>
>>Most of the dialogue breaks your rule #1, because it is
>>comical in many people's opinion. I find much of the
>dialogue
>>amusing.
>>
>
>no, it doesn't break the rule, you're being so simple minded,
>and i've explained this already. the dialogue is witty but the
>humour isn't more important than the conversation itself,
>unlike in most comedies. Watch an episode of Friends notice
>how many times an unrealistic reaction to a joke is the only
>thing that lets the scene continue, or how many times Joey
>says something so dumb it makes his character's existence an
>impossibility. Pulp Fiction manages to be very funny, without
>being unrealistic like that.

But it's still funny.

>
>>
>>You said very little in a lot of words.
>>
>
>LOL i attempted to be thorough in explaining the complexity of
>some of the changes/reactions the characters go through, as
>YOU requested. You're not even concentrating, are you?

No I'm not. Because I'm tired and bored.

>
>>>>>but anyway, Pulp Fiction IS intertwined.
>>>>
>>>>Yes. Because characters like a boss, his wife, and his
>>>>co-workers are ALWAYS interwined.
>>>>
>>>
>>>no they're not. do you know you're bosses wife?
>>
>>I know her family, yes. Not to mention in most mafia/mob
>>movies, characters know the big boss's wife.
>>
>
>other than Masellus, Vince is the only one who knows Mia, and
>it was the first time they'd met.

Jules knows of Mia. I'm sure Wolf has met Mia, or knows of her. They know who she is, and what she's done. When/If they meet, they already know her background and story.

>
>>either way, waltzing
>>>into scenes at CRUCIAL moments is a little bit more than
>>>inevitable contact
>>
>>Yes, but there's ONE moment of that.
>>
>
>1. Butch turning up to kill Vince

How is that a coincidence? Butch doesn't know Vince. Just because we know them both doesn't make it a coincidence in the story. A coincidence would be if a person runs into another person they know unexpectedly. There are lots of strangers I interact with that maybe a mutual friend knows. That doesn't make it a coincidence.

>2. Pumpkin and Honeybunny meeting Jules during a "transitional
>period"
>

Same thing.


>
>>I said it's not intertwined because that implies a level of
>>complication/coincidence to the stories tying together, when
>>it's not terribly complicated.
>
>the stories are related to each other on more than just a
>"some of the characters are acquainted with each other" level,
>what more is there to say. if it was any more intertwined it
>would just be irritating
>
>>
>>Give me one instance of Marsellus being pop culture.
>>
>
>Without his presence, the three main stories aren't "pulp
>fiction" stories

That doesn't explain how HE PERSONALLY is pop culture. That's sidestepping the question by saying what things aren't without him. Without him, there's no story, so that's a bullshit answer. How IS he pop culture?

>
>>>they used the same technique of undermining violence,
>>>deliberately? of catching the audience out for enjoying it?
>>>example?
>>
>>Horror movies do it often. We are shocked, but the main
>>characters are less appealing than the violent evil. If
>Milton
>>had had a video camera...
>
>You said not enough in unsurprisingly few words
>
>i take it you mean we have a morbid fascination with monsters
>and serial killers, so we enjoy watching horror films. or
>maybe you mean something else. i don't know

Right. And horror films amuse us. And the violence doesn't shock us. Sometimes the violence amuses us/ intrigues us. Like you said.

>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>Yeah, but he said "joycean sense of here comes everybody."
>>>>Which means absolutely nothing and is meant to sound more
>>>>intellectual and more pompous than everyone reading it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Well, have you read Finnegan's Wake?
>>>if you're familiar with Joyce presumably it's not more
>>cryptic
>>>than saying something like "P.E.'s sense of militancy"
>>>
>>
>>You're saying the easiest, clearest way to convey his point
>is
>>through that statement?
>>
>
>if you're talking to a scholarly audience, why not. it's not
>like he's referencing an obscure book, it's one of the most
>famous books there is
>

Zzzzzz. Again, is it the clearest way to make his point? No.

>
>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Take a film like "Dead Poets Society"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>A movie that sucks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>man
>>>>
>>>>Yep. It sucks.
>>>
>>>jesus
>>
>>Jesus also hates that movie.
>
>jesus is a hater

I guess so. Cuz Dead Poets Society sucks.