So for part of my textual analysis I have chosen to analyse
the ‘breakfast scene’ from Quieten Tarantino’s ‘Pulp Fiction’. This is a very lengthy
scene so I will only be analysing the last 5-6 minutes of the scene, which is
the most climactic part of the scene.
Within the scene we have Jules Winnfield played by Samuel L.
Jackson and Vincent Vega played by John Travolta. They play the gangsters, associates
of the mob boss Marcellus Wallis. They have been sent to the hideout of three
young men who were the flaky business partners within a crime with Mr Wallis.
Jackson and Vega have been sent to retrieve a briefcase from the apartment.
Before I dive in I would like to point out that Tarantino
only uses natural lighting and digetic sound within this scene, the reasoning
behind this is to preserve the quality of the acting, Opposed to over-extravagant
film techniques. He does this to show that Jules and Vega are putting on a
show, they’re not morally invested into the crime, and they’re just acting out
these feelings of betrayal on Mr Wallis’s behalf. Reaching out to religion and popular
culture to harness the character of the verbose Jules Winnfield.
Early on in this scene we can see that Jules has completely
taken all the power in the room and is leading the conversation in any way he
sees fit. Helping himself to food and drink in sarcastic tones, with the camera
directly pointing up at him to extenuate that he is on top of everything metaphorically.
The 666 lock combination is important for religious reasons, but the briefcase
itself is also very important. The content of the briefcase has this constant
glow that heightens the spectacle and mystery of what it is. Tarantino, when
asked about this will always reply ‘It’s whatever you want it to be’. We look
into this as ‘Whatever man desires’ or ‘whatever drives mans actions for
violence and crime’. This could also mean different things for each character,
with each character being unique and very different to anyone else around them.
“I’m sorry, did I break your concentration?” these words
define Jules through his actions and calm and casual manor in which he took a
man’s life without even glancing at him. Just to give Bret the message that he
is capable of doing such deeds without any signs of moral strain or physical
effort. Long lens close ups are used to show the intensity and seriousness of
their conversation. The angles change high and higher for Brets character and
lower for Jules to show who is running the conversation. Lower camera angles
are used again when Jules become more dominant and starts flipping out. Jules’s
theatrical dialog really defines his character here with shooting the man for
stuttering and drawn out jokes like “Does he look like a b*tch!?”.
Ezekiel 25:17, I believe this is where Tarantino has perfected dark side
of Dark Comedy. His use of satire within this scene is unparalleled and perfected
to an art my Jackson. Tarantino shows how crime and sin are no longer morally
relevant to these men. This can be viewed as the representation of Jules and
how this modern man have lost sincerity and has become almost cynical when
making sense of his life. To which in the end of the film is also discussed
again. What Tarantino is trying to say is that religion is only used in modern
society as a way of man trying to find meaning in their lives.