Not the classic that the critics say

Rating: 6/10 (16 June 2000)

I saw this movie on video, after hearing all sorts of movie critics praising Tarantino's masterful use of "multiple narratives" in this film. I suppose I was expecting something along the lines of "Rashomon," which was probably setting my expectations too high. There are three story lines (two and a half really--the Tim Roth-Amanda Plummer story is not sufficiently developed), only one of which is really interesting: the final story, revolving around Bruce Willis. And that story takes up maybe one-quarter of the movie. The remainder is filled with the John Travolta-Uma Thurman story line, which would have been interesting in the hands of a more talented writer or director than Tarantino. The most interesting character is Keitel's--a great movie could be made of him, but he is on screen for only about ten minutes. Tarantino does a nice job of exploring the "banality of evil, but the "hard-boiled" dialogue is more often artificial and embarrassing, and when he runs out of expletives, he resorts to violence. As for the multiple story line concept, it's wasted here. Tarantino actually did a better job with interweaving multiple story lines in "Reservoir Dogs" (another flawed film, but for different reasons). And regarding what's in the briefcase--ultimately, who cares?