The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

Retrospect Review


#1

Finally I got to rewatch Tarantino’s debut flick on DVD this evening. I realized that my Australian DVD has very washed out colors, but aside from that it’s okay. I don’t know how many times I’ve seen this movie now, but this time I paid closer attention and I have come to these conclusions: There are many times in the movie where it comes across quite clearly that this is basically an amateur movie with lots of improvisation and low budget. About 90 percent of the movie are outstanding but there are a couple of moments where as a viewer I felt uncomfortable knowing what Tarantino and the actors do today and seeing what they’re doing on screen there, which is now over 15 years ago. My second conclusion is that the writing is outstanding. The screenplay unfolds the story in such a great fashion, it makes you grin. It’s just so original. And the last conclusion I drew now was, that I don’t like Tim Roth. I am not saying he is a bad actor, but he’s so miscast, and he is too fake. Not as fake as he was in Four Rooms, but he is overacting and his fake pseudo-american accent makes it even worse.

Nevertheless, Reservoir Dogs is one hell of a great film, a fantastic piece of independent cinema and of course highly quotable. B+




What are your viewpoints when you rewatch this classic today?


#2

I think we all reviewed the film back when we had the weekly QT marathon.


#3

he’s got some truth, it does seem very amateuristic and cheap, there’s no way to compare it to Kill Bill, Quentin didn’t jump onto another level, but another universe, the little mistakes in 'Dogs bother me, ex. when Pink kinda messes up his line “the cops didn’t show up untill Mr Blonde started shooting everybody”, that would never ever happen in a modern day QT film, Quentin will never act again either, i’m quite certain, Dogs shows the diffrence between having fun making a film, and making films for a living

it’s a fine, great, awesome picture, it’s funny, it’s fun, but it’s small and it’s childish and it will never return cause it’s made by a kid, having fun doing it, have to learn to crawl before ya walk, nobody starts with epics and not everybody ends with em, but i’m quite sure that Quentin will end with em, thanks to Dogs

and I do like Tim Roth, never got annoyed by him, not even in Four Rooms, beleive it or not


#4

I have no problems with it whatsoever. Noone messed up their lines in Dogs! What are you talkin about?! I’ll never ever turn around and say its amateurish and childish. Its really not. Its got a fresh pulse and its a helluva lot of fun. Dogs still gets an A+ in my book. Its a debut written-directed film for petes sake!! I think QT has a spotless filmmaking record so far. He does what every director should do which is grow with each movie. Dogs was his starting point and he’s learned and moved on from it. Its a cult classic btw, saying “it will never return” makes no sense. WTF?


#5

[quote=“WinslowLeach”]
I have no problems with it whatsoever. Noone messed up their lines in Dogs! What are you talkin about?! I’ll never ever turn around and say its amateurish and childish. Its really not. Its got a fresh pulse and its a helluva lot of fun…WTF?
[/quote]

what we’re basically saying is that with all the time that has passed, a spontaneous and critical rewatching can offer some new insight into ones personal opinion of a movie. that is what happened to me. i still love the film, but some of the weaker points now seem clearer to me than they did years back.


#6

Exactly. Now time has passed and we can look at it more soberly. And also we can compare to QT´s other films and see how he has developed.


#7

[quote=“The Seb”]
What are your viewpoints when you rewatch this classic today?
[/quote]

Actually it’s been at least two or three years since I’ve seen it the last time. I don’t wanna watch it now cause I’ve seen it like 10-20 times and I wanna watch it again when I don’t remember every little thing and it will feel at least somewhat fresh again.



Of course I know more about movies now and I could watch it a little more critically now but before it has never felt amateurish at all to me and it’s my second favourite Tarantino movie after Pulp. And actually, the fight scene against The Crazy 88 in Vol. 1 feels more (for a lack of a better word) amateurish for me than anything in other Tarantino movies. It’s entertaining, energetic and all, but somehow it doesn’t really flow after seeing it a couple of times. And that little axe throwing in the middle of the fight has always annoyed me. But enough about that.


#8

I love that feel in Reservoir Dogs…it isnt that slick…



I am surpriced by you Johny…I thought you would prefer a sqeeuking, false, drugged up Pete Doherty to a more sober slick Pete Doherty…



I see Dogs as the first…more just go with flow…



Kill Bill is a better movie if you look at the production as a whole, but I kinda prefer the natural flow of dogs to it.


#9

[quote=“WinslowLeach”]
I have no problems with it whatsoever. Noone messed up their lines in Dogs! What are you talkin about?! I’ll never ever turn around and say its amateurish and childish. Its really not. Its got a fresh pulse and its a helluva lot of fun. Dogs still gets an A+ in my book. Its a debut written-directed film for petes sake!! I think QT has a spotless filmmaking record so far. He does what every director should do which is grow with each movie. Dogs was his starting point and he’s learned and moved on from it. Its a cult classic btw, saying “it will never return” makes no sense. WTF?






[/quote]

Quentin will never EVER make another Reservoir Dogs, because he’s grown as a director and a man, he’s one of the big boys now



nobody messed up their lines? watch it again then, white and pink’s convo, Buscemi fucks up



i’m not hating on Dogs,i’m not “turning my back” lol at that, i’m just sharing you ALL - those were ALL - the things that kinda botherd me, critism, stoumach it, right now Quentin is better than ever, meaning he improved, meaning there once was a lesser Quentin, hence lesser movie, directing-wise, it’s much more playfull then any of his future movies will be, that’s what I meant with childish, it’s not as artistic as his current work, it’s just a fun ride

[quote=“Seth_Gecko”]
I am surpriced by you Johny…I thought you would prefer a sqeeuking, false, drugged up Pete Doherty to a more sober slick Pete Doherty…
[/quote]

you can never compare music and movies, can you? ;D my viewpoint on them are actually the opposite, movies have to be filled with perfectionism and music has to be improvised and nonlinear without any sense of perfectionism


#10

Ok :stuck_out_tongue: That makes sense!! 8)



I had a different view on your taste there :stuck_out_tongue:


#11

I dont think anyone in the movie fucks up their lines. Those conversations were as natural and cool as anything Ive ever heard spoken on the big screen. If there WAS a noticable error, QT wouldve definitely done another take. What kind of director who writes his own stuff leaves IN a bad take of his dialogue?



If you mean that its not as big in scope as his later movies, well, thats obvious. So what?



QT has only really changed in one area to me: his direction and in that I means hes gotten bolder and even sharper. Everything else has stayed the same. Hes always written great dialogue, casted his films great and hes always picked the best music. That being said, Dogs has some awesome direction in it. QT has even said the movie came out exactly the way he wanted it. Ya cant argue with that.


#12

[quote=“WinslowLeach”]
I dont think anyone in the movie fucks up their lines. Those conversations were as natural and cool as anything Ive ever heard spoken on the big screen. If there WAS a noticable error, QT wouldve definitely done another take. What kind of director who writes his own stuff leaves IN a bad take of his dialogue?[/quote]

a director making his first feature film

[quote]
If you mean that its not as big in scope as his later movies, well, thats obvious. So what?



QT has only really changed in one area to me: his direction and in that I means hes gotten bolder and even sharper. Everything else has stayed the same. Hes always written great dialogue, casted his films great and hes always picked the best music. That being said, Dogs has some awesome direction in it. QT has even said the movie came out exactly the way he wanted it. Ya cant argue with that.
[/quote]

we are not arguing with that. we are merely looking back at the feature film debut of a director we all love, and as far as I am concerned I look back at this film now from a more objective and neutral standpoint than the last time i saw it. i grew up watching it first a couple of times in german dub, then in english and now, years after all that, i finally got the opportunity (that means out of my 200 or so dvds i finally picked RD again) to rewatch it and i chose to be very very critical and objective, and all i am saying, and that is what most others said here, is, that reservoir dogs, although being a kick-ass and cool film, a tarantino masterpiece and whatnot, … all that aside, it still has some minor flaws, which, after a distance reviewing, is exposed to the critical viewer, and yeah, there are some lines that are a bit awry, and yeah, i think there are moments that should’ve been cut or re-shot… but that’s not the point. the point is, that we are talking objectively about a film we ALL love. and loving somebody doesnt mean you cant discover flaws. if you cant admit that, you’ve never been in a relationship :wink:


#13

Every great film has a few flaws, so why go back and start picking at Dogs now? If theres some major thought about why Dogs is different in 2006 than thats cool, but if all people have to say is “its more amateurish” and “theres a few screwed up lines” (which I still don’t believe there is) in it, its kinda pointless to start a whole new topic about it. We all know that it was QTs first film, its not 100% perfect, its still a cult classic that QT fans will always love for what it was.


#14

[quote=“WinslowLeach”]
“theres a few screwed up lines” (which I still don’t believe there is) [/quote]
then please watch it again :wink: “the cops didn’t show up untill mr euhmm mr blonde started shootin everybody” that should of been a CUT! DO IT AGAIN! immediatly, that would of never happend in Kill Bill, cause it’s just too perfect for it



should we ignore the flaws? no, don’t let greatness blind you, respect other peoples critisism



it’s not 100 % perfect, like you said, but we can’t say what’s nto perfect about? no, we should, THAT’s being a fan


#15

[quote=“Johny|Exhale”]
then please watch it again :wink: “the cops didn’t show up untill mr euhmm mr blonde started shootin everybody” that should of been a CUT! DO IT AGAIN! immediatly, that would of never happend in Kill Bill, cause it’s just too perfect for it
[/quote]

Maybe QT left it in cause the performance was good and doesn’t really matter if he screws up one line, which isn’t even that “important”. People do screw up “lines” in real life too, P.T. Anderson has noticed that too and in every one of his movies (not sure about Hard Eight) there’s a scene where someone fucks up a line and it’s left in. And Dogs was over a million dollar production, I don’t think shooting one little take again wouldn’t have been an option. Those kinda little things don’t bother me the slightest bit.


#16

Is it really a fuck up? I mean they are constant pondering if they should keep up the colour names…plus they dont know eachother that long…so it would only be natural for him to take a second and match the codename to the person…


#17

[quote=“Jack Wolfgang”]
Maybe QT left it in cause the performance was good and doesn’t really matter if he screws up one line, which isn’t even that “important”. People do screw up “lines” in real life too, P.T. Anderson has noticed that too and in every one of his movies (not sure about Hard Eight) there’s a scene where someone fucks up a line and it’s left in. And Dogs was over a million dollar production, I don’t think shooting one little take again wouldn’t have been an option. Those kinda little things don’t bother me the slightest bit.
[/quote]

well they bother me :wink: you notice it’s a fuckup and not a scripted hessitation, even if it was intended, it bothers me, I see it as a flaw, I would of liked it more if it was fluent, quick an smooth like the rest of the lines


#18

I think it adds to the “stagefeel” and feeling like you are locked up with them in the warehouse. I am sure it aint all smooth, but it more adds to its charm than if it would be a all slick and clean movie…


#19

I watched Reservoir Dogs again a few days ago after a very long time, and I have got to say that I like it more than ever.



After I had seen all the Tarantino films, I put RD at the bottom, I just thought it wasn’t as good as his others. I would still probably put it at the bottom of the list, but in my opinion, it has gotten better.



I did notice one or two flaws, but what the fuck? To knit-pick at a film, a DEBUT film for a basically unknown director who had no formal training is just retarded. I can’t remember a debut film for any other director which was this good, I really can’t.



For QT to be so ambitious so as to make film with a complex narrative structure, the non-linearity is just a testiment to the man. I mean even in his first film, he had such confidence in his filmmaking and in his audience. This guy basically started at the top and is just getting better and better. I have seen films from more established filmmakers who even after years and years of making film still aren’t as ambitious as they’d like to be because they’re scared the audience won’t get it or won’t like it.



For me, and I’m sure this is true for everybody that watches this film that at no point do we say “what the fuck is going on?” because we know we are in good hands. We know from what we have seen earlier in the film that what we need to know will be revealed to us at some point.



The acting is brilliant in this. Buscemi, Keitel, Roth, Madsen and Penn do a great job. I have still yet to see a bad performance from an actor in a QT film. This shows just how good a director he really is. Sure, some parts are a tiny bit flawed (acting-wise) but even that suits the rough, gritty style of the film. This is an uncomfortable film, some of it is hard to stomach, the cinematography adds to this and I think the style is brilliant. Yes the film isn’t as pretty as Kill Bill, but it isn’t supposed to be that way. It’s everything you would expect from a film dealing with violence, blood, guns and crime.



I also noticed a few things I hadn’t before such as when Nice-guy Eddie says “I’m sorry, I didn’t hear you. What did you just say?” a similar line is said in Kill Bill and Jackie Brown, must be some sort of in joke.



I think for people to say stupid shit like “I think one guy messed up a line, it wasn’t as smooth as I’d like it to be” just shows that the other aspects of the film are so good that you have to resort to pointing out even the smallest of errors and one’s which probably aren’t even errors at that.



I love the soundtrack, I love how the screen goes blank a lot of the time with just sounds coming out, I love the witty dialogue - all now classic QT traits.



To also say that “I think you should look at it objectively and not as a fanboy”, well how the fuck do you think we became fanboys in the first place? We watched RD, thought it was brilliant, became fans and love it. We can’t go back now and say “oh no, I was wrong to love this film, it’s actually shit, I mean one guy doesn’t say a word as fluently and smoothly as I would have liked and they should have done another take of that one scene, that’s it I’ve made my mind up, this is the worst film ever!!!11one”. Fucking retarded.



If you watch the film with the INTENTION to pick out flaws and be as critical as you can, you sure as hell WILL find those flaws. Every film has them. Yes, EVEN Kill Bill does. Nobody or nothing is perfect. Accept it and get the fuck off QT’s back. He doesn’t owe you shit.


#20

Its NOT a fuckup thats the whole point! You dont leave in a fucked up line in a main scene in a film, especially when you’re QT. If QT thought it was wrong he wouldve cut it out for sure. This whole discussion is fuckin retarded and we’re dredging up shit just to argue about nothing. Mr Pink and Mr White are confused as hell thats why hes studdering and trying to figure things out. Its actually very realistic to how it would sound if two guys were talking to each other in a panicky situation. If you dont like that part, oh well. When you watch it, skip over it or something.