Review of Pulp (1972) by Sebastian H — 10 Dec 2011
Let's just say that "Pulp" isn't quite the Mike Hodges we're akin to; the Mike Hodges that made great films such as "Croupier" or "Get Carter". It's fairly sub-par for a director of his magnitude, and is lacking in many of the major areas that are required for a film to be considered "good".
The plot is confusing and is never really made clear, and we spend half the time trying to figuring out the importance of the any of the characters. We meander from scene to scene, never really knowing what's happening.
Half of the scenes are really quite unnecessary. Eventually, the story picks up with twenty minutes left to go, but by then we don't care. I won't necessarily say that "Pulp" is a "bad" film though.
It certainly tries hard to be what it's not, and while you can certainly spot the influences here, "Pulp" never really pulls anything off. What we're left with is a forgettable neo-noir that could make for an enjoyable watch on any given night.
It's not perfect, but it's a forgivable attempt.
This review of Pulp (1972) was written by Sebastian H on 10 Dec 2011.
Pulp has generally received mixed reviews.
Was this review helpful?
