289 of 1001 Movies: Pulp Fiction (1994)

Filmed in Los Angles, this movie is an epic, long, dark, and comedic ride. With a lower budget than one might expect, Tarantino took this film and wired into his dream. This movie seems like Reservoir Dogs 2.0. I do like Pulp Fiction though, and while a controversial director, I think Tarantino ranks as one of my favorites officially now, since I can't think of a movie I've disliked from him. I've so far loved them.

Summary: Three stories are featured that are all connected. The first follows Vincent, a hit man for the mobster Marsellus. After fulfilling a hit, he is asked to take Marsellus' wife out, Mia. An accidental drug overdose sends their evening into a tail spin though.
The next story is about Butch. who has accepted a large sum of money from Marsellus to take a dive in his next match. After he wins though he takes off with the money that he has won. The getaway for Butch is filled with chaos, and unexpected violent events.
The last part of the movie is about Jules, who does hits with Vincent for Marsellus. The hit that the movie begins and ends with changes Jules life after he believes a miracle has happened.

This is one of the most ambitious movies I've seen. I enjoyed it, but it doesn't place above some of my other favorite Tarantino movies like Inglorious Basterds or Kill Bill Vol. 1. The movie has great direction, but I love the directness of the others better.

The most memorable aspect of the movie is the interaction between Vincent and Jules. John Travolta has one of his most memorable and signature performance as Vincent. I haven't seen Travolta in a lot, but this showed his range. There is also Samuel L. Jackson as Jules. Between these two a lot of awkward and dark comedy ensues. I don't know how I feel about laughing out loud at some of their scenes together.

If only Uma Thurman could always score roles as she does in Tarantino movies. Tarantino always writes unique and catchy female roles. Thurman brings to life the mysterious nature of the females' he writes, and it sets them apart from many feminine roles in movies I've seen. Thurman's character Mia is no different, and I don't think anyone else could have brought this character to life.

I wish there would have been more of her character in the movie. It would have been extended by another hour, but it might have been worth it. I was so curious about the life she led as the life of a wife of a mobster in this setting. There are other noticeable faces though like Bruce Willis as Butch. This is one of the few Willis roles I've enjoyed. I'm still not sold on Willis, because it was more so the writing that carried it, but he brought it to life well in a suiting character for him.

Pulp Fiction is a classic and a stand out for the time of 1994. It doesn't scream that it's a 90's movie, and it intentionally looks ahead of it's time. It throws in random elements like the 50's restaurant and dance scene with 70's inspired music to transform the time into one that transcends over generations.

285 of 1001 Movies: Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994)

From director Mike Newell, and famed screenwriter, Richard Curtis, comes one of the most British films there is, Four Weddings and a Funeral. I have to admit I didn't overly enjoy Love Actually, but I really loved About Time from Richard Curtis. Maybe he just needed to dump Hugh Grant finally? I think overall I enjoyed the story, but I've never been huge into this specific type of romance, and the acting left something to be desired.

Summary: The movie centers on Charles and his group of friends throughout the duration of four funerals and a wedding. Charles is a good guy, but he's also a bit awkward when it comes to expressing his feelings. He meets Carrie at a wedding, and he finds out that if he really wants to win over love then he might need to become better about expressing that then. Carrie doesn't waste time though, and through four weddings and funerals not only does a lot change in their own lives, but the lives of those that surround them as well.

The two main leads are Hugh Grant and Andie MacDowell as Carrie. I don't think neither were bad in their roles, but also they didn't hit in making the memorable impact that the screenplay seemed to showcase they could. Actually, Grant is fitting for his character here. As a guy who wasn't who he is now there isn't an energy of being uptight that is in this role that transcends into his other ones. I'm still not a huge Grant fan though. The character seemed capable of a lot more. Now MacDowell might have spoiled the movie for me, or at least the vibe of it. I don't think she is a bad actress, but not particularly suiting for the role. More so, my confusion was what laid in the motives of her character? Was she making the choices she were because the possibility of taking a chance with Charles scared her? MacDowell's portrayal left me unaware of what emotions the character was experiencing.

There was one character that I was transfixed by, but in a huge array of characters takes a back seat. Kristen Scott Thomas was Fiona in the movie, and the character that most intrigued me. I also enjoyed her in The English Patient as well. Seeing the chemistry that Hugh Grant had with her, sort of makes me think it wasn't him that he was wrong for the role, but more so the pairing with him, Andie MacDowell. Thomas seemed to have real emotions going on with her character that pulled her in, but the movie is trying to handle a lot, which I admire Newell for, but also it is too much to develop.

I can see why the movie is a charming one. For a time when the romantic comedy was thriving in the 80's and on, this movie brought in a new element with romantic movies. Not only was it trying to handle the two leads romance, but also the intertwining relationship of a group of people as this is all happening. It was like the Friends of movies for the time. I admire it for what it embarked on, but there was some heartstrings I wanted pulled that weren't. Then again I find the two leads personalities very unattractive.