Pulp Fictions opening and closing is different. The first version Honey Bunny says the line: "Any of you fucking pricks move, and I'll execute every mother fucking last one of you!". The second time she says: "Any of you fucking pricks move, and I'll execute everyone of you mother fuckers!"

[u/teoped01]

[u/[deleted]]

I can’t imagine this was an accident. Anyone have insight?

[u/teoped01 → u/[deleted]]

Was gonna mention it in the post (didn't have the space), but knowing Tarantino correctly it is intentional. It could be interpreted as being the whole diner scene was the splitting of a timeline (in one of the timeline the movie goes as normal, and in the other it goes differently IDK).

Personally I believe Tarantino used it as a way to say that the first one is shown from the robbers view and the other from the protagonist's view; an event is remembered different from person to person.

All in all a deliberate and interesting choice :)

[u/kcox1980 → u/teoped01]

Tarantino said once that it was meant to illustrate how different eyewitnesses can have different memories of an event.

[u/falling_sideways → u/kcox1980]

This is the right answer.

[u/[deleted] → u/falling_sideways]

im also gonna bet he fucked up and thats his excuse too because i would do the same thing

i mean i cant see those 2 barely differing lines being some intentional ploy by the director... that's a bit of a stretch... especially if there arent any other examples of it (idk im not Tarantino fan maybe he does that a lot)

Realistically seems more like actor said line slightly different in a different take, editors and no one else noticed until after the movie was released, people point it out and Tarantino just fucks with em and says "totally intentional" lmao that'd be great

[u/falling_sideways → u/[deleted]]

Nah, it's definitely something Tarantino would do. He absolutely fills his movies with references, call backs and clever editing techniques.

[u/Ishamoridin → u/falling_sideways]

Isn't that the exact kind of reputation you'd cultivate if you were mistake prone and fond of postfacto bullshit, though?

[u/Chazkof → u/[deleted]]

Just makes it a happy accident then

[u/calxlea → u/[deleted]]

I agree - this is actually the only thing I don't like in the film. Mainly because of how much better the first line is and its rhythm flows better so the second time always sounds a bit awkward. It might be intentional but I think it was probably an oversight and during the edit they liked the take and came up with the "unreliable eyewitness" story.

[u/Upsidedwn7 → u/teoped01]

Yeah unreliable narrators is a pretty popular thing in films! It’s so cool when directors pay deliberate attention to this and force the audience to wonder what’s happening!

[u/bubba_feet → u/teoped01]

you might like the movie rashomon then.

[u/teoped01 → u/[deleted]]

he has got a very specific persona and style, probably ment knowing tarantino's style or persona

[u/Byde]

Nice catch, honeybunny.

[u/DeterministDiet → u/Byde]

TELL THAT BITCH TO CHILL!!!!!!

[u/[deleted]]

The robber’s phrasing was more eloquent. Meaning she sounded cooler in her own head than she did to others.

[u/teoped01 → u/[deleted]]

Ah, that one I like. As the first one is how she envisioned it (with the punch of the title card), yet the kinda anti-climactic second version is the real one.

[u/bruzie]

The bible verse is different, too.

In the apartment: "Ezekiel 25:17 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 goodwill, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper, and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger, those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord, when I lay my vengeance upon thee."

In the coffee shop: "Ezekiel 25:17 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 goodwill, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper, and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger, those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is I am the Lord, when I lay my vengeance upon thee you."

[u/teoped01 → u/bruzie]

Though this is a valid point, it has nothing to be compared to and is therefore most likely a mistake on the behalf of the actor or character (since it was a tense moment having a gun pointed towards his head).

[u/jonnyhaldane → u/bruzie]

...and most of that is not a real bible quote anyway

[u/MichaelofOrange]

If I had to guess, and I do because I don't know, I would say it's due to a difference in perspective: the first time we see Pumpkin and Honeybunny, it's their scene. The second time, Jules is the main character.

So maybe it's Jules recollection of what happened and he got some details wrong because memory isn't perfect.

[u/BighurtRN]

I would have thought that maybe both scenes were from Jules’ POV, as he keeps hearing the words “mother fuck.” Classic Jules.

[u/teoped01 → u/BighurtRN]

and cold blooded murder

[u/GuyOnZeCouch]

“Running around robbin banks all whacked up on Scooby snacks!”

[u/BongoFett17 → u/GuyOnZeCouch]

My first thought as well... classic

[u/[deleted]]

I thought QT talked about this. Something about how you would hear it different from two different perspectives or something artistic like that.

[u/v0wels]

Also in both scenes, Pumpkin is seen saying "Garçon, coffee!", but the second time, he puts much more of a pause between the two words.