Quentin Tarantino is a talented guy there is no doubt. He has a sharp eye, a masterful control of language and knows how to wield his encyclopedic knowledge of cinema and pop culture. For all of his gifts however, he is also a master at squandering them on pap nonsense. This film,a twisting collection of underworld tales of mobsters, hit men and a wayward boxer, is a marvel. It is brisk, catchy and wonderfully shot. The acting is inspired and the dialog is poetic. There is no denying the lure of the production. It is unique. It is also the biggest example of style over substance. Tarantino paints a brilliant picture but fails to infuse it with any purpose. The movie was made simply to be watched, consumed and that's all. There's no over riding reason to see the film other than it's "cool". This is fine if you're a simpleton who has no expectation out of cinema other than to be titillated. If you expect more out of film, when you break this thing down and look at it, it is hollow.

The lack of a point wouldn't be that big of an issue, there's plenty of content-free movies out there, but this is such an ugly movie that it makes me pause. The characters are hideous people doing horrendous things to each other. Everyone is an amoral monster carelessly drifting through the world causing mayhem and bloodshed. Instead of pulling the various plots together into a decisive moral point, Tarantino is comfortable letting the loose ends float in the wind without either resolution or any deeper meaning. Someone dies, it's no different than if they live. A man is shot in the back of hit man Vince Vega's (John Travolta) car he's the referred to as a "dead nigger" for the remainder of the scene. He's not a man, he not an individual, he's not respected, just a "dead nigger" who needs to be mopped up. If it were clear that Tarantino were trying to show the world as an amoral jungle it would be passable but he never feels the need to explain things that far. Things just happen and the things that happen are simply ugly. I am certain the reason for this is because of how the script was written. The script, with all of it's fast dialog and broken time lines, is actually very simple. Reading it, it seems apparent to me that Tarantino sat down and thought of some scenes he thought would be cool to produce. The needle in the heart, the hillbilly male rape, the standoff in the diner, etc. These scenes are anchors me established and then wrote wandering threads to each of them. There are five or six solid scenes with riveting action the rest of the film are meandering paths to these scenes.

It is clear actors thrive when given Tarantino's dialog. He offers them, not so much deep characters, but interesting ones and with the popping dialog there is plenty for trained actors to dig their teeth into. In particular Samuel L. Jackson finds a rich role in hit man Jules, who is transformed after surviving an ambush that should have taken his life. Jules sees God's hand in the event and feels that he's been spared to do greater things. This redemptive element could have been drawn out and held meaning but Tarantino doesn't seem to know what he has on his hands. In the end, Jules' epiphany is explained and his explanation falls flat, weighed down by irrational pop culture references and a lack of direction. I found myself wanting Jules to pull himself out of this criminal life and his choice to wander the Earth, doing good deeds, sounds wonderful, but this brief respite from the amoral morass Tarantino creates has as much impact as spitting in the ocean.

Ultimately, this is not the brilliant work of art it has been portrayed to be. It is a lively, invigorating piece of cinema, to be sure, but it's not a masterwork. I understand why so many claim this to be brilliant. It is a vivid work and there's no ignoring it. As I said, it is unique. But when you stop to really look at it, there is actually very little going on other than a lot of flash and bang. I give credit for some great dialog, but the overall film is just a vile trip through the imagination of a man who is stuck in his corrupted adolescence. as I've said before, Tarantino is a legitimate talent but he has the instincts and mentality of an abused twelve-year-old boy with a box of frogs and firecrackers.


Related Reviews:
Quintin Tarantino movies
Kill Bill Volumes 1 & 2 (2003 - 2004)
Reservoir Dogs (1992)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Roger Ebert
ScreenIt!

Labels: Bruce Willis, film, JohnTravolta, movie review, Quentin Tarantino, Samuel L Jackson, Uma Thurman