MovieChat Forums > Pulp Fiction (1994) Discussion > Were we supposed to take this movie LITE...

Were we supposed to take this movie LITERALLY and SERIOUSLY?

posted a year ago by TheMan18 (13102)
25 replies | jump to latest

Or, even in its occasional flashes of dark macabre (even if still - black comedy), most notably the notorious store scene, were we meant to treat it all as dark satire and black comedy and at times just an adult or otherwise comedy, in general?

Particularly with, besides the aforementioned scene (and how it seemingly came out of nowhere etc) and its results, scenes of drug taking, loads of foul language, saving Uma Thurman from a drug overdose in a somewhat questionable manner, shooting that man accidentally in a car and other things here and there.

What do we think, thanks.

[–] blindfolded (1649) a year ago

Honest to God don't understand your question.

[–] davodikum (6202) a year ago

It's rambling 'disguised' as a question. I feel like the emcee in Billy Madison after reading that.

[–] blindfolded (1649) a year ago

🤣

[–] stickman38 (3408) a year ago

There is nothing in this film that would indicate it's a comedy. That being said, you can still find humor in many films, I recently re-watched that Matt Damon film, Downsizing and although it's not a comedy, I find it to be one of the funniest films to come out between 2010 and 2020.

I like to call it unintentional humor. Some scenes are just funny, but I don't find this in Pulp Fiction. It's a pretty serious film and one of the best crime dramas I've ever seen. Very good piece of film here... I would highly recommend it to anyone that likes gangster films or just good crime films.

[–] Ranb (10124) a year ago

I think much of a dialog was written to be intentionally hilarious. Just about everything that comes out of Winston Wolf's mouth is very funny. The repartee between Jules and Vincent before they murder Brett is just as funny. But your mileage may vary.

[–] stickman38 (3408) a year ago

I can see what you mean by the dialogue being humorous, Ranb. But technically speaking, the movie is not a comedy, not even black comedy.

I do think the film is supposed to be taken seriously. But you are right, some of the dialogue is funny.

[–] KingBob (2562) a year ago

You do know there's a difference between having comic relief and being a comedy?

[–] Ranb (10124) a year ago

Yes I do. This would be a violent comedy film. It follows two incompetent hitmen who work for a man that is a poor judge of character and allows an over the hill boxer to take advantage of him.

[–] KingBob (2562) a year ago

Ok just making sure you knew the difference.

[–] TheEndIsNigh (445) 3 months ago

Well you're wrong. I think Tarantino knows his own work better than you. He literally said years ago that Reservoir Dogs has a lot of funny moments but it doesn't belong in the Comedy section of a video store but Pulp Fiction does.

[–] stickman38 (3408) 3 months ago

Link??

That as it may be, I just don't know anyone that would consider PF to be a comedy. None of the movie sites have it listed as such. They all call it a crime/drama.

[–] TheEndIsNigh (445) 3 months ago

I don't have a link. It's an interview on the special features on the Reservoir Dogs DVD (and I assume Blu-ray as well) where he's sitting in a garden.

I also remember this quote from when he was talking about PF.
"I'm trying to make a comedy. But in particular I'm trying to make things funny that you're not used to seeing in a humorous light".

I can't convince you if you don't see it, but that was Tarantino's approach and again it's his work. It's listed under Dark Comedy on IMDB as well as Crime.

[–] stickman38 (3408) 3 months ago

Hmmm... fair enough. I've just never viewed this as comedy. I'll try to laugh the next time I watch it. 😉

[–] davodikum (6202) 3 months ago

There are for sure comedic elements to this movie.

[–] AP (5290) a year ago

I’m not sure how a movie is taken literally. We are supposed to take it seriously just like any other movie, regardless of his humor.

[–] Seperatrix (1281) a year ago

" . . . the notorious store scene . . . and how it seemingly came out of nowhere . . . its results . . . [the] scenes of drug taking, loads of foul language, saving Uma Thurman from a drug overdose in a somewhat questionable manner, shooting that man accidentally in a car and other things here and there."

Why . . . you just gave a great example of what the term "pulp fiction" refers to in storytelling.

Come to think of it, the film gives a definition in the beginning.

There's your answer.

[–] BKB (10481) a year ago

I think the movie was meant to be over the top and it was and it was definitely an adult dark comedy. I'd say that's an accurate assumption..

[–] Saenzwa9 (494) a year ago

I couldn't take the pawnshop scene seriously at all. Two rednecks decide to rape the black dude while leaving Bruce Willis in the hands of some kind of retarded sex slave gimp then Willis kills the one redneck with a samurai sword while the other one is pegging Ving Rhames up the butt. Ving gets up and shoots the other dude in the nuts with a shotgun. They make peace, so to speak, and Bruce drives a chopper away. The first time I saw it, I was like, what the hell did I watch!?

[–] Mortificator (20) a year ago

It goes to show you never can tell.

[–] Tongue (493) a year ago

Yeah I’m honestly confused as to why people think this movie is so amazing …? Don’t get me wrong it’s an entertaining movie but grossly overhyped . An 8.9?! Really?

[–] TheEndIsNigh (445) 3 months ago

Not to mention the fact that Butch (before he's learned that Marsellus is going to let him live) lets Marsellus get up, pull up his pants, grab Maynard's shotgun and and go behind him.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7786) a year ago

You lost all credibility when you said the store scene came out of nowhere. If you actually watched it, it'd make sense.

[–] TheArgentinian (7175) 3 months ago

No, it does not make sense. The movie was realistic up until that point.

Not that I dislike that scene, btw.

[–] TheEndIsNigh (445) 3 months ago

I'd say it's fairly realistic until Butch arrives at his apartment. Why would he be so cautious - parking his car a block away - to then just stick around for something to eat? Just because no gangsters are there doesn't mean they can't just turn up.

And I never thought it believable that Marsellus would take a stroll and get his own food instead of telling Vincent to do it.

[–] TheEndIsNigh (445) 3 months ago

How did it make sense? For all Maynard knew Butch could've been a criminal been pursued by Marsellus who's a cop. He had no idea who these two were or if there were more people with guns outside who were going to end up coming in to help Marsellus or Butch.

It's broad daylight, in a shop that wasn't in the middle of nowhere and he just thought "I'll have some fun with their asses"😂