein, and in fact would work faster in the carotid artery than the heart, personally I would have aimed for the jugular vein. I haven't seen the movie lately but I remember it being adrenalin, a general stimulant used in cardiovascular resusitation that has no effect on heroin, but would would be better than nothing. Again, there's no need to place it in the heart,
Larry, RN
  #17  
Old 07-20-1999, 03:32 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Alright! Maybe someone can settle a disagreement between my wife and me.

I said that Butch's watch was first his great-grandfather's (WWI), then his grandfather's (WWII), then his father's (Vietnam), then kept by Capt. Koons until he could deliver it to Butch.

My wife said it was his great-great-grandfather's, etc.

Considering that my wife didn't care much for the movie, she doesn't want to re-watch it to settle it. This kills me when I'm right, but she won't admit it nor prove it. sigh
  #18  
Old 07-20-1999, 04:46 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Why it easy, AWB! Just show her the final script, here: http://www.godamongdirectors.com/scripts/pulp.shtml

Your Quadell
  #19  
Old 07-20-1999, 10:26 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
This watch I got here was first purchased by your great-granddaddy. It was bought during the First World War in a little general store in Knoxville, Tennessee. It was bought by private Doughboy Ernie Coolidge the day he set sail for Paris. It was your great-granddaddy's war watch, made by the first company to ever make wrist watches. You see, up until then, people just carried pocket watches. Your great-grandaddy wore that watch every day he was in the war. Then when he had done his duty, he went home to your great-grandmother, took the watch off his wrist and put it in an ol' coffee can.
  #20  
Old 07-21-1999, 05:21 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Now I am going to have to rent the video, again. Y'all got me thinking about the car Jules, Vincent, and Marvin left in. It didn't seem like Jules' car. Could have been stated in the movie, but I don't remember. I'm guessing it was a company car to do jobs in.
  #21  
Old 07-21-1999, 02:43 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Just out of curiousity, why do people like Tarantino? Ok he does interesting stuff with the film and the way the plot is developed, but I find the scripts and the general plot to be boring. So do my friends, some of whom fell asleep in Pulp Fiction. Yet other people rave about it. I just don't get it. But do Americans really swear that often and monotonously? I would fins it very hard to live there if you do. My 50 öre (about 2 cents)

------------------
What's the ugliest part of your body?
Some say your nose, some say your toes,
But I think it's your Mind - Frank Zappa
  #22  
Old 07-21-1999, 04:47 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
BTW, the clever "what's in the suitcase" was an allusion to a 60's Mike Hammer (Mickey Spillane?) movie where a suitcase filled with unnamed nuclear material is stolen. Anytime the suitcase is opened, there is a glow from inside and a creepy scifi growly noise. Apparently, the movie was one of Tarantino's favorites.

------------------
"Knowing others is wisdom. Knowing yourself is enlightenment." - Lao-tzu, Chinese philosopher
  #23  
Old 07-22-1999, 08:17 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I checked the script. 73 Nova. It's not important. No mention of owner. I picked out a pointless detail. Am I glad this is MPSIMS, or what?
  #24  
Old 07-22-1999, 11:25 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
FloChi - Personnel opinion only - Tarantino has a strength in dialogue - Pulp Fiction has several scenes that are beautiful for the dialogue (Walken's scene) My favorite is when Jules and Vinnie are discussing foot massages and then Jules says, "put your face on" - just classic - Reservoir Dogs has the same things - dialogue.... Also, the language I believe is manly man talk (at least perceived manly man) Once again just my opinion

------------------
  #25  
Old 07-22-1999, 11:28 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Pulp Fiction trivia - the opening song is a Greek folk song called Miserlou (which I read today means "Beloved")
  #26  
Old 07-23-1999, 12:48 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Well as long as this thread has revived, here's another question. What do you feel are the best Pulp Fictionesque movies? Reservoir Dogs and Jackie Brown are two obvious ones. I also liked The Usual Suspects, 2 Days in the Valley, and the recent Go, all of which were indebted to and/or inspired by Pulp Fiction.
  #27  
Old 07-23-1999, 01:01 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I think there was also a Star Trek episode with a similar plot device. There was some alien who was made up of shimmering lights and anyone who looked at it without protective goggles went blind or insane.

And no, FloChi, I think most people do not swear as consistently as the average Tarantino character does. His use of profanity and racial language seems to derive from his infatuation with the "gangsta" lifestyle.
  #28  
Old 07-23-1999, 01:19 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
I just don't get it.
Those who don't like Tarantino movies are usually the people who don't get them.



------------------
>^,,^<
KITTEN

Coarse and violent nudity. Occasional language.
  #29  
Old 07-23-1999, 09:45 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels is very PulpFictionesque. Fast, violent, and hysterically funny.

------------------
"Knowing others is wisdom. Knowing yourself is enlightenment." - Lao-tzu, Chinese philosopher
  #30  
Old 07-23-1999, 11:37 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Swimming with Sharks. A darker movie with Kevin Spacey the guy that played Brad in Pulp Fiction ("look at the big brain on Brad") A a Lt. from the 1st season of Srar Trek NG.
  #31  
Old 07-23-1999, 03:10 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
coupla things:
re the suitcase:
i have a buddy who's a huge fan of the movie, and insists that it's wallace's soul. the deal is this: wallace sold the soul to the devil (the combo to the lock on the case is '666'), and jules and vince are sent to get it back. proof that it's a soul lie in the glow it emits, and the band-aid on wallace's neck where it was removed. incidentally, when 'honey bunny' sees the suitcase and asks jules if "that's what i think it is", jules replies in the affirmative, which means that (hypothetically, at least), the characters do know what it is.

re: other movies
LOCK STOCK AND TWO SMOKING BARRELS

the best movie i've seen in a long time

ellis
  #32  
Old 07-23-1999, 03:10 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
My appoligies, there sould be a comma after Kevin Spacey. The movie Swimming with Sharks" has three main characters. Kevin Spacey, Frank Whaley, and Michelle Forbes (from Star Trek).
  #33  
Old 07-24-1999, 01:30 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
There is a resemblance between the two men, but the character of Brett was played by Frank Whaley not Kevin Spacey.
  #34  
Old 08-08-2000, 08:02 PM
ShadowSRM ShadowSRM is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1
The Resivor Dogs/Pulp Fiction Connection

I read a post on this thread about the Vic Vega(Michael Madsen) from Resivor and Vincent Vega(Travolta) connection. They're probably brothers. Also, Mr. Pink from Resivor Dogs is the waiter that serves Uma and John at Jack Rabbit Slims. Could it be that Steve Buscemi(who was arrested at the end of Dogs) made a deal with the FBI or escaped and is in disguise for some reason at Jack Rabbit Slims? I thought that was pretty cool.

The thing in the breifcase, I think it'd be cool if it was Marcellus' soul, but in keeping with the Dogs/Pulp connection, it's most likely the diamonds that the gang was trying to steal in 'Dogs'.

Then again, it's whatever you want it to be. That's what's cool.

I'm not a fan of Tarentino's, I'm a fan of Dogs and Pulp. Four Rooms sucked, that's all I can say about Tarentino.
  #35  
Old 07-17-2001, 10:36 AM
tegatu tegatu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 5
unearthly glow

I don't know if anyone is still following this thread or not, but having just read all the posts so far, I'm surprised that no-one has mentioned the resemblance between the contents of the briefcase in 'Pulp Fiction' (casts a glow, is never seen) and the boot/trunk of the car in Alex Cox's 'Repo Man' (casts a glow, is never seen). In the case of 'Repo Man', the contents are alleged to be dead, decaying aliens,but everyone who investigates is vaporised. People have mentioned the briefcase in 'Kiss Me Deadly', but I'd have thought the 'Repo Man' car was a more likely inspiration for the 'Pulp Fiction' briefcase - both, of course, are MacGuffins of the first order.
  #36  
Old 07-17-2001, 11:15 AM
Fish42 Fish42 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 252
Quote:
Originally posted by phouka
BTW, the clever "what's in the suitcase" was an allusion to a 60's Mike Hammer (Mickey Spillane?) movie where a suitcase filled with unnamed nuclear material is stolen. Anytime the suitcase is opened, there is a glow from inside and a creepy scifi growly noise. Apparently, the movie was one of Tarantino's favorites.
The Mike Hammer film you're refering to is "Kiss Me Deadly," directed by Robert Aldrich.

Personal guesses as to what's in the suitcase:

1) Jules is telling the truth when he tells 'Ringo' that the suitcase contains the boss's laundry. Marcellus owns a really shiny gold-lame suit, like the one Elvis wore on the cover of "50,000,000 Elvis Fans Can't Be Wrong: Elvis's Gold Records Vol 2."

2) It contains a MacGuffin.
  #37  
Old 07-17-2001, 11:34 AM
Crusoe Crusoe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 7,130
This was answered in another thread, and yes, it's a MacGuffin. Tarantino never decided what was in it. There's a quote and cite in that other thread, I'm sure.
  #38  
Old 07-17-2001, 02:00 PM
Enright3 Enright3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,456
Re: The Resivor Dogs/Pulp Fiction Connection

Quote:
Originally posted by ShadowSRM
Also, Mr. Pink from Resivor Dogs is the waiter that serves Uma and John at Jack Rabbit Slims. Could it be that Steve Buscemi(who was arrested at the end of Dogs) made a deal with the FBI or escaped and is in disguise for some reason at Jack Rabbit Slims? I thought that was pretty cool.
I thought it was pretty evident that Steve Buscemi was killed outside the warehouse at the end of Reservoir Dogs.
  #39  
Old 07-17-2001, 02:19 PM
thinksnow thinksnow is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: lurking behind you...
Posts: 4,736
IIRC (and it's been a few years)

Buscemi was, at the least, involved in a serious gunfight at the end of the movie, though his plight is unknown. All that is known is that he runs out, is met by yht cops, there is some gunplay and then the cops are inside the warehouse telling Harvey K. to drop his gun.

For those that liked Lock, Stock…, I wonder what they thought of Snatch, a very similar movie with many of the same characters.
  #40  
Old 07-17-2001, 03:42 PM
Spritle Spritle is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Speed's trunk, usually
Posts: 2,005
Quote:
Originally posted by Fish42


It contains a MacGuffin.

[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that's it. It's the same stuff in the trunk in Repo Man - a lot of MacGuffins.


Actually, I was gonna post that it was a MacGuffin, but I couldn't remember the term. [stupid question] What is the origin of this term anyway? [/stupid question]

and why is every poster in this thread listed as a "Guest" with a "N/A" thread count???
  #41  
Old 07-17-2001, 05:24 PM
Drastic Drastic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
and why is every poster in this thread listed as a "Guest" with a "N/A" thread count???
It's vaguely unsettling to me that they're also all registered "not yet".

Perhaps the chronology of the thread is shuffled around, just as the movie.
  #42  
Old 07-17-2001, 10:48 PM
eunoia's Avatar
eunoia eunoia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Outside Poker Flat
Posts: 1,613
What's in the case...

Personal Guess: Laura Palmer's gold-plated pelvic bone.

Boy, am I glad this is in MPSIMS.
  #43  
Old 07-17-2001, 11:59 PM
Purd Werfect Purd Werfect is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Amongst the earthlings.
Posts: 2,317
Re: IIRC (and it's been a few years)

Quote:
Originally posted by thinksnow
For those that liked Lock, Stock…, I wonder what they thought of Snatch, a very similar movie with many of the same characters.
I thought Snatch was excellent. Great characters and dialogue, and excellent acting all around. The guy who played Brick Top was just flat out perfect in his portrayal of the sociopathic mid-level crime boss. It's been awhile since I've seen Lock, Stock, etc., - were the characters the same, or just the actors? And I have to say, after Fight Club and Snatch, any opinions I held that Brad Pitt was just trading on his looks have pretty much dissipated.
  #44  
Old 07-18-2001, 01:12 AM
Fyodor Fyodor is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Canada
Posts: 614
My read on Marvin was...

He was a nobody, who had the opportunity and took it to rat out Brad et al to curry favour with Marcellus, to gain points and move up in the criminal world. The guys didn't kill him as part of the deal, but they took it very seriously when he didn't mention the dude with the hand cannon hiding in the bathroom. That's why Vincent was pointing the gun at his head in the car. He was pissed.

As for the fascination with the movie, a big part of it is the fact that pretty much all the characters are villains or "bad guys". Normally their role in a movie would be to receive justice from some hero, like James Bond or Dirty Harry, but not in this movie. There is no clear cut right and wrong or good and evil, and the characters twist and turn and fumble and stumble, sort of like a dark vision of real life.

Just because someone likes Pulp Fiction doesn't mean they're a Tarentino fan.
  #45  
Old 07-18-2001, 01:38 AM
Sir Rhosis Sir Rhosis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 2,406
Is it just me, or. . .

Am I the only person on the planet who thinks that RESERVOIR DOGS is far and away superior to PULP FICTION? DOGS is a clever film. PULP is just funny bits, a good story in there somewhere, but broken by interminable stretches (does anyone actually like that drivel between Willis and his French girlfriend?) but much of it does not gel for me. I get it, I just don't like it.

JACKIE BROWN strikes me as being made by someone badly imitating Tarantino's style (I know it was Tarntino).

Sir Rhosis
  #46  
Old 07-18-2001, 04:13 AM
tegatu tegatu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 5
MacGuffin hunt

For Spritle and others who want to know the origin of the term MacGuffin (or even those who want to know what a MacGuffin _is_!), I quote the following concise explanation from the St Augustine Record (that's St Augustine, Florida,for your information) -

The term "MacGuffin," first used by Alfred Hitchcock in a lecture at Columbia University in 1939, is an element in a film, novel or play that provides a pretext for the plot. It may be anything - secret papers, jewelry, money - that propels the story. The MacGuffin itself has little, if any, intrinsic meaning.

MacGuffins in Hitchcock's own films include the stolen $40,000 in "Psycho," the scientific formula in "The 39 Steps" and the smuggled microfilm in "North by Northwest."

Other cinematic examples include the falcon statue in "The Maltese Falcon" and the mysterious briefcase in "Pulp Fiction." (Some contend "Rosebud" in "Citizen Kane" is a MacGuffin, but I disagree. Its meaning, revealed at the end of the film, illuminates Kane's life.)

But why "MacGuffin"? Hitchcock said the term originated in a strange story told by his longtime Hollywood friend, writer Angus MacPhail: Two Scottish men are riding on a train when one man asks the other about the contents of a package on the overhead luggage rack.

"It's a MacGuffin," says the first man, "a device for hunting tigers in Scotland."

"But there are no tigers in Scotland," replies the second man.

"Well then, it's not a MacGuffin," says the first.

As for spelling, most authorities prefer "MacGuffin," in deference to the "Mac" of "MacPhail," but "McGuffin" is an acceptable and common alternative.
  #47  
Old 08-05-2001, 04:47 PM
gorewonfla gorewonfla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 167
Marsellus's neck

The whole soul argument falls apart once you learn that Ving Rhames, who played Wallace, had a really bad scar on the back of his neck and the makeup people put on a bandaid to cover it up because it was just beyond help. I'm inclined to believe it is the diamonds because of Buscemi's role as the waiter. In Resevoir Dogs, he tipped poorly, so maybe this is cruel irony, a common thing in Tarantino movies. The briefcase is probably just another connection to Resevoir Dogs
  #48  
Old 08-05-2001, 08:05 PM
Spoonbender Spoonbender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 217
Quote:
Originally posted by Sir Rhosis
Am I the only person on the planet who thinks that RESERVOIR DOGS is far and away superior to PULP FICTION?
I agree that Dogs is better in some respects; I'm not sure which movie I like better overall. Dogs is tighter, more suspenseful, and has clearly articulated themes about trust and suspicion. There's hardly a word spoken in the film that's superfluous. On the other hand, Pulp Fiction meanders a bit in places - the Butch/Fabienne scene you mention is a good example.

And I also agree with you that Jackie Brown was crap.
  #49  
Old 08-06-2001, 04:02 AM
Kaitlyn Kaitlyn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Green Lake, TX
Posts: 2,708
Thinksnow: We hear a shootout shortly after Mr. Pink leaves, but after that there is a lot of shouting. On the DVD, you can clearly hear cops shouting for Pink to get out of the car and put his hands up, but there is no more shooting. I think it's pretty clear that Mr. Pink survives. But there are no plot connections between the two movies. Tarantino just reused some actors he likes.

I personally like both movies about equally. One of the appeals of Reservoir Dogs for me is the way it shows a world where morality has been turned completely upside down. The thieves have absolutely no compunctions about killing cops because, to them, the cops are the bad guys. The Tim Roth character, who is the only positive developed character in the movie, and most worthy of our respect because of the risks he is taking to do right, is in this world the ultimate evil (an undercover cop) precisely because of his positive attributes. Yet, despite all of the other characters being scum, there are varying degrees of evil here. Danny Aielo is less evil than the rest because he is at least loyal to his friend to the point of being willing to die to protect him. That Tarantino is able to develop truly individual characters is a great credit.

Pulp Fiction actually has some more positive characters. Butch, in particular, isn't really a bad guy. Pulp Fiction has much of the same theme of there being different levels of bad guys, whereas movies that focus on the good guys tend to have less developed villains.

Jackie Brown probably doesn't seem as much like a Tarantino movie as the other two because it was an adaptation rather than entirely his own creation. I liked it a lot, not as much as Pulp or Dogs, but as an Elmore Leonard adaptation, it worked for me.

Rather than refer to Pulp Fictionesque movies, I would say that Pulp Fiction is more of a Reservoir Dog type movie. Some other really good ones:

The Killing directed by Stanley Kubrick uses the same time shifts to examine the chaos surrounding a big heist. There is a lot more emphasis on the heist itself, which actually goes well, but disintegrates when it comes time to split up the money.

Ecstasy of the Angels, directed by Koji Wakamatsu is a Japanese "B" movie about the aftermath of a heist gone wrong, caused by an informant in their midst. The thieves are radicals trying to steal nuclear material, and their code names are the days of the week.

Hard Boiled, directed by John Woo, does the "undercover cop who's in so deep he's begun to identify with the gangsters" thing about as well as it has ever been done. And he's just one of three undercover cops. It also has one of those three-way Mexican standoffs that made it's way into Reservoir Dogs.

City on Fire, directed by Ringo Lam, would probably seem very familiar to Dogs fans, as Reservoir Dogs is about half remake of this Hong Kong film about a deep cover cop, played by Chow Yun Fat. Many of the set pieces in Dogs were inspired by individual scenes in this movie.

Some less charitable than me claim that Tarantino ripped off City on Fire. I think Tarantino borrowed elements of a lot of different movies. When you draw from a large enough pool of sources, that's just good research. Reservoir Dogs is highly derivative, but that doesn't mean that it isn't also very well made.
  #50  
Old 04-02-2003, 08:06 PM
coug coug is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2
Aha!!
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017