The breifcase retrieved by Vincent Vega and Jules Winnfield in the film contained the soul of their boss, Marsellus Wallas.
Remember the first time you were introduced to Marsellus Wallace. The first shot of him was of the back of his head, complete with band-aid. Then, remember the combination of the lock on the briefcase was 666. Then, remember that whenever anyone opened the briefcase, it glowed, and they were in amazement at how beautiful it was; they were speechless.
Yep, you guessed it. What is the most beautiful thing about a person: his soul. Marsellus Wallace had sold his soul to the devil, and was trying to buy it back. The three kids in the beginning of the movie were the devil's helpers. And remember that when the kid at the end came out of the bathroom with a "hand cannon," Jules and Vincent were not harmed by the bullets. "God came down and stopped the bullets" because they were saving a soul. It was divine intervention.
However, Roger Ebert's "Questions for the Movie Answer Man" states: Originally the briefcase contained diamonds. But that just seemed too boring and predictable. So it was decided that the contents of the briefcase were never to be seen. This way each audience member would fill in the blank with their own ultimate contents. All you were supposed to know was that it was "so beautiful." No prop master can come up with something better than each individual's imagination. At least that was the original idea. Then somebody had the bright idea (which I think was a mistake) of putting an orange lightbulb in there. Suddenly what could have been anything became anything supernatural. Didn't need to push the effect. People would have debated it for years anyway, and it would have been much more subtle. I can't believe I'm actually talking about being subtle.
Tarantino has admitted that there is no official explanation behind the briefcase's contents, and that it was simply written into the screeon play as an intriguing McGuffin.
2006-12-22 02:11:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by trigam41 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
I've never seen it... But I'm sure it couldn't meet up to the hype... It seems like it would be really boring... However, in the movie's defense, movies are not required to have a moral to be considered a great. I can think of many great movies that have not taken part in shaping my definition of morality. A great deal of movies are pure entertainment. From what I gather, Pulp Fiction is one of these movies. To answer the question specifically: Although you may not personally like this film, the majority obviously do not share the same view, or else this film would not be, in your words, "so highly rated".
2016-05-23 15:34:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe you need to go a bit further back than Repo Man for the source of this. Check out "Kiss Me Deadly" (itself, based on the 'pulp fiction' of Mickey Spillain).
"The tough, ruthless cop's selfish, solitary pursuit of the white-hot apocalyptic object in a mysterious 'Pandora's box' ("the great whatzit") leads to nuclear catastrophe and annihilation during the explosive ending at a Malibu beach cottage - although there is no explicit mention of the words bomb, atomic, or thermo-nuclear in the nihilistic film."
"Kiss Me Deadly is rich with symbolic allusions, labyrinthine and complex plot threads, and Cold War fear and nuclear paranoia about the atomic bomb. The film, shot over a one month period in late 1954, is a masterpiece of cinematography, exhibited in the disorienting camera angles and unique and unconventional compositions of Ernest Laszlo. It has all the elements of great film noir - a stark opening sequence, destructive femme fatales, low-life cheap gangsters, an anti-hero, expressionistically-lit night-time scenes, a vengeful quest, and a dark mood of hopelessness. And women are abused quite predominantly in the film: the trench-coat-wearing woman Christina by an unknown killer, the faithful Velda by Hammer, and Lily by Dr. Soberin. Later films would repeat the motif of the mysterious box, such as Repo Man (1984) and Pulp Fiction (1994)."
2006-12-22 02:22:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by mattoneill 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The most prominent theory is that the briefcase contains Marcellus Wallace's soul. Director Quentin Tarantino has admitted that there is no official explanation behind the briefcase's contents, and that it was simply written into the screen play as an intriguing McGuffin.
In various shots from behind, you see a bandage on the back of his neck. That is where his soul was extracted from.
2006-12-22 02:09:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by wvucountryroads 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The only indisputable observations about the stolen attaché case recovered by Jules and Vincent are that its latch lock combination is "666", the "Number of the Beast" as given in the Biblical Book of Revelation, and that the contents of the case either glow orange or are highly reflective.
The only acknowledgements of its contents include the captivated stare of Vincent and later the character called "Ringo", his reaction, "Is that what I think it is?", and his response (to Jules saying "Uh-huh"), "It's beautiful." Whenever asked, director Tarantino has replied that there is no explanation for the case's contents: it is simply a MacGuffin
Some feel it is Marsellus' soul
2006-12-22 02:13:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Some say it's Marcellus' soul...others say it's just an homage to Repo Man, the green glow coming out of the trunk.
Q-T just says, "It's a battery and a lightbulb" and leaves it at that.
2006-12-22 02:17:08
·
answer #6
·
answered by none 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
it is pointless to even debate or theorize about this.... quentin tarantino himself said he never even had an idea what it was when he wrote and directed the film... so it is what it is, plain and simple-- a mystery...
2006-12-22 02:19:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by lisa_mynx 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nobody knows, except that it is Marcelles' dirty laundry. It glows, so I'm betting on gold, but it's anyone's guess.
2006-12-22 02:11:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by wayfaroutthere 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
they never tell you but theres theorys i believe one is the soul of someone
2006-12-22 02:10:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by stuntowns7 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Thats a very good question! I have no idea.
2006-12-22 02:13:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by thekorean2000 4
·
0⤊
1⤋