SCREEN-L Archives

October 1994


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
J Roberson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Sat, 22 Oct 1994 12:22:08 -0600
text/plain (56 lines)
It's amazing what gets this list going.
I've been deleting most of the Pulp Fiction messages without reading them
because I didn't plan to see the movie. Talented though he may be, I've
just not been particularly attracted to Taratino's testosterone-charged
(and mostly male-oriented) stories. I suppose I'm a little jealous, too;
His movies are successful, I want to be a successful director, but there's
no way in hell I culd ever write those stories, simply because you should
write what you know, and I know *none* of what he writes about.
That said, I still think he's a good director. I enjoyed the movie.
I've got a more personal stake in the classical-v-narrow education debate
regarding film movies. I'm only 21 and attending a university that has no
film program. I like to think of myself as having pretty broad interests,
and I rather doubt that I would do well in the cuttthroat competition of
most film schools. Also, I've only recently discovered that you have to
raise money for films in film schools - I had thought the departments
fundeed endeavors. At any rate, I'm happy to be where I am, practicing on
video and my film experience from two years ago, and finishing a script or
two before going to beg for money.
One thing about postmodernist echoes of previous films. Maybe I just feel
left out, but I've always thought that including referneces to great past
films is kind of masturbatory - especially if the references are the kind
that only people who study film or watch movies for five years will get. I
mean, I like it when it's for humor or serves the film's theme or plot in
some way, but I really don't care if Director X was emulating Director Y's
interpretation of Director Z's classic movie XYZ.
But that's just my opinion ;)
>3)  I don't recall either Butch or Marcellus reviling their former. . .captors
>>for their sexual orientation. . .rather, if anything, for their S/M
You know, maybe they reviled their former captors because they (the
captors) were going to rape them. I mean, how many rape victims *don't*
revile their captors? That said, I still think that Marcellus and Butch
would be homophobic - but it's not the point of the film. It doesn't
surface neatly. For instance, in the original script maybe there was a
scene where Vincent is revealed to be gay; that scene gets cut and the
audience never knows, even though during shooting Travolta would have kept
that in mind.
The characters sould be homophobic but it's not brought out greatly in the
"I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather
a new wearer of clothes. If there is not a new [person], how can the new
clothes be made to fit?  If you have any enterprise before you, try it in
your old clothes." - paraphrase of Thoreau.
J Roberson      [log in to unmask]        [log in to unmask]