IMDb > Reservoir Dogs (1992) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Reservoir Dogs
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Reservoir Dogs More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 94: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 936 reviews in total 

5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Major disappointment, completely overrated and a film with a trailer better than the actual film. 2/10

Author: Jsedwards93 from New Zealand, Wellington
17 December 2014

Reservoir Dogs was a complete disappointment. Despite the hyped reviews and high rating on IMDb it was nothing special. Mostly consisting of dialogue of pointless banter between the characters dragging out for uncomfortable amounts of time, the story had a weak plot and built up to nothing. Although to be fair the acting was very good, it did not redeem the overall poor script and plot which has its audience checking their watches within the first 30mins. The violence factor was nothing that shocking either, nothing much more you would find in a Bond film.

Personally I do not understand how this film gets good reviews. Please do not be fooled into wasting your time with this bore of a film. I'm surprised that this was not a career-ender for Tarantino.

2/10 Good acting, very boring plot. Overall poor.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

Shallow, unintelligent and pretentious

Author: N667 from Finland
5 November 2003

Quentin Tarantino seems to concentrate his movies very much along the lines of "cool" and "tough" and pulpy storylines and characters. To me, his scripts come across as done by someone who reads too many B-grade comic books, mainly because his movies have very similar content.

The story is very thin, and to sum up the what you see on the screen most of the time: there's a bunch of cookie-cutter emotionally retarded tough-guys who compete over who can deliver the coolest and toughest lines to each other and wave their shiny guns at each other with the right sort of swagger. That sort of thing is just so ho-hum, clichéd, and juvenile that I felt like tuning out right away.

Mixed into this macho posturing is some gratuitious violence (even to the point of being repulsive at times, for example when Mr. Blonde gets his way with the cop) and a couple of "cool" stories in the vein of Pulp Fiction's story about McDonald's in France (what depth). Too bad it's pretty much gloss over content. The only flash of intelligence in this movie is right at the beginning where Mr. Pink delivers his speech on tipping. That's what kept me somewhat interested at first. Unfortunately, it was all downhill from there.

This sort of movie doesn't appeal to me at all, although I'm sure it has some appeal to teenagers who consider the like of _The Fast and the Furious_ to be "cool". Me, I guess I'm just too old (27) to be impressed by this sort of trashy stuff. Had I seen it ten years ago, my review then might have been somewhat different.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

For the dogs.

Author: yarborough from northridge, ca
15 October 2001

The idea that Quentin Tarantino could be seen as a great filmmaker for "Reservoir Dogs" and "Pulp Fiction" is ridiculous, and "Reservoir Dogs" is proof exhibit A. "Reservoir Dogs" is simply one of the most shamelessly plot-driven movies I have ever seen. First of all, what is the point of the commode story? In the movie, the crooks are supposed to keep their mouths shut, but Tarantino has Mr. Orange go on and on, pointlessly, about the commode story just so Tarantino can make an attempt at art filmmaking by showing Mr. Orange talking to the actual police officers in the bathroom and dry his hands in slow motion. Talking that much would only make it more obvious that Mr. Orange is a policeman, anyway. Also, as one viewer pointed out, Mr. Orange doesn't shoot Mr. Blonde before Mr. Blonde cuts off the police officer's ear. Want to know why? Because Tarantino needed Mr. Orange to hear the bad guys say they were going to return to the warehouse after ditching the cars, but he also needed the ear-cutting scene. What else was there to do except make Mr. Orange not give a damn about the police officer, which is totally ridiculous. Also, why in God's name was Mr. Blonde going to set fire to the police officer? Wouldn't that have drawn attention to the warehouse hideout? Sure, it would. But Tarantino threw out that logic just so he could make a "thrilling" scene as Mr. Blonde prepares to set fire to the police officer. Also, what sense does it make to have the warehouse in the middle of a neighborhood? What a bunch of smart crooks. It's no wonder they couldn't snoop out the undercover cop.

This movie shouldn't even have made as little as it did (one million, I believe). And it figures that after about three years Tarantino's name dropped out of sight.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

One of the worst movies ever made

Author: fubar-2 from Boston
23 October 1998

This repulsive, reprehensible trash for Quentin Tarantino has to rank as one of the worst movies ever made. When I wasn't bored to tears by interminable dialogue, I was repulsed by the glorification of sadism as an alternative life-style. The Marquis De Sade would have been proud. Tarantino should put his talents to suitable use and just make a real 'snuff' film. See 'Clockwork Orange' instead. That is a work of real genius.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

should have been a theatre play

Author: Jovan Milosevic ( from Waterloo, Canada
13 December 1998

It is extremely difficult to make a good movie when almost the entire script happens in the same room within a few hours. In fact, at the moment, I can't think of any movie that has accomplished that. Tarantino's "Reservoir Dogs" certainly hasn't.

"Reservoir Dogs" could have been an excellent theatre play. In fact, it IS an excellent theatre play that was taped and sold to us as a movie. It is sad that we are so preoccupied with movies that a script like this has to be wasted on one.

Making matters worse is the violence. Tarantino often uses it in his movies to get attention, and this time takes it too far. "Pulp Fiction's" violence was milder and stood out less from the rest of the story, but "Reservoir Dogs" goes way over the top. It is very difficult to offend me with violence yet Tarantino does just that.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 40 people found the following review useful:

If this is a gangster movie where are all the cool robberies that gangsters are supposed to do?

Author: seedofchucky87 from Australia
25 February 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

People were forcing me to get this movie, so I eventually got it. I watched it waiting for the action and waiting for them to show us the robbery. How can this be called a gangster movie if they don't even show you a robbery? It said everywhere that this movie is a classic. What's classic about it? Robbers who cuss and act childish all the time waffling on about a robbery? All they do is talk and swear for 94 minutes, that's all they do. And it was very predictable who the cop was. There was no surprise. The reason I knew it was Mr. Orange was because Mr. White was treating him like a little 5 year old and he still treated the others like they were a piece of garbage. The direction was poor. The pacing was off. The humor with them discussing body functions and people's religion, etc was way off. They tried too hard to be funny when it came to he humor. There are 2 great songs in this movie, but that's it. The only thing that's original about this movie is the color names. The movie just seemed pointless, especially after the ending. They all shoot each other. What was the point in that? Them waffling on about a robbery, then nd up killing each other? What sense is that? I guess people love Quentin Tarintino so much that they'll accept anything he gives you. The dialog wasn't even good. Gangsters talking about their life and trying to be humorous, BORING!

A lot of people will probably abuse me for this review, but i'm sorry, this is what the film is about and you fall for such poor movies like this. The reason I type this is to also warn others to let them know that you'll be expecting nothing more from this film than gangsters (Who they don't even act like) waffling on about a failed robbery that they don't even show you. 1/10

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

In typical Tarantino fashion: it's GREAT!

Author: John William H. from Australia
30 September 2016

Reservoir Dogs could almost be adapted into a stage-play thanks to its minute scale yet very lively characters and script. Quentin Tarantino knows how to make non-linear stories flow well and never feel jarring with leaping from beat-to-beat.

Tim Roth, Michael Madsen, and Harvey Keitel are phenomenal as Mr Orange, Mr Blonde and Mr White respectively. They're all so cynical and the passive subtexts in their dialogue aimed at each other shows how full of nuance the film is rich with. And you can't blame them considering that all these take part in a heist, that doesn't go well for everyone involved.

Without this film and its success, we'd have no Pulp Fiction. Imagine what a crime against humanity that would be in the world of entertainment?

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

What happens when a robbery goes bad?

Author: Orange Kiddo
28 August 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

There seems to be two schools of thought when it comes to Quentin Tarantino's "Reservoir Dogs". On one hand you have those who say that it is a gratuitous meditation on violence, and that Tarantino must be a psychopath. Then you have those who say it's a brilliant film and that Tarantino must be a genius. I belong to the latter category.

Here in Tarantino's directorial debut we see all of his trademarks: excessive violence, rivers of blood, language that would make a sailor blush, razor-sharp dialogue, a non-linear storyline, and a terrific soundtrack. It is by these signature touches that we come to recognize a Tarantino movie when we see one. Love it or hate it, Tarantino has made these things his own.

One of the things that makes "Reservoir Dogs" so charming is its humanity. The audience might not relate to the characters' violent tendencies, but they can certainly relate to the sometimes-goofy, sometimes-angry, always-honest dialogue and banter. In "Reservoir Dogs", criminals might torment cops for fun, but they also have strong opinions on Madonna's song "Like a Virgin". They refuse to tip waitresses. They have a celebrity crush on Pam Grier. In other words, they put their pants on one leg at a time. The only difference between these criminals and us is that, well--they're criminals and we're not.

The cinematography and camera-work is flawless; every shot draws you into the red-and-grey world Tarantino has created for us. The acting is spectacular. Harvey Keitel, Michael Madsen, Tim Roth, and Steve Buscemi and the rest bring their characters to life. Each actor brings something unique to the table and gives their characters a distinct personality.

Even the notorious "ear scene" is perfectly executed. The scene is gleefully twisted, and the use of Stealers Wheel's "Stuck in the Middle With You" will send chills down your spine. Just as the actual robbery is never shown in the film, the most horrific part of the "ear scene" is never shown either. You hear the muffled screams... but that's it. And THAT is what makes this film so powerful. It's not what is shown but what isn't shown.

This film is a prime example of "Less is more". With just a few speaking characters and a bare-bones set, "Reservoir Dogs" has the feel of a stage play. With limited resources and funds, Tarantino shows us you don't need a big budget to make a big effect on the audience.

Shocking, hilarious, heartbreaking, "Reservoir Dogs" has it all. This is not your average 90's crime flick. It will make you laugh, cry, and reconsider your current stance on tipping waitresses. Do yourself a favor and watch this movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Larry, stop pointing that f****** gun at my Dad!

Author: lonysimbasa from Toronto, Canada
26 July 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Ever since I was a little kid, Back to the Future was the s***! For years, I tried to find out how to actually build a DeLorean time machine, or any time machine. I practically lived and breathed time travel, and I still somewhat do. But, after years of watching movies, seeing nothing that could compare to Michael J. Fox. Out popped a movie that was minimalist and natural. My new favorite movie ever.

Plot - 6 guys robbed a bank under the guise of colors. They are Mr. White, Mr. Orange, Mr. Pink, Mr. Blonde, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Blue. They were hired by two guys Joe Cabot and Nice Guy Eddie. S*** goes down, Orange is shot and Blue and Brown die. The guys start wondering how the cops got there so quick. They begin to suspect that there is a rat/cop within their group. There is nothing wrong with the plot except that, they only slick back their hair in order to mask themselves. Who is to say that not one person would see your face. They have artist renderings. Also the plot is sort of borrowed from City on Fire (1987) and Kansas City Confidential. 7/10

Acting - The acting in this movie is superb. That can be credited to the fact that the dialogue is extremely relaxed and realistic. Props to the opening diner scene, where they discuss Like a Virgin and how it's all about d***. Tarantino had a sort of style that you're all familiar with. It's sort of laid back and the characters talk about stuff not important to the plot. Michael Madsen and Steve Buscemi are the best ones. Tim Roth would be the same, if it weren't for the scene where he's bleeding in the car. Keitel, Penn, Bunker, and Tarantino are good. I heard Lawrence Tierney was a pain on set, but he's not that bad. 9/10

Set Design/Location Shoot - There are barely any locations in this movie. There is the warehouse, the diner, Joe's office, the bar, and another diner. It's really nothing to brag about, though the minimalist is just amazing, as Tarantino shows he does not need a bunch of locations to make a great movie. That warehouse is also pretty memorable. 7/10

Cinematography - I really don't like reviewing this part of any movie, as I feel that it is so mundane and uninteresting. I completely skipped it over in my An Extremely Goofy Movie review and my still not submitted Beauty and the Beast review. I however include it, as there are films that deserve for their cinematography, good or bad. The cinematography is good, not great. We see Tarantino is not an amateur with his shots, and I will mention the credits sequence and Mr. Pink's flashback. There is however, nothing great about it. 7/10

Costumes/Props - The actors all brought their own costumes, because it wasn't in the budget. Nice Guy Eddie's track jacket is actually Chris Penn's and it is hilarious. The suits add to the cool factor of the movie, the cop costumes are standard, and the guns are also standard. There's no real focus on the costumes or props in this movie. 6/10

Soundtrack - My god is that soundtrack amazing. Little Green Bag is forever stuck in my head, and Stuck in the Middle With You was unbelievably awesome. Other than that, the movie is quiet for the most part. 8/10

Script/Dialogue - Like I said before, the style is very relaxed and cool. It's a really great script with realistic characters. 10/10

Characters - We don't really no much about the guys' backstory. We do know about their personalities. White (Lawrence Dimmick) is compassionate towards Orange (Freddie Newandyke) and takes the responsibility of being his mentor. He is really hurt when Freddie turns out to be the rat, and regrettably shoots him afterwards. He however, can be a killer when he needs to. I couldn't really pin down what Orange's personality is, he seemed kind of cool and scared of death, but he was mostly knocked out for most of the movie. He is also way to quick to single out Pink for not tipping, foreshadowing events to come. Blonde (Vic Vega) is a sociopath. He just doesn't care. He shoots down cops and civilians once the cops arrive a little too quickly, and he tortures a man, while at the same time dancing to 70s music. All the while, he's cool and suave, and he shows no remorse. Pink is selfish, greedy, and just wants to get the job done. He fancies himself a professional and sees Blonde as nothing more than a Psycho. We never find out his name, and yet he is the only one to survive the entire movie. Nice Guy Eddie seems like his namesake at first, but will instantly lash out if anyone threatens his dad, or if he found out his friend was trying to make off with the jewels. Joe fells every one of them is untrustworthy, so he never gives out their names. Instead he gives them colors. Although, he never gives himself or his son a code name, so he's only protecting the guys he hired and not himself. Brown and Blue were barely in the movie. We did see that Brown is very talkative. Great characters who never spout out their backstories and instead show us who they are. 9/10

Overall - It's a really good movie that borrows elements from other gangster movies. But other than that, it's fine. It's good, it's a fun movie. Mexican Standoff, awesome. And was a great movie for Tarantino to start with, unlike My Best Friend's Birthday. Inspiration comes from Kansas City Confidential, The Big Combo, The Killing (1956), The Taking of Pelham One Two Three, City on Fire (1987), and Au revoir les enfants. 7.875/10, rounded is 7.88/10, rounded is 7.9/10, rounded, 8/10.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Tarantino's First Is His Best!

Author: IntotheMystic1
15 July 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

When "Reservoir Dogs" was released in 1992, it was the first time the whole world became aware of a writer/directer called Quentin Tarantino. "Reservoir Dogs" is a stylish bank heist film that hits all the right notes. Loaded with seventies pop hits and cool, slick characters, the film deserves its cult status.

The film centers on a group of career criminals without names. Instead of calling each other by their real names they use colors. The other criminals are unaware that one of their own is a cop. The film primarily takes place in a warehouse where one of the guys lays on the floor bleeding. Tarantino gives us a view of each guy's background in between.

This film is one of the greatest films of all time in my opinion and deservedly so.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 5 of 94: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history