Component 2d: Experimental Film 1960 – 2000 (Auteurship)

“Experimental film is often the result of an auteur challenging established conventions with fresh ideas.” With reference to your chosen film option, how far do you agree with this statement?

Planning:

Intro: I agree with the statement large extent. Make reference to the concept of Auteurship and explain how Tarantino is one, making reference to Pulp Fiction,

Explain how Tarantino is an auteur through his subversion of convention, making specific reference to sequences in Pulp Fiction. Describe how the film experimental and LTQ!

Explain why he is an auteur through his filmography motifs and reoccurring experimentalism signature to his oeuvre.

Make reference to criticism of the auteur theory and show why experimental film is not always made by auteur, and can be a result of a directors wish to dismantle convention, but acknowledge the increasing influence of directors who create experimental film, e.g Nolan or Wes Anderson. Experimental or auteur for different reasons, i.e narrative or visuals, etc.

Conclusion: Link points together, explaining why Tarantino has created an experimental film through his Auteurship, but experimental film, while common among auteurs, is not specific to them.

Version 1:

I agree with this statement to a large extent as auteur directors will often strive for new and original films, and often achieve this through experimental methods of filmmaking. The auteur theory states that a director who exudes a specific style or aesthetic that is singular to them, making their work recognisable as having been made by that director, is an auteur.

Tarantino is considered an auteur director because of the nuanced way he subverts narrative convention in Pulp Fiction. The film is episodic, circular, and each plot arc plays out in a linear order within itself. Tarantino keeps the film interesting by frequently swapping audience perspectives and playing major events in the story out of order, keeping the story and plot out of sync for the entire film. The way that he plays around with established narrative form in an otherwise cliche genre setting makes the film experimental, and this experimenting with narrative has become a staple of Tarantino’s oeuvre. This can also be seen in his other film, Reservoir Dogs (Quentin Tarantino, 1992), where the events taking place in the present are often broken apart or interchanged with snippets of the events leading up to them. Therefore, experimental film is often the result of an auteur challenging established conventions with fresh ideas, and this is significant in Tarantino’s style as an auteur in creating nuanced narrative.

Tarantino is also experimental in his approach to other aspects of filmmaking. In Pulp Fiction, this can be seen in the dialogue. Conversations are often entirely centred around copious pop culture references, typically music and film of the 1970s that Tarantino himself appreciates, making it more distinct to him as a director. There is subtext to these seemingly pointless discussions, and crude language within them is another motif of his filmography that makes his films recognisable as having been made by him. Obscure, vintage soundtracks, shooting on film, subversion of genre cliches, here that is crime/thriller, extreme violence used for comedic effect are also reoccurring staples in his entire body of work that make him films instantly recognisable as a Tarantino film. This can be seen in Pulp Fiction in the conversation between Jules and Verne. They casually talk about TV and fast food for a long period of time before carrying out a hit in an apartment. This scene is very drawn out, uses entertaining yet seemingly unrelated dialogue, and climaxes in a bloody and violent death. Therefore, auteurs do often experiment with new and fresh approaches to established film conventions to make their films more distinct and specific to them. This can be seen in Wes Anderson, for example, whose oddly symmetrical visuals and dry humour and dialogue give his work an individuality in their experimentalism and a link to him as a director. Therefore, auteurs will often create experimental film through a desire to make nuanced, interesting films specific to their oeuvre.

However, I do not completely agree with this statement, as auteur theory has been criticised for placing too much emphasis on the director alone as the creator and executor of an artistic vision in a film. There are many people who work on a film, for example, the cinematography for Pulp Fiction was done by Andrzej Sekula, who would go on to do a number of Tarantino’s other films. Therefore, it can be argued that Tarantino alone did not create the experimentalism of Pulp Fiction, rather a group of people who each input their vision and skill. However, this can be argued against as Tarantino wrote the script for Pulp Fiction, and often with other auteur directors the crew of a film may input their own ideas, but ultimately they carry out and partly execute the artistic view of the director who oversees that the film executes their idea/vision correctly. Therefore, many auteur directors do execute their vision in their films accurately enough so that it is specific to them, and any experimental narrative, dialogue, or aspect of it can be attributed to them and their desire to create a nuanced and fresh subversion of an established convention. Therefore, I agree with this view to a large extent.

I agree with the view that Experimental film is often the result of an auteur challenging established conventions with fresh ideas to a large extent. While experimental film is not specific only to auteur directors, most auteur directors will create and execute fresh, innovative takes on film convention to make original and entertaining works that are recognisable as their due to an overarching style in their filmography, as seen with Quentin Tarantino, and this drive for originality and ingenuity often results in experimental approaches to filmmaking.

Quentin Tarantino, Auteur

Quentin Tarantino is considered an auteur for his stylistic, signature aesthetic and approach to filmmaking. His films are all linked by reoccurring motifs and aspects that are distinctly recognisable to him ad a director. These include shooting in film, interesting and entertaining dialogue surrounding pop culture Tarantino himself likes, crude language and humour, extreme violence used for comedic effect, etc.

Quentin Tarantino is considered an auteur for the the motifs that can be recognised universally in his filmography. An identifiable feature of his work is snappy, entertaining dialogue, crude humour and language, riveting tension, extreme violence, pop culture references and classic/retro soundtracks. A scene that shows this clearly is the apartment scene in Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarantino, 1994), where a long and unrelated conversation told through crude language on pop culture builds up to the hit, tension is built in the apartment through a lengthy soliloquy by the character Jules, further pop culture references are made, and the climax arrives as a bloody, violent moment that is done for comedic effect. Tarantino is considered an experimental auteur, as his films display a high level of filmmaking/technical competence but also use unique and innovative approaches to narrative, dialogue, violence, etc. This is another reason why his films are so signature and specific to him, and allow for the audience to instantly recognise a Tarantino film as a Tarantino film. His experimental approach also prevents his films from become so synonymous with the crime/thriller genre that his style is considered a convention of the genre. He plays around with convention, subverts audience expectations and uses nuanced techniques. He has not simply made innovations in the genre, he has created a style and approach within the genre that is specific to him.

He can be considered a post-modern auteur. He has created his own directorial style by copious reference to past (specifically 1960s and 1970s) obscure/grind-house film and music sub-culture, cementing that convention in his own films, re-contextualising into the norm, while experimenting with nuanced approaches to narrative, scriptwriting, etc. He does not change the art’s original message, rather shows how it was filtered through the audiences perspective.

Auteurs And Auteur Theory:

Auteur: “An artist with a distinctive approach, usually a film director whose filmmaking control is so unbounded but personal that the director is likened to the “author” of the film, which thus manifests the directors unique style or thematic focus.”

The auteur theory began in the 1950s when Cahiers du Cinema began to hail certain directors as ‘auteur’ directors for having demonstrated particular artistic skill while working in a studio system. These early examples include Alfred Hitchcock and Orson Wells.

Auteur theory claims that the director holds complete creative control over the audio and visual aspects of the film, is more so the “author” than the writer of the screenplay. This is the concept of camera-pen. Fundamental elements such as camera placement, lighting, scene length, etc. convey the message of the film rather than the plot line. Supporters of the theory will also claim that the most cinematically successful films are those with an unmistakable sign of its director. Personal expression is key to being classed as an auteur, and an auteur director is more concerned with aesthetic/style and themes than structure and content, giving their films a signature flair. It may not have to be an artistic interpretation of the world, but rather an artistic vision or style specific to the director. A director can be considered an auteur for a distinct visual style, such as Wes Anderson, or for thematic interest, or or being considered an innovator in a specific genre, such as Ridley Scott, or experimenting with established conventions such as narrative, or another reason. Auteurship reinforces the ideal of individual perspective building upon conventions to build something new.

The theory has been criticised for not recognising the value and role of the various crew of a film or the social/cultural/production context or genre it was made in. It is more so the main vision of the director guiding the crew, but often the voice of the other people making the film can come through aswell as the directors. Many producers have been recognised for their own voice and vision influencing the voice. Scores, screenplays, etc. can be more recognisable, or combine to create the overall film, its style, etc. The author of the film can be more than just the director. Auteur theory is a policy. It is a theory used to identify, but is not a rule, the films quality does not depend on an authorial voice or who gave it that, but is used to understand whose personal creative voice influenced the film, even if the director is not the only factor in the films final image.

Quentin Tarantino: Contextualised

Quentin Tarantino’s signature style can be seen to have began in his lost film My Best Friends Birthday, which featured his comedic editing and use of volatile language and snappy dialogue. Tarantino’s career began with Harvey Keitel’s dedicated support to the Reservoir Dogs script, whose career had been diminishing. His name helped the film to be made, as other stars began to consider the project. Tarantino’s style seemed unconventional to more experienced members of the industry.

He was heavily criticised for leaving in a graphic torture scene in the film. It was pegged as a revelation at Cannes, and won at the Toronto Film Festival the prize for best film. It made $3 million in the USA, only shown in 26 theatres in the first week, and 10 in the UK, making £100,000 in the first weekend. It was considered the best directing be but since Citizen Kane.

Tarantino thinks in oeuvres (body of work), considering his films connected. He is eager to avoid creating lesser works that affect the overall quality of his oeuvre, believing that his filmography would be healthier if all his films were well-made.

His films are distinct in their use of fast and witty dialogue over seemingly pointless subjects, chaptered plots and story’s following 1970s crime thriller cliches that he puts his own spin on via unique characters, dialogue, soundtrack and nuanced use of extreme violence for comedic effect. Tarantino’s filmography is consistently highly-praised and many, if not most of his films are considered masterpieces. There are many aspects of Tarantino’s films that make them recognisable as being made by him, including extreme, often ridiculous violence, clever and nuanced use of dialogue, non-linear/interesting approaches to narrative, obscure 1970/80s compiled soundtracks, re-occurring actors and riveting plots told through unique structure and use of perspective/audience positioning. He often also includes crude language used casually in his dialogue and many pop-culture references, of which are very specific to him and his tase in pop-culture, e.g films, music, etc., which make his films individually more unique to him as a stand-alone director.

He includes an abundance of subtext to his dialogue, which makes his more fun to watch. He also creates and holds suspense over the course of long scenes. All of his films include scenes like this, some include many of them. He will do this often through dialogue with subtle and hidden meaning, even if on surface level it is over pleasantries and/or seemingly unrelated topics. He will give the audience implicit information and often create constantly building tension by bringing the scene closer to a climax or realisation, and continues the tension even after that realisation. The characters take their time and chat over normal, even realistic matters. They do not speak quickly or purposefully for long periods of time, instead Tarantino establishes their motivations and goals to create binary oppositions and set the possibility for a climax, thereby establishing tension and building it through subtle dialogue slowly but evidently building to that climax. These scenes also rarely involve music, instead long, drawn out silence to draw the audience inti the scene, alongside the dialogue with subtext.

His films have become highly recognised, respected, discussed and aspired to in the film industry. He is considered an independent auteur director, all of his films instantly identifiable to him and his body of work, different in each story but connected through signature features of his style of directing and his striving for consistent success in his oeuvre.

Component 2d: Experimental Film 1960-2000 (Narrative)

“Explore how far your chosen film or films are experimental in challenging conventional approaches to narrative.”

Planning:

Introduction – Briefly explain some context, i.e traditional approaches to narrative (3 act structure, 3 types of narrative), and summarise how/how much Tarantino subverts these traditions.

Describe how Tarantino subverts audience expectations and orthodox narrative through a non-linear, episodic narrative through a jumbled plot, linking to Tzvetan Todorov’s 5 stage theory. Also how he follows the 3 types of narrative.

Describe his switching between different narrative viewpoints through characters, restricted and unrestricted, and audience positioning. Explain how he subverts Vladimir Propp’s theory on character types, and his unique use of dialogue.

Conclusion: Describe how Tarantino combines episodic, circular and linear narrative types, changes audience positioning and narrative viewpoints regularly, and subverts established film theories/tropes and the cliches he himself included deliberately in the film to challenge conventional approaches to film narrative.

Version 1:

Pulp Fiction is highly experimental in it’s approach to narrative. Narrative traditionally follows a three act structure with a linear plot. Tarantino creates a narrative that subverts conventions and regularly swaps viewpoints, abandoning common narrative form in favour of focus on dialogue and character.

Tarantino subverts audience expectations in Pulp Fiction by going against orthodox film narrative, described by Tzvetan Todorov as a five stage process, involving the equilibrium, the disruption, recognition and resolution. Pulp Fiction is broken up into three distinct chapters which are played out of linear sequence, epilogued and prologued by a scene in a diner. This makes the plot episodic, circular, and linear, as each story plays out in chronological order in itself. The plot is completely separate to the story, leading to a highly experimental and disrupted narrative. The audience does not witness the plot playing out in order of the events occurring, for example, the diner sequence is shown at the beginning and the end of the film, but in the story occurs somewhere near the start of events, and the final scene chronologically int he story is shown around halfway through through the film’s plot. Tarantino therefore subverts audience expectations by fragmenting the plot and leaving the viewer to create the story in their own mind after seeing the film. He follows the three most common narrative types, and uses multiple devices such as inter-title cards and chaptering to create a highly irregular narrative that combines different conventional forms to subvert traditional narrative theory and create an experimental narrative in Pulp Fiction.

Tarantino also challenges conventional approaches to narrative through his frequent switching between narrative viewpoints. For example, at the start of the film the audience is positioned to empathise and care for the two diner robbers. At the end of the film, we are positioned to care about Jules and his story, and in that scene, despite what we know about them, the robbers are the antagonists with a binary opposition to Jules, who is in that scene our protagonist. He also uses restricted and unrestricted narrative viewpoints, such as when we do not know about the armed man in the apartment bathroom whilst the hit is happening, but later on we are aware of the fact, whereas Jules and Vincent are not. Every different chapter the narrative viewpoint shifts between characters, which stops the audience from seeing any particular person as the main character or villain, subverting Vladimir Propp’s theory on character type, stating that there are seven main character types in all stories, such as the hero, villain, and false hero.

Tarantino also does this by making the characters immoral and hard to look up to, so no character is the hero, villain, etc. Tarantino also places a great amount of emphasis on the dialogue in the film. The characters spend large amounts of time discussing irrelevant topics, such as how Vince and Julie’s spend as much time talking about fast food and foot massages leading up to the hit in the apartment as they spend carrying out the hit itself. The audience would not realise this as the dialogue, despite going against convention buy being so seemingly pointless, flows so well and immerses the viewer in what is being said. We are drawn in by these conversations that do not progress the plot in any way, only revealing binary oppositions, such as Vince’s belief that foot massages are inappropriate, explaining his later reluctance to take Mia on a date, or Butch’s dedication to his father’s watch. These oppositions, established by Claude Levi Strauss, provide the film with underlying tensions that immerse the audience. Tarantino subverts this theory by revealing the binary oppositions through seemingly pointless conversations about apparently unrelated topics, rather than through character actions or inner-monologue. The dialogue is flowing and entertaining to listen to, providing the film with a rhythm that flows smoothly to move the audience between major events, which are more memorable than the events themselves. Tarantino challenges conventional approaches to narrative through original, nuanced and experimental dialogue and cliche characters that are fleshed out and developed through the subtly written dialogue, script, and shifting narrative viewpoints.

Pulp Fiction is highly experimental in challenging conventional approaches to narrative. Tarantino utilises a chaptered, non-linear plot that goes against traditional narrative convention to encourage the audience to order the story themselves, forcing viewer participation and subverting Todorov’s established theory on five stage theory. He also swaps audience positioning to show characters from different perspectives, adding a layer of depth to the film through an experimental methodology. He incorporates fresh and original dialogue that does not progress the story but immerses the audience by being so casual and calm, and fleshes out the cliche characters through binary oppositions and subtle meanings between the lines. The characters themselves go against convention, despite being cliches themselves, as they are realised and developed through the dialogue and the audiences shifting feelings towards them as Tarantino changes the narrative and audience positioning.

Pulp Fiction: Narrative Drive

Dialogue:

Tarantino utilises dialogue to a high extent in his films, and it is considered a staple aspect of his films. He makes the dialogue enjoyable and engaging for the audience through reference to pop culture, and long conversations often revolve entirely around trivial or non-important topics, which makes it relatable and enjoyable for the audience to listen to. Ordinary conversations between friends are easy and entertaining to pay attention to, especially when between characters such as Jewels and Vincent, hit et that you wouldn’t usually expect to be talking do jovially about a “royale with cheese”.The dialogue provides a flowing pace to the film, as seen in how the drive leading up to the murder in the apartment is as long as the scene in the apartment, but the audience does not realise this while watching either scene since the dialogue in the car flows so easily. It also makes the character archetypes interesting, fleshing out blatantly cliche characters through relatable and unique dialogue over mundane focal points (such as the French equivalent of American fast food names) that is characteristic of Tarantino.

Narrative Viewpoint:

“The character with whom the audience is manipulated to emphasise or sympathise at any oven point in the film.” Tarantino also utilises this in an interesting and nuanced way, as he shifts the perspective between characters every new chapter. At first we are interested in the diner robber’s story, then we empathise with Vincent due to his precarious situation, then we are enthralled by Butch’s risky quest for the gold watch (in which Vincent and Wallace become the antagonists) then we understand Jewel’s sudden moral awakening, and from that perspective Vincent seems like a vain idiot to us and the diner robbers are the antagonists of the scene. This prevents the audience from becoming too attached with any one character, but simultaneously keeps us engaged and attached to all of them.

Character Motivations:

This is the driving force behind the character’s choices and actions. Motivations are fundamental to the audiences understanding of and engagement with the meaning of films. Tarantino’s character motivations are facilitated through his dialogue and so is the films narrative drive. This can be seen in how Vincent’s seemingly pointless defensiveness about the inappropriateness of foot massages eludes to his later apprehensiveness of taking Mia out and sets up his personality, therefore why he reacts to her overdose in the way that he does. It is also done, more explicitly, in Christopher Walken’s explanation of the origins of Butch’s fathers’ gold watch, which sets up why he would later go to such great lengths to retrieve it.

Cause and Effect:

The cause is an event or action and its consequences , which is the effect. All films are constructed around this simple concept, and in Pulp Fiction this can be seen in Vincent’s desperateness to save her with Mia due to the story of the man killed by her husband because he gave her a foot massage. Vividly created characters make cause and effect more esoteric, and creates character nuance and depth.

Chronological Flow:

“The arrangement of things following one after another in time.” Pulp Fiction only flows chronologically in throughout the individual sequences in the film, which contrasts how the film as a whole is not arranged in chronological sequence.

Pacing:

“The rhythm at which the plot unfolds.” Tarantino deliberately paces his films in a nuanced way that goes against film tradition, subverting audience expectations and engaging them through that subversion. Seemingly insignificant scenes take up a lot of time, whereas scenes crucial to the story can start and end very quickly, as seen in the drive to the from the apartment where Martin is shot by Vincent very suddenly and offscreen, after which the scene ends abruptly, just after we see a long, drawn out conversation between Vincent and Jewels about divine intervention. It is also evident in the diner robbers’ long conversation about robbing coffee shops opposed to gas stations right before a sudden start and cut away from the actual robbery in the diner itself, which we only again return to at the end of the film.

Pulp Fiction: Narrative Nonconformity

Narrative is made up of 3 components. Story, plot and narrative. Story is what the audience internalises in their minds. It is everything that occurs in the film from start to end, including events that the audience infer. The plot is what happens in the film, what is shown, allowing the audience to construct the story in their heads. It can begin anywhere in the chain of events, and can lead backwards or forwards. Narrative is how perspective is shown, i.e how the information is conveyed by the film to the audience. The flow of information from a positioned viewpoint.

In Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarantino, 1994) Tarantino uses the narrative to change the audiences understanding of events happening through changing perspectives. The characters, settings, story and key events are already familiar to the audience, as they are traditional, established crime thriller tropes/cliches. So, Tarantino constructs the narrative in an unfamiliar way, and therein lies the audiences enjoyment. Also, the fragmentation of the plot creates a sense of anticipation, because the audience knows what to expect, but don’t know when it will happen.

Tarantino also subverts the traditional 3 act structure which is a storytelling model dividing a story into 3 acts, the set up, confrontation, and resolution, in that order. In Pulp Fiction, each story, such as Vincent and Jewels’ arc, can be taken individually and told in a 3 act structure. E.g they travel to the apartment in act 1, the inciting incident, in act 2, the confrontation, they are attacked by one of the men and take a hostage, act 3 , the climax, they clean up a dead body and are confronted in the diner by the robbers. However, the film as a whole does not follow this structure, as it’s plot is so split up.

Tarantino also subverts audience expectations by following the 3 most common types of narrative simultaneously. The film follows a linear narrative (events play out in order from start to end) as each story plays out in a linear fashion by itself. It is circular (the narrative starts at the end and returns back to that point at the end of the film by going back in time) by showing the diner robbery at the start and end of the film. It is also episodic (the narrative has clearly separated sections, often broken up by a title, date, or usage of a narrator) as it uses inter titles to bring the film into new sections, such as “the Gold watch” or “the Bonnie situation”.

The film uses Prolepsis (edit to a later point in time) and analepsis (edit to an earlier point in time), and elipsis, which is where part of the story is emitted and later on learned of by the audience. Pulp Fiction deliberately hides things from the audience for them to learn later on, such as the diner robbers being in the same diner as Vincent and Jewels, or Vincent and Jewels entering the restaurant to see Wallace while Butch is there.

Tarantino also combines the 3 types of narrative viewpoint. It uses restricted (the audience only know as much as the protagonist, or character the film is following) such as when Vincent and Jewels are unaware of the man in the bathroom apartment, and at the time we, too, are unaware. We also see things from an unrestricted viewpoint (the audience sees aspects of the narrative the character it follows does not), like when Mia overdoses on heroin, thinking its cocaine, when we, the audience, know that it is heroin and cannot be sniffed as she does so. Tarantino mixes and switches between these as he sees fit.

He also uses different narrative devices in Pulp Fiction, such as title cards (the definition of pulp fiction at the start of the film establishing the well-known cliches of the film), intertitle cards, chattering that splits the film into 3 distinct chapters bookended by the diner robbery. Tarantino also utilises audience positioning in an interesting way. Vincent and Jewels are hired hitmen, Wallace is a murdering crime boss, Butch is a man who is willing to kill, lie and cheat for personal gain, Fabienne makes no moral judgement over it, Jimmy is happy to let gangsters into his house and dismember a body. All of the characters in the film are repugnant characters, and yet in the film we like them to various degrees.

So we are definitely positioned to enjoy being in the company in Vincent and Jewels who are charismatic, humorous or stylish. Lance is a scummy drug dealer, but is funny to listen to. We are being manipulated and positioned to sympathise with characters we wouldn’t normally. We are positioned to view the two men in the basement scene as horrible, but they are not much worse than the other characters, except in the context of the film they are the villains. The audience sympathies might shift throughout different points in the film, as in the beginning we follow the diner robbers, but later on they are from central characters to perifiral ones and we now care about Jewel’s reaction to the situation. We follow Vincent and Jewels, then Vincent and Mia, and the film shifts focus onto Mia, so the audience positioning is fluent and shifting.

There are academics who have invented narrative theories. Vladimir Propp studied Russian folklore and realised 7 character types throughout hundreds of stories. The hero, the villain, the princess, the donor, the dispatcher, the helper, the false hero. They are very vain characters. They will conform to these character types vein if those types are not present. In pulp fiction these traditional character types are not conformed into the script, as no character is one particular type, no villain, no single hero, etc. The second was that any story has up to 31 narrative functions. There are 31 things that can happen in a story. Any story will have some of them, but they will be in order. Pulp fiction is not in order, as the throes only works in linear stories/narratives. His theories are accepted as true, but Tarantino has created an interesting narrative as it doesn’t follow these audience expectations in terms of character types or narrative structure.

Propp

The second narrative theories is tzvetan todorov. Equilibrium theory. He said that any story has 5 stages. Those are equilibrium, disruption of equilibrium, recognition of disruption, resolution, new equilibrium. Tarantino does not give the audience this, what they expect.

Todorov

Roland Barthes invented the narrative codes theory. All stories have two narrative codes, which he identified as action and enigma codes. All stories have things that make audiences want to continue. Action codes are when a thing happens physically that you want to see what happens next, such as the shootout scene. Enigma codes are something that is intriguing that makes you want to know more. Such as the golden suitcase. Tarantino provides the codes, but does not necessarily give you what you want despite you seeing it. We never see what’s in the case. You are not given the satisfaction of the explanation. After Butch driving off, we don’t see what happens next to him.

Barthes

Claude Levi-Strauss invented binary opposition. Audience engagement is driven by tension between binary opposites. In any story there are tensions between opposites. The interplay drive the narrative and audience interest. It works for pulp fiction. There are binary oppositions, and that’s what creates interest.

Strauss

Pulp Fiction Contextualised

Pulp Fiction was written by Quentin Tarantino between 1992 and 1993, and was originally turned down by Tristar pictures for being ‘too demented.’, but was the fist film fully distributed by Miramax after co-chairman Harvey Weinstein saw it. It won the Palme d’Or at Cannes film festival in 1994, having been made with a budget of $8.5 million and eventually making a box office success of $213.9 million.

It is considered by critics as a touchstone of post modern film due to its entirely unique and unconventional narrative structure. It’s use of an A-List cast also brought the film much attention, regardless of the long-anticipated second film by the director, who had made notoriety after his 1992 crime thriller Reservoir dogs brought him into the mainstream.

Pulp Fiction is an experimental film, telling a conventional, cliche gangster story through a nuanced form of narrative. They film was also so influential due to Tarantino’s use of violence to ironically create humour and snappy and clever dialogue that does not add to the plot in any way, self-reflexive style, all which would come to represent Tarantino as an auteur director. The film homages more classic, indie cinema, and is considered his masterpiece particularly for its screenplay.

Tarantino created a riveting and enthralling movie by maintaining an escalating plot that is conveyed in a more nuanced way by the unique narrative. His dialogue is also honest and genuine-seeming, as characters talk among themselves about topics that don’t necessarily relate to the plot in any way, building his characters and their views on different matters. There is always something at stake in his films, creating conflict in all interactions, no matter how trivial, which maintains the viewers’ attention. He also handles subtext in a way that maintains tensity in a scene, and therefore viewer interest, as seen in the prologue scene in the diner.

He was closely involved in the production process, communicating with the actors and giving direct instructions. He uses non-diegetic music to add to his scenes, adding a style, pace to tone to a scene. In pulp fiction, Tarantino uses the narrative structure to reveal things about the characters, such as Vincent’s death due to his dismissal of Jewel’s moral awakening after a near death experience. He also immerses the audience into the narrative immediately by having two people discussing organised crime casually, bringing them into the story and the characters. By the end of the film, our perspective has changed a lot between characters, as Tarantino follows separate characters and revealing things about them between scenes, such as Jewel’s job to kill, the resolution of Butch and Wallaces conflict, and Vega’s death. Characters feel relatable due to the clever dialogue, scenes are engaging through dialogue undertones andcasual violence, and an engaging narrative that immerses the audience through what it reveals about the plot and how it keeps the audience on their toes. It also uses experimentalism in the narrative structure to create a new and subjective experience for the audience who can view the film in a way they want, therefore encouraging audience participation through a structure that demands attention and experimental methods that create a memorable and engaging audience experience.

Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarantino, 1994)

Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarantino, 1994) is crime/gangster thriller that follows multiple characters whose arcs intertwine and play out in a non-chronological order. The film is split up into five stories/sequences that swap perspectives between different characters at different points in the story.

The film is told in a unique way, as the plot does not play out chronologically, but rather the separate parts of the film are show in a jumbled and non-consecutive order. For example, the prologue, showing two people robbing a diner, is played again at the end of the film from another characters perspective. However, this scene is not the final in the story, only the plot, as they are separate in this film.

The film holds a significant place in history, as the methods through which it was told, i.e the narrative structure, use of violence and swearing, casual conversation, etc. were very new to film at the time. Tarantino took a cliche, conventional film genre and made it his own, individual work through distinct dialogue, tropes specific to him as a filmmaker, and a unique narrative structure.

I personally very much enjoyed Pulp Fiction. I enjoyed listening to the clever dialogue, the violent and shocking action sequences, the moments of intensity and the interesting mode of telling an entertaining and stylistic story. Tarantino utilises signature actors and iconic, classy music to give the film a slick aesthetic. It’s characters and quotes are iconic, and the story is intriguing and riveting. I rate Pulp Fiction ★★★★★!

Component 2d: Experimental Film 1960-2000

Component 2d contains the corse study areas of context, representation, key elements and aesthetics, and the specialist study areas of autership and narrative. We cover the 1994 Quentin Tarantino film Pulp Fiction, which has been chosen for it’s unique and experimental plot structure. Tarantino is also considered an auteur director with a signature style who creates his own, individual works.

Past questions have focused on the directors approach to filmmaking and the experimental use of editing and sound in the film, how narrative reinforces themes and how far Pulp Fiction is an auteur film. The unit focuses on the unique aspects of the film and the director who made it, and we are required to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of elements of film and it to an analysis of how to construct and communicate meaning in a film.