Two way street since there is nothing you can say that would convince me that the story is better in Gump. Forrest Gump is corny, cheesy and over the top. Oh look, this Blue guy does all this incredible shit that nobody could ever do and has a lot of cute sayings. Yawn. Pulp Fiction has a more interesting story and the way it unfolds was unique and unless I'm mistaken pretty damn innovative at the time to take all of the different stories out of chronological order and have them intersecting at different points
True, but since film's my specialty I'm just going to rape you with a whole bunch of terminology you can't understand.
Forrest Gump is everything it needed to be. The fact that you said the movie was "over the top" is exaggerated already.
This is over the top:
Sharknado
Forrest Gump is not Sharknado. Forrest Gump has one of the best stories, if not THE BEST story in a movie ever. It's more than just a blueberry doing stuff he shouldn't be doing, if it was that we'd be watching another "Ernest Goes to…" movie. The visual timing and the way Hanks sells that character makes you look at it as more than just a Blue guy. His disability isn't the antagonist of the story, it's society itself that's the antagonist and that's a hard thing to write (or at least write well). I mean, there's action, comedy, and romance all in this movie, it even ties in some historical info that impacts the story. Where have you ever seen a script that comes even close to Forrest Gump? It's as innovative as it gets on a story based level.
On the other hand, Pulp Fiction, which is also a GREAT movie, no doubt. It's not innovative and it's a bit bothersome when people call Tarintino movies "innovative" because they're not. What he does, is takes elements from other movies (from a technical standpoint: cinematography, editing, lighting, production design, ect) and he just combines them. He figures out a formula that makes them work together, so it SEEMS like you've never seen these things before, but they've actually been done plenty of times. As far as non-linear story goes, I actually laughed at this ( no offense), that's been done years before Tarintino. I mean Citizen Kane for one, which came out before Tarintino was even born. The only thing that's different about this non-linear story is that it doesn't provide a smooth transition, which forces the audience to become active participants while watching the movie and it worked beautifully. It got people to pay attention to his story because if there was even a moment where the audience didn't pay attention, they'd be lost. However, that does not make it the first non-linear film.
Edit: At the end of the day you have to ask yourself which story was more memorable. For me it's Forrest Gump.
