marcellus wallace

lucky charms.

or gold.

They say his dirty laundry. I take this to be literal, perhaps it is filled with skidmark saturated underpants.

Actually, I think there is no real answer and it is all debatable and up to the viewer to decide for themself what is in the suitcase.

I think it is either dirty undies or a bright light. People would kill for a barely used bright light or some dirty undies.

its a mcguffin... tarantino wont say, and he might not even know. its just that they needed to get something, and whatever it is is negligible to the actual action. they just need something to pursue, so its a briefcase, and the only thing thats important about it is that marcellus needs it.. whatever is inside we dont really have to know to still be interested in the story, so they just dont bother to tell us.
one of the more interesting theories i have heard is that it is marcellus' soul.
but it could be gold as well, but they wont explain, so no one really knows.

His soul.

1) Mythically, when the devil took a soul it was taken out of the back of the neck (hence, the band-aid).

2) It's combination was clearly 666.

3) What else could give off that glow? Gold would be way too heavy to carry around in a briefcase.

I second that it's his soul. I read this in a movie trivia thing one time. Don't remember where though. I'm such a huge help.

The Band-aid is there because Ving Has a big mother fucking scar on the back of his neck, not because Satan stole his fucking soul.

The Suitcase is supposed to be mysterious, it makes you think.. makes you think about the movie and discuss it, its actually a very smart Idea if you want a lot of people to start talking about your movie, just leave some loose ends.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Taylor [/i]
[B]The Band-aid is there because Ving Has a big mother fucking scar on the back of his neck[/B][/QUOTE]

No shit. What makes you think QT didn't just run with the idea though?

It doesn't matter what's in the briefcase because the entire movie isn't about anything. I mean seriously, there's no real plot. No real ending. But it's been a while since I've seen it so maybe I'm wrong.

i thought it was his soul to, until i read somewhere that QT debunked that. but it does work with the scar and all. who knows though

I think its a fuck load of Crunchie bars.

Because they come in a gold wrapper, and Marcelus Wallace is fat.

finally a breakthrough thanks cingram

My insight is often detrimental to my enjoyment of life in general.

Sorry if I ruined the film for anyone.

It's a joke, assholes.

Does he look like a bitch?

'Uh, ... the stuff dreams are made of.'

Humphrey Bogart, 'The Maltese Falcon'

Werd.

I've heard QT say that it's not his soul. Conversely, I've heard QT say that it [b]is[/b] his soul. Personally, I think QT is a tease.

I think the actual contents of the briefcase is Uma's panties. I mean, [i]you'd[/i] kill people for that, right?

This would explain the glow...

Indeed.

DOES MARCELLUS WALLACE LOOK LIKE A BITCH???

goddamn i love that movie. the screenwriting is brilliant. that and reservoir dogs. other than that i think QT kind of wears out his welcome. it's like, he brings this interesting perspective, but i don't want to watch more than two movies with the same kind of gimmick. i think pulp fiction is great, but i hate how all his movies try to be pulp fiction. i guess it's his style, but it gets old.

i don't know what i'm trying to say.

You're trying to say that QT had only one film in him; that Resevoir Dogs was [i]almost[/i] it, and that Pulp Fiction was [i]just past[/i] it, and that he should have stopped there. I tend to agree.

Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are way different. Aside from the whole hired-killers-in-suits thing, you can't really compare them. Either way, they both kick serious ass.

You could write a who thesis comparing and contrasting the two. I'm sying that the one movie QT was born to make lies somewhere between the two.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tuffy the Dump Truck [/i]
[B]You're trying to say that QT had only one film in him; that Resevoir Dogs was [i]almost[/i] it, and that Pulp Fiction was [i]just past[/i] it, and that he should have stopped there. I tend to agree. [/B][/QUOTE]

THANK YOU.

argh. *kicks self in head*

i'm glad someone has a command of the english language today.

Am I the only one who was completely dissatisfied with Resivior Dogs, and adores From Dusk Til Dawn?

RD seemed so pointless to me. Yes, it was well-written and well plotted, but the entire time I was watching it, I was thinking, "Why, exactly, did he write this? Was this the kind of script that he just HAD to write in that writer's sort of way, where you wake up in the middle of the night to write because you have to? Or is it something he wrote because he thought it would be cool?"

i think it's meant to be looked at on a scene-by-scene basis, as a kind of art-for-art's-sake piece of subversiveness.

or, really, on a catchphrase-by-catchphrase basis. kinda like caddyshack.

RD kicks ass. It's just cool. Really fucking cool. As was Pulp Fiction. No real point to it, it's just cool.

Really, both RD & PF are television episodes, plotwise. What makes them rise above that level are the dialogue, the editing, the blocking, the directing, and the acting (more or less in that order.) Which goes to show that a mediocre plot executed brilliantly is better than the reverse.

again, tuffy, we are in wholehearted agreement.

Weird, huh?

i know it.

i'm a mushroom cloud layin muthafucker, muthafucka...
that's all i have to say.

now this is a tasty burger....

what ain't no country I ever heard of, they speak english in what?!

Does he look like a bitch?

many people think QT took the idea from the fifties noir Kiss Me Deadly. of course, it's QT we're talking about so ripping the contents of Repo Man's trunk is more likely.

Does he LOOK like a BITCH?

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by asenath waite [/i]
[B]many people think QT took the idea from the fifties noir Kiss Me Deadly. of course, it's QT we're talking about so ripping the contents of Repo Man's trunk is more likely. [/B][/QUOTE] It looks like sausage!

Heres the soul explanation:

[QUOTE]Some dude had a two hour conversation with Quentin Tarantino himself (many people say they have),
and claims this is the Story Of The Case:

Remember the first time you were introduced to Marsellus Wallace.

[IMG]http://home.att.net/~twosmokingbarrels/payoff.jpg[/IMG]

The first shot of him was of the back of his head, complete with band-aid.

[i][note from page-owner: Ving Rhames is known to have a scar, it could be that it's on the back of his head. If so, this story still is valid, and maybe even cooler, but keep it in mind.][/i]

[IMG]http://home.att.net/~twosmokingbarrels/666case.jpg[/IMG]

Then, remember the combination of the lock on the briefcase was 666.

[IMG]http://home.att.net/~twosmokingbarrels/soul.jpg[/IMG]

Then, remember that whenever anyone opened the briefcase, it glowed, and they were in amazement at how beautiful it was; they were speechless.

Now, bring in knowledge of some ancient cultural traditions, and remember when the devil takes you soul, he takes it from the back of your head.

Yep, you guessed it. And 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.

[i][note from page-owner: this is not neccesarily true. Note that the bullet-holes in the wall behind Jules and Vincent are ALREADY THERE before the hand-cannon is emptied at them. This could be an editing mistake, but it's also probable that the gun contained no real bullets.[/i]

Furthermore, if you sell your soul to the devil, you are said to get back infinite knowledge, power, whatever. Marcellus was indeed a powerful man in Inglewood, but would he have sold his soul for what he now is?

[b]Ezekiel 25:17[/b]

"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, sheperds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truely his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengence and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my borthers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay My vengeance upon thee."

[i][note from page-owner: although a very broad interpretation of what E2517 really says, it could explain why Vincent is killed, and why Butch and Jules walk away.[/i]

1.Butch goes back, risking his life to 'sheperd the weak' - Marcellus Wallace. ('through the valley of darkness' gets a whole new meaning if you take into account what Zed and Maynard were doing to Marcellus.. *wink*)

2.Jules saves the lives of Pumpkin and Honeybunny, who are doing the stick-up. He even gives them his money ($1500), which makes him 'the finder of lost children'.

3.Vincent is struck upon with great vengeance and furious anger in an attempt to destroy Butch. (If this is so, the question is raised why Marcellus, who's gun it is, supposedly, that is lying on the sink, is later saved by Butch. Then maybe he really was only getting something to eat and was it indeed Vincent's
gun.[/quote]

Theres also the theory that the diamonds from RD are in there.

I have a Brief case with the numbers 666, I used to think it was so fucked up and then when I saw Pulp Fiction I almost flipped.. what if its the same breif case???

Does the fact that there's that "random" glow when Jules and Vincent start shooting people after he reads Ezekiel have anything to do with it?