Скачать | Top 100 Praise and Worship Contemporary Christian Gospel Music Songs of 2015 | Aidan Quinn
Gladys Hamilton (Seattle) i was told that I can migos Pulp Fiction free download, but I did not believe, especially the year 1994 New York. Michael Whitehead (Lexington) Quentin Tarantino Pulp Fiction free download Bluray at high speed, and even in the USA Cambridge.
Pulp Fiction
Crime, Drama, Thriller
IMDB rating:
Quentin Tarantino
John Travolta as Vincent Vega
Samuel L. Jackson as Jules Winnfield
Tim Roth as Pumpkin - Ringo
Amanda Plummer as Honey Bunny - Yolanda
Eric Stoltz as Lance
Bruce Willis as Butch Coolidge
Ving Rhames as Marsellus Wallace
Phil LaMarr as Marvin
Maria de Medeiros as Fabienne
Storyline: Jules Winnfield and Vincent Vega are two hitmen who are out to retrieve a suitcase stolen from their employer, mob boss Marsellus Wallace. Wallace has also asked Vincent to take his wife Mia out a few days later when Wallace himself will be out of town. Butch Coolidge is an aging boxer who is paid by Wallace to lose his next fight. The lives of these seemingly unrelated people are woven together comprising of a series of funny, bizarre and uncalled-for incidents.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x816 px 14757 Mb h264 13360 Kbps mkv Download
HQ DVD-rip 852x362 px 1847 Mb h.264 1500 Kbps flv Download
iPhone 480x204 px 823 Mb xvid 600 Kbps mov Download
I am baffled by the users who rate this film so highly. If one deleted the N word and the F word there would be no script. How can we expect young viewers to treat people respectfully when Hollywood bombards us with racial slurs? Yes life imitates art although calling this movie art is a stretch.

I read that Tarrantino is a high school drop out. Must be true judging from this script. I am certainly no prude or a stranger to adult themes and language. However the script was filled with glorified drug use and violence yet failed to show one ounce of Character growth. The barrage of profanity and violence was both offensive and boring. Quentin Tarrantino movies are on my list of films to avoid. Waste of time.
The Movie that redefined a genre
Viewers are taken on a ride through three different stories that entertwine together around the world of Marcellus Wallace. Quentin Tarantino proves that he is the master of witty dialogue and a fast plot that doesn't allow the viewer a moment of boredom or rest. From the story of two hit-man on a job, to a fixed boxing match to a date between a hit-man and the wife of a mob boss. There was definitely a lot of care into the writing of the script, as everything no matter the order it is in, fits with the story. Many mysteries have been left such as what is inside of the briefcase and why Marcellus Wallace has a band-aid on the back of his neck, which may be connected. The movie redefined the action genre and reinvigorated the careers of both John Travolta and Bruce Willis. This movie is required viewing for any fan of film.
What's the big deal?
I really don't know what the big deal is. This is obviously another one of those "highly intellectual" movies I am too stupid to understand. The critics compare it to "The Godfather"... I find that to be sacrilegious! I agree with one critic only when he states that the film "presents meaningless issues in an intensely-fascinating and almost lyrical fashion", and I would like to put a big emphasis on MEANINGLESS!!! How can something meaningless be good?

Another famous critic, Roger Ebert, claims "Seeing this movie last May at the Cannes Film Festival, I knew it was either one of the year's best films, or one of the worst. Tarantino is too gifted a filmmaker to make a boring movie, but he could possibly make a bad one..." That is amazing! One of the world's most acclaimed film critics watches a 'masterpiece', and right after that cannot decide whether it is really a masterpiece or garbage? Then he goes on to say, 'oh, but it can't be garbage if such an in-director made it, so it must be a masterpiece'. So much for competent individual judgment... I suppose you would not be able to call yourself a critic if you wrote that Tarantino simply screwed up this time...

In my opinion, the film has a ton of famous actors, an "in" director, and nothing else. The plot is practically non-existent, there is no message, no "higher" meaning, nothing but violence for the sake of violence..., and above all, it does not entertain either! If this is art nowadays, I want to go back to the past!
Didn't like it at all! it's just me, I guess...
I have watched 75% percent of this film twice: the first time, I watched it on TV, and about 3 quarters of the way, I gave up... However, due to the film's cult following, I gave it another shot (and watched it to the end) and, to be honest, I didn't like it anymore than I did the first time I watched it...

Why is that?

First of all, it was utterly chaotic for the most part. It felt like those experimental, amateur films, which I personally didn't like at all...

Then there were the conversations within the film: as always with Tarantino's films, obscenely profane and crude, plus they get nowhere...

Moreover, I found it over the top violent. Obviously, the storyline wouldn't be the same without all the violence, but at times I found it to be overdone on that department...

Lastly, I found the script to be utterly appalling, in true Tarantino fashion, and nonsensical at parts...

I only liked one thing about Pulp Fiction: the acting. Everyone did their best and in the end, wasn't the actors that disappointed me, but the film's script...

So, the verdict:

It might be that I dislike everything that involves Quentin Tarantino, (his signature obscene violence and cruelly long, pointless and crude conversations have always appalled me) but I cannot give this film more than a 3 out of 10. For me it was painful to watch, only to reach a disappointing ending. Utter loss of time! But then again, it seems I'm one of few here on IMDb that disliked Pulp Fiction...
Pretty bad!
The story development is very poor, and has very long dragged scenes that add nothing to the story. The non-linear and looping time order of the scenes smacks of an effort to cover up the lack of coherence in plot and character. The movie is like several episodes of a TV show thrown together.

Some sequences, especially one involving bondage harnesses and homosexual rape, have the uncomfortable feeling of creative desperation, of someone who's afraid of losing his reputation scrambling for any way to offend sensibilities.

The actors are doing a fine job with the crap they are given. However the distinct lack of a coherent plot, the disjointedly interwoven and half-baked story lines, the absence of characterization and incorrectly using of the music, makes this movie a good example of bad Cinema!
worst movie ever made
This is pure sh*t. Movie without normal plot and characters. Only part which is funny is when Samuel L. Jackson interrogates that dude in the apartment. Bruce Willis has no part in this movie,he just sit around and rage's about some watch which his father carried in the a** during world war. Not to mention that stupid gay part...no comment on that. It was suppose to be a bad a ss movie and it was just pure sh it. Quentin Tarantino go direct and produce some third-class Chinese shi**y movies. This was suppose to be in a bottom 250 movies not in top 10. People are so stupid and like shi**y movies. John Travolta just dance in this movie and shot a guy in the face but nobody gave a fu*k because it's so stupid movie.
Is Tarantino Our New Kubrick?
It seems to be the fashion among film "intelligentsia" to give wild praise to the most incomprehensible and incoherent rubbish, sending the partly unspoken message that if you, the film-goer, do not get it, you are not smart enough to understand it. This applies to most of the oeuvre of the late Stanley Kubrick (with the exception of LOLITA, DR STRANGELOVE, and to a point A CLOCKWORK ORANGE), and it applies equally well to this odd and trashy bit of nonsense handed to us by Quentin Tarantino. To say that sitting through it was painful would be an understatement, but if that isn't bad enough, it is also incoherent and confusing (at one point the Samuel L Jackson character dies, if memory serves, only to show up alive later with no explanation given). Uma Thurman is striking to look at in that dark wig, and Travolta stretches what little acting talent he has, but I still to this day have no idea what the movie was about, and frankly, Tarantino failed to make me care very much.

Like most of Kubrick's work, this film is visually striking: the color palette in particular is stunning. But at the end of the day, how a film looks means nothing unless there is some substance underneath the surface, and if there is any here, I did not see it.

At the time this movie came out, the critics were falling all over themselves proclaiming that it represented a new direction for Hollywood films. Fortunately that seems not to have been the case.
The type of movie I would've loved when I was thirteen
Some observations:

1. Anytime your most admiring audience is comprised of 17-year-old males you know you're in trouble.

2. Anytime the most common adjective used to describe your movie is "cool" you know you're in trouble.

This is a silly, juvenile, vulgar movie. Tarantino should have had the courage to make a cheap, violent, trashy Hollywood-style movie and been proud of it. Instead, he made a cheap, violent, trashy, Hollywood-style movie and hid behind the "irony" façade. Works for 17-year-olds, doesn't work for the rest of us.
the most over valued film of the '90s
Pulp Fiction is one of those movies you feel uncomfortable to talk about in negative terms since mainstream loves it. The real killer of this movie are the dialogs supposedly so cool but instead being silly and irritating, from the very first scene when endless minutes are waisted talking about a frivolous argument. The violence in this film, rather strong, is very often disturbing but never fun or entertaining. Tarantino takes himself a little too seriously making the movie lose most of its ironical aspect. Unless you are a fan that goes wild for the overweight Travolta, you will find his so-called cult scenes dull and of no interest. All the characters in this movie are exaggerated, and that wouldn't be a bad thing, but they also are not fun. There are some good action scenes, very few, which anyhow will not save from failure a movie that lasts 2hrs 40min!
I just finished screening this movie for the first time after putting it off for a number of years because of what seemed like equivocating appraisals from some of my friends. In hindsight, however, it seems to me that while the movie must have definitely bowled them over, overall they weren't sure exactly what to make of it or how to articulate what were probably a confused mix of feelings. But I am so impressed that I feel compelled to add a few specific observations to the many fine reviews already on this database.

First, this movie hits you with an impact somewhere in between, say, APOCALYPSE NOW and A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, and for some people may be just as disturbing (however, in this respect I am happy to report I didn't think it rose to the level of NATURAL BORN KILLERS). Full of graphically violent action and language, PULP FICTION is not a picture for everyone - I would definitely not recommend it to my parents, born in the 1930's (even to my one fairly "hip" relative of the same generation who, at age 66, still teaches high school sex education and likes to talk about things like sunbathing nude, among other potentially sensitive issues).

Irrespective of audience sensibilities, however, the film-makers, supported by superb acting in every role, manage to create a world full of the most fascinating sleazy characters possibly ever to appear on screen. From Travolta's pronounced almost-child-like curiosity about the world to Jackson's sincere and thoughtful philosophical ruminating and Willis's deep devotion to the memory of his father, I think such fascination lies not only in the characters' personalities as they are portrayed but in the way they tantalize the viewer into considering the possibility that such people could actually exist. As a lawyer of some years' experience dealing with all sorts of people I was particularly drawn to this aspect of the film.

Thus, and in response to some other reviewers' comments, I think this movie is more character-driven than plot-driven. Instead of a story peopled by basically weakly developed characters employed primarily as a mere device to move the plot along, as is too frequently the case in the movies (especially these days), the undeniably strong, clever, and unpredictable plot lines in PULP FICTION are actually of essentially secondary interest and importance, serving primarily as vehicles to get you worried about the fate of characters you can't help caring about despite the truly low attributes that otherwise form the basis for their respective personas. As at least one other reviewer noted, when the film ends you are actually disappointed, left craving more of these crazy people and their explosive lives.

Finally, and as strange as it may sound, this film reminds me of another Monumentally Great Film which one would never typically associate with it in any way in a million years - CASABLANCA. As in that film made way back in 1942, and as another reviewer has suggested, perhaps its special appeal - its unusually high degree of emotional impact - lies in its distinctly successful simultaneous application of several different genres in a single film - drama, action, dark humor - with the whole thing bound together by essentially flawless execution in every department. And while CASABLANCA is no doubt clearly much more wholesome and high-minded, like the older film PULP FICTION is not without a pronounced theme of redemption, even if it is not as strongly felt, considering all the later film's sleaze and violence.

In sum, when people say that this is probably the best film of the 1990's, it is easy to see why. Fundamentally a truly outstanding movie, it is a must-see for anyone who considers themself a film buff and can handle graphic subject matter.

(Incidentally, if you would like a more toned-down, much more overtly humorous and less serious picture with a not-altogether dissimilar look and feel, don't miss another 1990's Travolta picture, GET SHORTY.)
Roland J. Tran (Saint Paul) i was looking for a movie free Pulp Fiction download, as 720p to download it in 1994, one of the first Quentin Tarantino Tallahassee. Clara J. Lovett (Buffalo) i love how they play John Travolta, Samuel L. Jackson, Tim Roth, Amanda Plummer, Eric Stoltz, Bruce Willis, Ving Rhames, Phil LaMarr, Maria de Medeiros, Rosanna Arquette, Peter Greene, Uma Thurman, Duane Whitaker, Paul Calderon, Frank Whaley, Bronagh Gallagher, Burr Steers, Laura Lovelace from the movie director Quentin Tarantino 1994 Miami.