Regular Price $29.99

Starring: Rosanna Arquette,  Steve Buscemi,  Paul Calderon,  Bronagh Gallagher,  Peter Greene, 
Directed By:
Rated: R (Restricted)
Release Date: 1994-10-14
Studio: Walt Disney Video
Format: Closed-captioned,  Color,  Dolby,  DVD-Video,  NTSC, 

Editorial Reviews and DVD Information about Pulp Fiction

Amazon.com
With the knockout one-two punch of 1992's Reservoir Dogs and 1994's Pulp Fiction writer-director Quentin Tarantino stunned the filmmaking world, exploding into prominence as a cinematic heavyweight contender. But Pulp Fiction was more than just the follow-up to an impressive first feature, or the winner of the Palme d'Or at Cannes Film Festival, or a script stuffed with the sort of juicy bubblegum dialogue actors just love to chew, or the vehicle that reestablished John Travolta on the A-list, or the relatively low-budget ($8 million) independent showcase for an ultrahip mixture of established marquee names and rising stars from the indie scene (among them Samuel L. Jackson, Uma Thurman, Bruce Willis, Ving Rhames, Harvey Keitel, Christopher Walken, Tim Roth, Amanda Plummer, Julia Sweeney, Kathy Griffin, and Phil Lamar). It was more, even, than an unprecedented $100-million-plus hit for indie distributor Miramax. Pulp Fiction was a sensation. No, it was not the Second Coming (I actually think Reservoir Dogs is a more substantial film; and P.T. Anderson outdid Tarantino in 1997 by making his directorial debut with two even more mature and accomplished pictures, Hard Eight and Boogie Nights). But Pulp Fiction packs so much energy and invention into telling its nonchronologically interwoven short stories (all about temptation, corruption, and redemption amongst modern criminals, large and small) it leaves viewers both exhilarated and exhausted--hearts racing and knuckles white from the ride. (Oh, and the infectious, surf-guitar-based soundtrack is tastier than a Royale with Cheese.) --Jim Emerson

Customer Reviews for Pulp Fiction

utterly disappointing and worthless!
I am even disappointed about being disappointed by this movie because I loved Quentin's "Resevoir Dogs". But this flick was so painfully contrived, poorly written and conceived, and so dependent on transparent cheesy ploys to get attention that it is just totally unwatchable. The pretty girl just because you need a pretty girl (especially on commercial posters and DVD covers), the John Travolta dance scene because they needed to exploit the popularity of Saturday Night Fever, the overdose scene just to show we can film such a thing, the buggery scene just for shock value....and on and on....all very transparent ploys to get attention, shock the faint-hearted and draw in the gullible masses that'll watch anything that shocks the faint-hearted and righteous types. Everything was poorly glued together with a weak, unbelievable plot unworthy of a major film producer/director. The lack of time chronology, the jumping back and forth between scenes wasn't even done well, which is disappointing from Quentin T. He knows that jumping back and forth in time during scenes can be very effective. And Quentin knows how to do it very effectively...again, I refer you back to Resevoir Dogs, a brilliant flick where he used devices in a very effective and stirring way. RD is one of my all-time favorite movies, which is why I am so utterly disappointed by this very cheesy follow-up. I think QT was even trying to "give the audience a message about redemption" when Travolta's little gangster buddy 'found God' after all was said and done. This only drags the film further into the gutter of uselessness. Resevoir Dogs gave no messages. It displayed the characters as they were, let you taste the lives of these dirtballs and left you to draw from it what you will. This flick was riddled with poor writing, unbelievable glitzy plots, unnecessary characters and scenes that served no purpose other than to transparently get certain intended reactions from certain people, the time chronology jumps were poor and not as effective as QT is capable of when he does a good movie.....there are many reasons to wish this flick was never made. There is some decent acting by some of the involved actors, given the undesirable script. Harvey K., John T. and Bruce W. all gave decent performmances under the circumstances. It almost made the movie worth 2 stars. But, the movie was just so bad! If you like lots of gangster-related violence, swearing and shock-value fluff with no plot, just a bunch of poorly constructed movie devices haphazardly glued together, you might enjoy this film. Otherwise.....the hype didn't match the final product. Sorry, Quentin. I know that you know how to make a brilliant movie. This flick was just not up to what your standards should be. Better luck next time.
Pulp Fiction

I got a headache after watching this because of swearing by many actors from the beginning till the end.
I got a headache after watching this because of swearing by many actors from the beginning till the end. The acting is lively. It's worth watching once.Pulp Fiction

Royale with cheese
Saw this on the big screen back in 1994, and have loved it sense. The dialouge between the characters, the memorable lines (which are several), the cinematography, the direction, acting are all first rate.

But to me the most important thing is how the stories within the movie unfold leaving the viewer to ask "what's next?" instead of having everything explained from the beginning. All questions (excpet for what's in the briefcase) are answered. It takes patient viewing.

In sum: the greatest movie ever. A must watch.Pulp Fiction

It's Pulp Fiction. What more need be said?
This is an excellent movie. The actors bring robust life to their roles and create memorable and quirky characters. The writing is original and innovative. The most impressive aspect of the film is how the director effectively breaks the usual convention (dating back to Aristotle's Poetics) of having a linear beginning, middle and end. Good stuff.Pulp Fiction

No classic
I do not deny that this much lauded Quentin Tarantino film set in a violent underworld is enjoyable. There is snappy dialogue, interesting characters - such as Samuel L. Jackson's Bible-quoting hit man, Harvey Keitel's problem solving `Wolf' and Bruce Willis's boxer on the run -, intelligent banter between the film's various characters - such as between Samuel L. Jackson and his hit man partner John Travolta and between John Travolta and his gangster boss's wife Uma Thurman when the two of them go out on a `date' -, a number of conflicts involving guns that highlight the violent underworld which the film's characters inhabit, a particularly horrifying scene that takes place in the basement of a second-hand store and even an excellent cameo from Tarantino himself as Samuel L. Jackson's testy friend who doesn't want his wife to find out about his underworld connections. But these elements unfortunately do not add up to a whole because this film is lacking the most basic ingredient that any film must possess: a plot. There just isn't one. Lots of `stuff' happens in this film but there is no story to follow, no tale being told, just the activities of a group of disparate characters who do this and that and then the film is over. It may seem strange that I am giving this film 4 stars after such criticism but that is because what there is to watch is enjoyable as I have already said, despite the film's severe shortcomings. This is a testament to Tarantino's ability to create an enjoyable film experience for the viewer. But just as candy floss is only meant to please the taste buds and not fill the stomach likewise this film cannot be considered a meal, because of what it lacks. Yes, it is enjoyable. But it is no classic.

Pulp Fiction

Customers who bought Pulp Fiction also bought:

Featured DVD's

• Action & Adventure
• Anime & Manga
• Art House & International
• Classics
• Comedy
• Cult Movies

• Drama
• Gay & Lesbian
• Horror
• Kids & Family
• Musicals