i haven't seen pulp fiction since it played in the theatre back in 94, but it appeared on cbc this weekend and i found myself sucked in. watching movies on tv is dreadful stuff, what with the bad aspect ratio, the commercials and bleeping of "fuck", and all its magical variants, but i hung in there. i couldn't look away for some reason. perhaps i was shocked at how the movie didn't quite live up to my memory of it.

when pulp fiction first hit the screen i was excited beyond words. after being blown away by reservoir dogs i couldn't help but be filled with anticipation at what tarantino would come up with next. the instant dick dale's "misirlou" blasted out and that giant candy-coloured title rolled up i was in love. this was shaking up contemporary film, or at least my conception of it, with its expletive-filled dialogue and over the top violence. it wasn't a straight up crime film, a thriller or any other genre flick. it was everything all at once.

fifteen years later it feels much imitated and not at all as clever and innovative as it did back when it came out. maybe i've seen too many films in those in-between years. the pacing now feels too slow, the dialogue thinner than i remember. granted, there's still some hilarious bits that i had forgotten about. like samuel jackson's "bad motherfucker" wallet. overall, though, it is clever bordering on pretentious and unecessarily long. most of this can probably be written off to history and all the imitations that have come since. and my over-enthusastic 19 year old brain.

pulp fiction was transgressive - still is in some ways - and that's what i think grabbed me the most about it at the time. did tarantino continue to evolve as a filmmaker after this? i've seen those efforts and i seriously can't recall. they all have that trademarked slickness of script/acting/sound/cinematography/film-reference. they seemed good at the time. maybe one day i'll stumble upon them again and find out.