Pulp fiction

clusk007 · 15-02-2009 6:27pm #1

I watched pulp fiction the other night and obviously it's a brilliant film. just one quick question- what was in the briefcase?

amcalester · 15-02-2009 6:36pm

Nobody knows.

I've heard it said it is Marcellus's sole.

indough · 15-02-2009 6:45pm

a MacGuffin :P

seriously though its nothing, as in they never had any idea as to what it should have been

it might be a slight homage to 'kiss me deadly' too

Otis Driftwood · 15-02-2009 6:51pm

http://www.snopes.com/movies/films/pulp.asp

bnt · 15-02-2009 8:12pm

amcalester wrote: »

Nobody knows.

I've heard it said it is Marcellus's sole.

I thought his shoes looked fine... but there may be a link to the plaster on Marcellus's neck. :cool:

indough · 15-02-2009 8:18pm

the actor wore that plaster because of either a tattoo or scar he didnt want shown

Nolanger · 15-02-2009 8:26pm

Anyone see a '60s movie called Red Line 7000 - very similar set to the restaurant in PF

.

PirateShampoo · 15-02-2009 8:28pm

bnt wrote: »

I thought his shoes looked fine... but there may be a link to the plaster on Marcellus's neck. :cool:

I thought it was because Z gave him a love bit there

indough · 15-02-2009 8:35pm

Nolanger wrote: »

Anyone see a '60s movie called Red Line 7000 - very similar set to the restaurant in PF .

do you mean the diner or the restaurant?

Valmont · 15-02-2009 9:12pm

I thought it was fairly obvious that it was a briefcase full of gold.

DublinWriter · 15-02-2009 9:18pm

It's Marcellus's soul in Terrentono's subsequent Faber & Faber published script

In the film, Travolta described it as a bulb with a couple of batteries attached.

Draw your own conclusions.

grames_bond · 15-02-2009 9:20pm

i know whats in the briefcase:

The best movie oscar that PF was robbed of!!

or a lightbulb!

there were rumeurs for a while that is was the diamonds from the heist in reservoir dogs (adding to the fact that vincent vegas brother was part of the heist)

but QT has clarified that he doesnt want it to reveal/ never wrote anything to be in it!

qz · 15-02-2009 9:22pm

clusk007 wrote: »

I watched pulp fiction the other night and obviously it's a brilliant film. just one quick question- what was in the briefcase?

What?! What ain't no country I never heard of, they speak English in what?!

MagicMarker · 15-02-2009 9:26pm

Valmont wrote: »

I thought it was fairly obvious that it was a briefcase full of gold.

This is what I thought too.

Sure when it's opened there's a ''gold'' light coming from it.

Valmont · 15-02-2009 9:33pm

qz wrote: »

What?! What ain't no country I never heard of, they speak English in what?!

Most confusing post in the entire world.

bnt · 15-02-2009 9:50pm

Valmont wrote: »

Most confusing post in the entire world.

Not if you've seen the film we're discussing in this thread.

MagicMarker · 15-02-2009 9:51pm

Say what again, I dare you, I double dare you!

Otis Driftwood · 15-02-2009 9:52pm

Valmont wrote: »

Most confusing post in the entire world.

You have seen the movie right?

Galvasean · 15-02-2009 9:53pm

Valmont wrote: »

Most confusing post in the entire world.

Really? In the context of a Pulp Fiction conversation THAT confuses you?

On topic: Read the link nedtheshed posted, particularly the bit where Avery talks about it.

indough · 15-02-2009 10:06pm

DublinWriter wrote: »

It's Marcellus's soul in Terrentono's subsequent Faber & Faber published script

are you sure about that? tarantino was very quick to dismiss that theory as an internet rumour, if anything it was originally intended to be diamonds according to the man himself, he decided to change it from that because it was too boring and making it nothing at all added mystery

15-02-2009 10:15pm

Isn't it a McGuffin for the sake of being a McGuffin? (It's a comment on the use of McGuffin's in movies, yada yada yada...)

Valmont · 15-02-2009 10:41pm

Galvasean wrote: »

Really? In the context of a Pulp Fiction conversation THAT confuses you?

I FORGOT that line. It's been a while since I've seen it. But now I understand.

shane86 · 15-02-2009 10:51pm

I first saw it when I was 15, 7 years ago, thought it was brillint. Saw it maybe 5 more times over the next fe years, it was still fresh.

Watched it a few weeks back for the first time in maybe 4 years and....I dunno.....is it just me or has it not aged well?

indough · 15-02-2009 10:52pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Isn't it a McGuffin for the sake of being a McGuffin? (It's a comment on the use of McGuffin's in movies, yada yada yada...)

yes, it was an artistic decision for it to be a macguffin, its not simply that they couldnt think of anything cool enough, the whole point of it is that whats in the case doesnt matter

grames_bond · 15-02-2009 11:22pm

shane86 wrote: »

Watched it a few weeks back for the first time in maybe 4 years and....I dunno.....is it just me or has it not aged well?

yes it is just you!!

DublinWriter · 16-02-2009 7:29am

indough wrote: »

are you sure about that? tarantino was very quick to dismiss that theory as an internet rumour, if anything it was originally intended to be diamonds according to the man himself, he decided to change it from that because it was too boring and making it nothing at all added mystery

Yes, it says it's his soul in the original script.

Also notice the plaster Marcellus has on the back of his neck. This was supposedly as a result of his soul being taken out in a sub-plot that never made it to the final cut of the film.

Pigman II · 16-02-2009 9:54am

clusk007 wrote: »

what was in the briefcase?

The script to "My Best Friend's Birthday"

16-02-2009 10:32am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AHETuK70Sc

Isn't it weird seeing the trailer?

Galvasean · 16-02-2009 11:29am

If it was indeed meant to be Marcellus Wallace's soul (which I don't believe it is), I'm glad that particular plot point didn't make it into the film because it would have been stupid and taken away from the movie. Pulp Fiction is great because it plays the MacGuffin card so well. There's no need to be told what's in the briefcase. Heck Avery himself admitted that making the briefcase glow was a mistake as it implies too much as to what may be in the briefcase, when in fact it's supposed to be up to the audience to imagine for themselves.

indough · 16-02-2009 3:31pm

DublinWriter wrote: »

Yes, it says it's his soul in the original script.

Also notice the plaster Marcellus has on the back of his neck. This was supposedly as a result of his soul being taken out in a sub-plot that never made it to the final cut of the film.

i dont know where youre getting this information from but tarantino has discredited that theory several times

Galvasean · 16-02-2009 10:38pm

I'm actually struggling to find how you could put "Marcelus Wallace's soul is in the briefcase" in the context of the film, into a script formatted to industry standards without it being thrown out by your producer.

grames_bond · 17-02-2009 8:39pm

DublinWriter wrote: »

Yes, it says it's his soul in the original script.

Also notice the plaster Marcellus has on the back of his neck. This was supposedly as a result of his soul being taken out in a sub-plot that never made it to the final cut of the film.

oh yes of course...because EVERYONE knows that to remove your soul, the devil takes it through the back of your neck! :rolleyes:

Galvasean · 18-02-2009 12:40pm

grames_bond wrote: »

oh yes of course...because EVERYONE knows that to remove your soul, the devil takes it through the back of your neck! :rolleyes:

After consulting with my moles in the Christianity forum, I can confirm this is simply not true.

missingtime · 18-02-2009 5:43pm

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AHETuK70Sc

Isn't it weird seeing the trailer?

Jesus Christ thats a very long trailer.

Pulp fiction

Comments