A (very) bloody stage piece

Rating: 7/10 (16 December 2019)

Reservoir Dogs is shocking in its excess and (seeming) glorification of violence. What makes it interesting is how the violence is used by the director. In some ways, it is used as a stun gun, to discombobulate the viewer, and in that sense it is not, appearances notwithstanding, entirely gratuitous.
When one reflects upon ¨the morals¨ of the story, Reservoir Dogs proves not to be a celebration of violence but a cautionary tale with a moral not unlike those of some of the great Greek and Shakespearean tragedies, which, we must acknowledge, are sometimes also extraordinarily gory (Oedipus Rex, Hamlet, Macbeth...). The big difference, of course, is that Tarantino protagonists are not greater-than-life heroes but loser, lowlife criminals born into less-than-noble contexts. Yet they still are kings of their own little castles and conduct themselves accordingly. Their foul language is their poetry.
My impression is that the critical acclaim heaped upon Tarantino´s oeuvre, beginning with Reservoir Dogs, derives from the undeniable fact that every single facet of the works is open to higher-order interpretation and was thoughtfully chosen by the director. Think about the names of the protagonists, for example, they all can be said to have meaning--left to the viewer to figure out, of course. Critics like that sort of stuff.
If not for the extreme messiness of blood, Reservoir Dogs could be staged in a theatre, given that it takes place almost exclusively in a single location. Tarantino´s subsequent works, while also theatrical and working from classical paradigms--following many classical rules while breaking others--exploit more of the potentials of the film medium, as distinct from theatre.