🎦 Pulp Fiction full movie HD download (Quentin Tarantino) - Crime, Drama, Thriller. 🎬
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
3 sets, main roles, debug's and stories.
Post following the segment of how everything concerns a little respect on the law, 2 Hit men named Vincent Vega (John Travolta) and Jules Winnfield (Samuel L. Jackson) Investigates the problem with the summit of their enemies and confesses to them about what they'e done, Jumping back and forth from one story to the next sounds frequently outstanding taking a quick look at the characters, plot and the main event, A purpose we can picture, However... Quentin Tarantino makes much movies that do with comic book similar stories that not only do himself but with his other friends who worked on those projects.

now we're moving on, Uma Thurman the actress in the film has the name Honey Bunny on her character, seems normal. In vision of the hair style and the viewpoint of her did so much better than the other films she has been in. And i don't know what they are because this is just about the first film with her in i've seen,

And the most memorable... Butch played by a man named Bruce Willis, A Die Hard actor. He is a boxer and does the complete opposite of the league, a champion who is known for The Diplomat Boxer, He not only does all this without struggling but knows what to do on most of the work that Quentin Tarantino asks.

Overall: This is the Quentin Tarantino Masterpiece I enjoy the most, Great Actors, Great Story, Brilliant Script, Well Improved Screenplay and Awesome Hard Work from Quentin Tarantino back in the 90's, Let's hope his films get better by the moment.
Good Music....Good Star Cast...But very overrated..
I watch it last night after reading millions of praising reviews for it and i was hoping i would see a spectacular classic movie but i was disappointed a lot..I agree Music was good..great cast..but something was lacking in it...movie ends and i was hoping it should have better end although climatic speech was good..... some 3 interrelated stories are combined by the Tarantino..dialogs are average entertaining with lots of f stuffs..you would hate scene of accidental shootout and cleaning brains stuffs after it so it's cruel, stupid, idiotic. It's full of violence & f-words to the point that it's sickening...it should be carefully viewed and analysis....you can have glimpse of dark humor..yeah i agree acting of Uma Thurman is good but why the hell Travolta nominated for Oscar.. but two and a half hours was too long in my view ...I will give it 7 out of 10 due to good casting and music and its average movie for me but it does not deserved in IMDb top 250 and it was not touching in any sense..
Am I blind?
You know that series of ads for Blockbuster Video featuring the oh-so-artsy film student that is really quite superficial and pseudo-intelligent? That's what everyone who sees greatness in Quentin Tarantino reminds me of. Come on, people, there are certain rules for movie-making that are indelible. You can't get by forever writing the script on the same day of shooting while hung over. Maybe I'm the blind man in the world of the sighted....or just maybe Tarantino has you all fooled, like Peter Sellers in "Being There."
A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
There are many differing schools of thought regarding Quentin Tarantino and his so-called "style". There are those who believe that the director who began his career as a humble video store clerk with a voracious appetite for movies of every conceivable style is talented and worth imitating. While Tarantino has made some movies worth discussing for their positive qualities (Reservoir Dogs is, by far, his best effort), this group of movies is rather small, especially considering that he has only directed five movies. There is another school of thought who regards his works as inane, self-indulgent, and bloated. Pulp Fiction, written and directed by Tarantino, and released in 1994, is his most divisive movie simply by virtue of being his most well-known. Upon its release, it was hailed as a warning shot to a complacent Hollywood- the maverick behind the indie hit Reservoir Dogs apparently had something else up his sleeve.

Pulp Fiction is ostensibly a crime story featuring the interconnecting lives of several characters. However, upon repeat viewings, the viewer begins to wonder exactly what that something is. Personally, I found this movie ran too long in spots, likely because Tarantino is so ridiculously in love with the sound of his own voice as spoken by different actors that he is afraid to cut one speech or even a single line. Dialogue, though it doesn't necessarily need to serve the story to justify its inclusion, should not be so dense as to drive the viewer out of the experience. When John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson, on the way to retrieving a briefcase for their employer, are talking about European hamburgers and foot massages, the scene plays like a witty outtake- as though the actors so understood the style of the movie that they were in that they felt comfortable riffing with the material. Not so- the rest of the movie is filled with conversations of a similar type, including (but not limited to) body piercing, blueberry pancakes, hamburgers (again), and coffee (this one performed by Quentin Tarantino himself, as though he couldn't wait to get a shot at delivering his own lines).

The strangest thing is, while the characters are "in character", as Samuel L. Jackson says in an opening scene, the movie is quite enjoyable. When the characters are placed into real confrontations, the movie takes on an entirely different persona and becomes at least a decent crime movie. Ultimately, however, these scenes are few and far between and, unfortunately, the movie clocks in at 154 minutes. There's really only a decent short film in all of this.

The movie also lacks what I would call a plot. The movie is described as three stories about one story, though that one story (ending, chronologically, with Bruce Willis and his irritating Euro girlfriend riding off into the sunset) doesn't connect the characters enough to be truly about one thing.

Ultimately the movie is a prime example of what happens when a VCR and a wide selection of movies replace film school. The movie lacks a coherent center and seems more like something that was made for the sake of just committing something to film and resurrecting the flagging career of John Travolta. The movie is too large in scope to sustain itself, and, in the end, implodes because there is really no conviction behind the presentation- too concerned with being a hipster-cool riff on a crime story, rife with pop in-jokes and 70's music (perhaps the best part of the movie is the soundtrack), somebody must have neglected to mention that the movie went nowhere and lacked the momentum to even get there.

While all of these qualities combine to form a truly deplorable viewing experience, I do have to mention Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson as two performers in this movie who, I felt, got away clean. Bruce Willis probably gets away with it because he's alone for the majority of his segment and, therefore, doesn't have anybody with whom to trade despicably derisible dialogue. Samuel L. Jackson gets a mention because of the scene at the very end of the movie in which he confronts Tim Roth's character and makes him realize that there are far more fearsome powers at work in the world than robbing a diner. In fact, the scenes coming directly at the beginning and the end of the movie are the two best, and everything else is filler.

As you no doubt have guessed, I fall squarely in the latter of the two groups I mentioned at the beginning of this review. Pulp Fiction is inane, self-indulgent, and bloated.
Hands down, the best film of the '90s.
Pulp Fiction, despite borrowing from just about every movie ever made, is the most invigorating cinema experience a filmgoer can ever hope for. Its hodgepodge of violence, mayhem, and generally deviant behavior is an assault on the senses, not to mention political correctness. However, despite all the film's cleverness and style, it hinges on the performance put forth by Samuel L. Jackson as Jules. The fact that he was denied an Oscar is a downright shame. Martin Landau, the best supporting actor winner that year, was terrific and funny in Ed Wood, but Jackson was perhaps the most commanding screen presence in film history as the bible-quoting, godfearing hitman. The last scene in the coffee shop with Tim Roth still sends chills down my spine, no matter how many times I've seen it. Rumors of a prequel involving Jules and Vincent (John Travolta) have been floating around lately. If Quentin Tarantino wishes to regain the fans he lost with the dissapointing (but still pretty good) Jackie Brown, he should get to work right away. I'll be the first in line to see the finished product.
Talk Fiction. Overrated and overpraised disappointment
I will never understand why Pulp Fiction is hailed by so many as one of the greatest films ever made. Quentin Tarintino's first film Reservoir Dogs was amazing. It had excellent performances, some good action scenes, an impressive structure and fantastic sound track. When Pulp Fiction came out in my country in October 1994, i could not wait to see it. Empire Magazine gave it 5 stars. I remember when i went up to Glasgow to see it with an anticipation i had not felt since i had went to see some thing like Star Wars or Indiana Jones.

Oh boy, twenty minutes in and i was already sick to death of Samuel Jackson's character. He just talked and talked and talked and....talked. John Travolta's Vince Vega was a guy i wanted to decimate, oh Travolta you looked ridiculous with those hair extensions and then you talked and talked and talked with Uma Thurman in a silly black wig. There was so much talking in this film that it made me want to walk out. I have only ever done this once in my life and it was with that utter garbage Jack Nicholson flick Wolf. Tosh.

So i kept hoping that something good would happen...Christopher Walken as an army bloke talking and talking about a gold watch up his ass...NOT GOOD...a male rape scene with talk...NOT GOOD...Quentin Tarintino turning up in a cameo that should have got him shot (in real life) talk talk about disposing of bodies...oh, this film was the pits, i must have been the only one in the audience that hated this film, because everyone was whooping and hollering like they were watching a Naked Gun comedy. Oh yes, they loved it.

Quiet frankly my admiration of Tarintino was gone forever, he got his head together with the brilliant Jackie Brown then lost the plot again with the silly Kill Bill volumes. Pulp Fiction is one of the worst movies I've ever had to endure, its a long boring ride to a sore head.
Enormously Overrated
The proof of the pudding, they say, is in the eating. The proof of the movie is in the watching. Most of the top 250 IMDb movies have kept me glued to my seat--with this one I found my mind wandering to that jigsaw puzzle I hadn't finished or the possibility of some popcorn. I found I had very little interest in the characters or in what was going on.

I asked myself why. Technically the film is very good. The actors all hit their marks and Samuel L. Jackson is particularly outstanding. I liked Maria de Madeiros also as Bruce Willis' wife Fabienne. The camera work is occasionally interesting, as the long scene where we watch Bruce Willis listen unemotionally to Marsellus go on. Interesting, certainly, but rather pointless.

Indeed, that's the problem: so much of what goes on is pointless. It's a big long shaggy dog story, told by one of those irritating people who can't get the story straight and have to keep going back: "Oh yeah, I forgot to tell you about that. Well, you know what I was telling you before . . ." I tried to find some justification for the higgledy-piggledy way in which this story is told. It does result in the best scene being the last one. But if this scene was the point then why not design the script so that the action is seen to be moving toward this goal and cut out everything that happens afterward? In the end I don't think Tarentino knew what story he was telling and that's why so much is so pointless.

The scenes of Butch attempting to control his temper, of his dilemma whether to help Marsellus, and the final scene in the restaurant are all good and entertaining as far as they go but they don't fall into a coherent framework. And the rest is quite dull.

The dialogue is not witty or clever although it occasionally has its moments. The constant profanity is as pointless as the rest; the point of profanity is presumably to emphasize what one is saying, but if everything is emphasized, nothing is. The mind becomes numbed by it. It's like someone who shouts all the time. Eventually you stop listening. The quotes give you a pretty good idea of what the dialogue is like: when "Shut the f*ck up, fat man!" is listed as a memorable quote, you know how inane the conversation is.

That this poorly composed script should have won an Oscar is a pretty clear indictment of the Academy.
The worst Movie i've ever seen in my life.
Absolutely no idea why this film is so popular. I was bored out of my mind from the first scene to the last waiting patiently for a twist of some sort to tie the multiple stories together, which never happened. Probably my least favorite movie i've ever watched. The acting wasn't bad and the film did tie in some aspects of popular culture and previous films, but if the viewer doesn't give a crap about any of the characters whatsoever, or the plot(if you could call it that), then whats the point. I gained nothing from watching this movie besides an intense feeling of emptiness that usually comes after wasting 150 or so minutes of your life watching a pathetic piece of crap film about nothing. Was I at the edge of my seat, yes, however It wasn't because of the suspense, I couldn't keep my head from falling forward or my eyes open. And the way that the scenes were arranged, terrible. The movie memento is hard to follow sometimes and slightly dull at some points but at least there was a freaking point in the way the scenes were arranged, considering the main character had memory problems. In this movie, there was no reason for the random mix up of the scenes, except to just do something different and make a movie so weird and disgusting the critics think its a masterpiece. I usually like movies that are critically acclaimed, like The Godfather, one of my favorite movies, but Pulp Fiction isn't even in the ball park. There isn't the dark complex characters like in the godfather, just a bunch of rambling idiots tripping over their stupidity.
Unconnected events, unnecessary characters, absence of a main storyline create masterpiece? -No, It creates one big empty movie.
This whole movie is empty really empty. I'm not saying every movie has to give message 'cos i don't believe in that. But this so-called masterpiece seems to be about nothing.

Events are unconnected. What is Uma Thurman's character's almost dying has to do with the Bruce Willis' boxer storyline? What's boxer storyline has to do with the main characters? Or, why is there a boxer, it all seems unnecessary.

Now, please tell me how this 'work of art' can described as masterpiece? Because of the directing, famous soundtrack or acting? I can say OK to all that but this movie only contains unconnected events, characters and has no main storyline and we don't know what this is about?

I can hardly say Tarantino is a big director. I can't call a man full of emptiness and bulls**t a master. His only film i like is Kill Bill which surprisingly different from this garbages, has a main storyline, now's where to going and i can only name Kill Bill a masterpiece.
Honestly, do people talk or behave this way?
Golly, everyone is falling all over themselves about this one. Why, please? It's silly violent, nihilistic, pointless. And every character has the same way of talking -- talking about clever things in that pseudo-way that only Quentin could possibly dream up. Ooooooh, the talent! Pass.
📹 Pulp Fiction full movie HD download 1994 - 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 - USA. 📀