I'm sorry, but I'm really not going a comment on this film so much as comment on some of the other comments I've seen here. People complaining that they couldn't follow the narration or don't understand why the main character doesn't enact his revenge, I really don't know much what to say other than for you it's probably best to just stick with the Hollywood fluff pics where the male star lead always makes it in the end with the female star lead and there's plenty of explosions and bright flashy images to keep you distracted from the fact there's no plot, no decent dialog, no character growth, and no appreciation of film making as art. If your point of reference is recalling the fantastic ground breaking story telling tools of True Lies, well, you're hopeless.
This was an incredible piece dealing not with revenge or action or any of the surface issues used to tell the story, but actually about a man realizing how his decisions in life impacted his daughter. It's about personal growth. In the end, he, himself, is ultimately the one he's seeking revenge against. There is a good speech he gives about mid way through the movie while talking to the DEA agent that clearly explains why he doesn't kill the Fonda character. You have to know what matters and when. When he comes to the end and realizes where and when he stands, ready to kill, it's very clear it's no longer the issue he needs to deal with, so he moves on.
And one more thing about the way this story is told with the flash forwarding technique, sometimes you just have to sit back and watch a film. Not spend most of the movie being confused and dissatisfied over what you can't pin down and put into linear sense before you've seen the whole thing, but just sit back and let the director and writer do their thing and take it in. When they're done with their work, it will be clear (unless you spend 90 minutes furrowing your brow and resisting of course...).
I mean, Pulp Fiction is an incredible movie, but did you spend the whole thing confused and upset over what Pumkin and Honey Bunny were doing in the opening scene or how it would fit into the film to the point of not understanding the rest of it? No, you just take the scene in and move on to the next one, and when you reach the end, it makes sense.
This was an incredible piece dealing not with revenge or action or any of the surface issues used to tell the story, but actually about a man realizing how his decisions in life impacted his daughter. It's about personal growth. In the end, he, himself, is ultimately the one he's seeking revenge against. There is a good speech he gives about mid way through the movie while talking to the DEA agent that clearly explains why he doesn't kill the Fonda character. You have to know what matters and when. When he comes to the end and realizes where and when he stands, ready to kill, it's very clear it's no longer the issue he needs to deal with, so he moves on.
And one more thing about the way this story is told with the flash forwarding technique, sometimes you just have to sit back and watch a film. Not spend most of the movie being confused and dissatisfied over what you can't pin down and put into linear sense before you've seen the whole thing, but just sit back and let the director and writer do their thing and take it in. When they're done with their work, it will be clear (unless you spend 90 minutes furrowing your brow and resisting of course...).
I mean, Pulp Fiction is an incredible movie, but did you spend the whole thing confused and upset over what Pumkin and Honey Bunny were doing in the opening scene or how it would fit into the film to the point of not understanding the rest of it? No, you just take the scene in and move on to the next one, and when you reach the end, it makes sense.