Pulp Fiction

There's so much to talk about when it comes to Quentin Tarantino's breakthrough crime caper Pulp Fiction that I barely know where to begin. On the first day of this class, when we were asked to write down our favorite movie and explain why we chose it, I wrote down Forrest Gump, and said it was my favorite movie because it had a little bit of everything: drama, humor, heroism, and romance. Pulp Fiction is Forrest Gump's evil doppelgänger. Pulp Fiction contains gangster related drama throughout, humorous conversations between Jules and Vincent, heroism when Butch frees Marcellus Wallace from his rapist captors, and even a bit of romantic spark between Vincent and Mia, as well as Butch and Fabienne. The two movies also both make constant reference to well-known events in popular culture. Forrest experiences some of the defining moments of the twentieth century, like Watergate, the Vietnam War, and the integration of African American students into public colleges. Pulp Fiction, meanwhile, makes reference to other forms of entertainment, rather than historic events. John Travolta's dance scene at Jack Rabbit Slim's is seen as a homage to his 1977 film Saturday Night Fever. Butch encounters Marcellus Wallace by pure chance while driving his car through the streets of Los Angeles, just as Marion Crane's boss nearly sees her in her car in the opening of "Psycho". Jules refers to one of Brett's friends as "Flock of Seagulls" because of his haircut, and tells Yolanda that everyone is going to be "like 3 little Fonzies" in the closing diner scene. The list goes on and on. The primary difference between the two films, however, is Tarantino's generous use of intense violence, vulgar language, sexual content, and general dark themes that are not present in Forrest Gump. Tarantino was clearly trying to appeal to a different kind of moviegoer than Forrest Gump director Robert Zemeckis, and although it is debatable as to which film is greater, there is no denying that Pulp Fiction has withstood the test of time as enigmatic, entertaining, and one hell of a ride.

Sharknado - Cinematic Masterpiece

I truly believe Sharknado was, in all seriousness, one of the best films we have watched in class this year. Forget for a second all the film terms we learned in March, and how much we are supposed to appreciate what is generally defined as quality filmmaking, and think about how much our class actually enjoyed themselves during this film compared to the dozens of others we've watched. For me at least, watching Sharknado was a genuinely more enjoyable experience than almost all the others. We laughed hysterically at this movie's impossible premise, cliché characters, abysmal cinematography, and downright stupid dialogue. Bauks' wisecracks about the walking train wreck that is Tara Reid only furthered our laughter. But believe it or not, this is exactly what director Anthony C. Ferrante wanted when he set out to make this movie. The reason for Sharknado's existence and positive response from audiences is the same reason why people love shows like "Jersey Shore" and "Keeping up with the Kardashians": they're so bad that they're good. People like to feel superior, and watching awful movies gives people the chance to gain personal satisfaction through criticizing the work of others, and they are willing to pay just as much as they would for any other movie to do it. This is the model that an entire industry is built on: "stupid sells". This movie had just a $250,000 budget, but managed to garner $19 million in total revenue, a 7,600% return on investment. As long as it remains profitable, the "so bad it's good" world of cinema will continue to pump out these half-assed excuses for movies. But as much as I've grown to appreciate great cinema in this class, and as much I hate to say it, I'm as guilty as the rest of the moviegoing public in their love of stupidity. I loved Sharknado.

The Secret Life Of Walter Mitty

The movie I chose to watch outside of class was The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, a 2013 romantic drama based on a 1939 short story of the same title. The movie details the life of Walter (played by Ben Stiller), a man with an unfulfilling, average life, who dreams of abandoning his everyday life and doing something extraordinary. He regularly "spaces out" in the middle of the day, imagining intricate scenarios in which he acts heroically or achieves something great. He is romantically interested in Cheryll (played by Kristin Wiig), a woman he knows from his work at the major magazine Life. His fantasies often involve his heroic act impressing Cheryll and the two of them falling in love. In real life, however, Walter is too shy to talk to Cheryll, and is often bullied by his coworkers because of his social awkwardness and constant "space outs". When Walter's job requires him to track down a traveling photographer or be fired, Walter jumps at the opportunity to make something more of his life. He goes on an adventure through Greenland, Iceland, and the Himalayas, eventually finding his man at the top of a Himalayan mountain. He returns home a new man, makes a romantic connection with Cheryll, and sees that Life magazine has used a picture of him for the front page of their final printed issue. One thing that really stood out to me during the movie was the Walter's transformation from an "average Joe" to someone truly remarkable. The vast majority of us live fairly average lives (well, average by 1st world standards), and we all dream of breaking free of the mundane and making our lives extraordinary. We all can see ourselves as Walter Mitty in one way or another, and this film encourages all its viewers to do just as Walter did: to seize the day, go on an adventure, and never look back. This was not the first recreation of the original short story, and it's no coincidence that this is a story that has been retold so many times, because it offers a universal message of hope, and as Cheryll says, "courage, and going into the unknown".

Memento's Use of a Non-Linear Story

Memento was, without a doubt, one of the most unique movies I have ever seen. Unlike most movies, in which events are presented to the viewer in the order that they happened, Memento switches back and forth between a black and white sequence which occurs first chronologically and moves forwards in time, and a colorized sequence which begins at the "end" of the story chronologically, and moves backwards in time in chunks, with a brief overlap between each chunk so that the viewer can connect the dots. To call this a complex story would be an understatement, but while this convoluted structure can be confusing to the viewer, it is also what makes the genius of this film. Memento's main character, Leonard Shelby, has a memory condition that causes him to forget all events within a few minutes of them happening. So, by showing a large portion of the film's events in reverse order, director Christopher Nolan forces his audience into experiencing things from Leonard's perspective, because while Leonard doesn't remember events that occurred just a few hours ago due to his condition, the audience simply hasn't seen them yet, and become just as confused as Leonard himself. Eventually, the two sequences meet in the story's chronological middle, and the events that lead to Teddy's death are finally revealed. This is one of only two movies I have ever seen that I believe makes effective use of a non-linear story line, the other being "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind". Both films use their non-linear stories to intentionally omit key details from the audience's knowledge, keeping them guessing until the final reveal at the end. All in all, Memento is a masterfully written screenplay that manages to turn a story that initially seems  to be incomprehensibly chaotic into a true masterpiece.