While I agree that QT’s work is about love I don’t agree that one can find it in the plotlines of his movies. His movies are about love for cinema. Reality has really nothing to do with it. Maybe some is taken from his personal experience, most notable True Romance, it’s not his main interest or point or what his movies are about. Pulp Fiction is cut up, but could’ve been a very straightforward movie if you put the chapters in the right order. This choice has to do with style, love for cinema and feeling for what works. It is not a plot-development tool.
I think the starting point of the director is the way to go when analysing his movies. In QT’s case that is the world that cinema creates. It’s not about being a mirror for reality or in any way making a comment on real life. Like the great Oscar Wilde said: Life imitates art far more than art imitates Life
You could make points about the characters chatting away and making some sort of logic out of it, but it is kind of futile. It’s like searching for a common sense and reality in a David Lynch movie, sure you can work out some things, but they would be beside the point and intention and what they are “really about”. Whatever that may be. I don’t find it interesting to search for what something is about. Only in what it creates. Like making poetry about an existing sensation or feeling it is a pointless exercise.
Good art creates. It doesn’t imitate.
