SCREEN-L Archives

April 1995, Week 1


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
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Mon, 3 Apr 1995 15:14:37 CDT
text/plain (29 lines)
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Given the following:
1) I liked "Pulp Fiction"
2) The Oscars are a lot of fun
3) The Oscars are absolutely meaningless
Let me state: quit whining about Gump's victory!!!
As for fluff, I certainly thought PF was clever, but quite lightweight... just
as its namesake writings were, intentionally. And if Bogie and Bacall
influenced the Academy's voters, eat your heart out Travolta and Thurman!
I am politically liberal, and understand the complaints many have leveled
against FG, but this is true: I cared about the character and the film touched
my emotions -- PF was like an intellectual exercise, but completely passionless.
Since FG was seen by four times the number of people as saw PF, maybe it is the
elitist hipsters who are out of touch. Why is nihilism better than
sentimentality? Young better than old? Negative better than positive? Black
better than white? etc. etc. etc...
A few final words: PF was a very good film, so was FG; I think there is room
for both in the world; so what if FG won a popularity contest?; I am playing
the Devil's advocate a bit here, just to tweak those whose lives were ruined by
Monday night's results. Wanna buy my monkey??