Were the Pulp Fiction bullet holes already there?

image description

In "the Bonnie Situation" just before dude fires 6 shots at Vincent and Jules, if u look over their shoulders, the bullet holes are already there. Was that done intentionally?

Thanks, Glen

Aurthor: Pulp Date:



I don't know if it's intentional but that dude looks like Jerry Seinfeld.


Some people say that this is a "deliberate" mistake. Why? Maybe the Jerry-Seinfeld-looking-dude has a fake gun and that's why the revolver on the gun doesn't rotate when it shoots? Maybe God didn't come down and stop the bullets?

:D ... BTW... it's not me who said it was deliberate mistake... it was

I think it's just a mistake. Films are not perfect. Even Tarantino films.


The Seinfeld looking dude is actually Alexi Arquette, Dave Arquettes transvestite sister.


Looks like Jerry Seinfeld in drag. Not my type but I wish her well. Life is a journey of self-discovery and everyone has a right to pursue happiness.


Just a mistake. If you see the end of the shooting of Bret in the first act of the movie you will see that Jules empties his gun into Bret, with the slide finishing in the reload position, back of the slide. In the scene you refer to here the gun is not empty, such that he has ammo to kill the hand cannon guy.
The other thing is there are only six holes in the wall. Three around the head of Jules, three which must have travelled through him, hence the miracle.


I believe it was actually a mistake. I am a huge Quentin Tarantino fan and love all the hidden messages he leaves in each of his films. That is why I can watch all of his movies a hundred times and learn something new every time.

However, this is not one of those messages. If you check in the beginning, when Vincent and Jules get to the apartment, one can see that the bullet holes are clearly not there. Also, If you check closely, the revolver on the guy's gun does, in fact, rotate.


Maybe bc its non linear he put them there to make the audience think that scene was in chronological order


I believe you can say with almost 100% certainty that it was absolutely NOT a mistake. This is a Tarantino Movie... he tends to promote realism even if the movies are somewhat strange. The guy (who is now a woman) fired directly at them and emptied the entire barrel.

The whole point of the holes in the wall behind them was to show that the gun was firing blanks! It is a clue. In other words: it is saying there was no divine intervention. The holes in the wall are supposed to be there as an indication that blanks were fired. If he was firing real bullets they would both be as good as dead.

I am not quite sure why many people do not see the ( not so subtle) clue. It is kind of obvious really.