“Too gifted a filmmaker to make a boring movie”: Roger Ebert’s verdict on Quentin Tarantino
Roger Ebert was initially unsure whether Quentin Tarantino’s *Pulp Fiction* was one of 1994’s best films or one of its worst. He worried that Tarantino’s delight in filmmaking could lead to indulgence, but ultimately praised the film’s inventive screenplay and gave it four out of four stars.
Co-written by Tarantino and Roger Avary, the film uses an unconventional structure and an ensemble of memorable characters and dialogue. Made for $8 million, it earned almost $214 million and helped establish Tarantino as a major director.
In short
- Ebert initially struggled to judge *Pulp Fiction*.
- He ultimately gave it four out of four stars.
- The $8 million film grossed almost $214 million.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Pulp Fiction’s fractured structure, vivid dialogue and memorable characters show a filmmaker using cinema’s possibilities with unusual confidence. Its inventive screenplay and lasting influence support the view that its playful, unconventional style makes it one of the era’s outstanding films.
The case against
The same pleasure in style and storytelling can be seen as indulgence: an unconventional structure and showy dialogue may draw attention to the filmmaker’s craft more than to coherence or emotional depth. Ebert’s initial uncertainty reflects a reasonable concern that technical flair and cultural impact do not, by themselves, make a film satisfying or among the year’s best.