---
title: "Reservoir Dogs"
year: 1992
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/reservoir-dogs"
fi1m_id: "reservoir-dogs"
imdb_id: "tt0105236"
tmdb_id: 500
wikidata_id: "Q72962"
fi1m_score: 86
critics_score: 70
critics_reviews: 14
published: "2026-09-12"
updated: "2026-09-18T08:37:52.363019+00:00"
region: "US"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Reservoir Dogs (1992)

Directed by Quentin Tarantino · 1h 39m · MPA R · Crime, Thriller

## Identity

Reservoir Dogs

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/reservoir-dogs
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** reservoir-dogs
- **IMDb ID:** tt0105236
- **TMDB ID:** 500
- **Wikidata ID:** Q72962
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105236/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/500, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q72962

**Fi1m score: 86** · Critics 70 from 14 reviews

*In a sentence:* Eight men in matching suits, one warehouse, no women, and the radio keeps playing cheerful songs at the worst possible moments

> Tarantino’s first film takes the robbery out of the heist film and leaves the men in a warehouse arguing about it. The talk is the action, the structure is the achievement, and the 18 certificate is earned in one scene we have never recovered from.

## Synopsis

Eight men in black suits eat breakfast in a diner before a diamond robbery, arguing about tipping and a Madonna song. Then the job goes wrong. Mr Orange (Tim Roth) is bleeding from a stomach wound in a car while Mr White (Harvey Keitel) drives and talks him through it. At a warehouse they are joined by Mr Pink (Steve Buscemi), certain the police were tipped off, and later by Mr Blonde (Michael Madsen). While they wait for the boss, Joe Cabot (Lawrence Tierney), and his son Eddie (Chris Penn), the film goes back in time to show who these men were. Written and directed by Quentin Tarantino, who also plays Mr Brown.

## Review

Quentin Tarantino’s first feature is a heist film with the heist removed. Eight men in black suits eat breakfast in a diner, argue about tipping and about what a Madonna song means, and walk to their cars. The next time we see them the diamond robbery has gone wrong. Mr Orange (Tim Roth) is in the back seat of a car with a bullet in his stomach, screaming, and Mr White (Harvey Keitel) is driving and telling him he will be fine. They reach a warehouse. Mr Pink (Steve Buscemi) arrives on foot, sure that somebody in the crew talked to the police, and the rest of the film is the wait for the boss, Joe Cabot (Lawrence Tierney), and his son Eddie (Chris Penn).

It is as good as its reputation, and it is plainly a first film, and the two facts are related. Tarantino had one big room and not much else, so he wrote a picture in which men talk and the talk is the action. We recommend it with two caveats. The 18 certificate is earned, and there is a stretch in the second half where the film enjoys its own cruelty a beat or two longer than it needs to.

The warehouse is dressed by David Wasco and Ken Kaufman, who fill it with a hearse and a stack of coffins, so it looks like a place bodies are meant to end up. Andrzej Sekula keeps the camera low and slow, circling the diner table in one long take at the start and later settling on the concrete where Roth lies in a widening pool. Betsy Heimann’s suits are cheap and identical, white shirts and thin black ties, and the men wear them the way waiters do. There is no composer. The music is a radio station playing seventies pop, and Sally Menke cuts against it rather than with it, so a cheerful song is nearly always sitting on top of something awful.

Menke’s other job is the structure, and it is the achievement here. The film goes back in time to introduce the men one at a time, with a title card for each, and returns to the warehouse each time knowing a little more. Ninety-nine minutes in one room could have played like a filmed stage piece. It does not, because every jump backwards changes how the warehouse looks when we get back to it.

Keitel is the adult in the building. He plays Mr White as a man who has decided to be decent about one thing and is prepared to be terrible about everything else. Buscemi’s Mr Pink talks too fast, keeps his back to the wall and is the only one thinking clearly, and the film knows it. Roth spends most of his screen time on his back, wet with blood, and does more with his voice than most actors manage standing up. Michael Madsen’s Mr Blonde arrives late, sipping a drink, and the temperature in the warehouse drops. Tierney barks, Penn bounces about in a tracksuit top, and Tarantino gives himself the opening speech and a small part as Mr Brown.

The scene everyone remembers is Madsen alone with a captive policeman (Kirk Baltz) and a razor. We watched it through our fingers the first time, and what has stayed with us is not the blade but the dance: Madsen shuffling to the radio, unhurried, having a nice time. The camera drifts away to a doorway at the worst moment. We were grateful for that, and then a little unsettled that a film had managed to make us grateful to it for anything.

The flaws are the ones you would expect from a writer who has just found out he can write. Speeches run on because Tarantino liked them. Two or three lines are pitched at the poster rather than at the person listening. There are no women in it at all, and it does not notice. Set against Kubrick’s *The Killing*, which also told a heist out of order, this is louder and less controlled, and it is more alive. Set against the films Tarantino made afterwards, starting with [*Pulp Fiction*](https://film.one/film/pulp-fiction) in 1994, it is the one where he had no room to indulge himself, and it is better for it.

Watch it late, with the volume up, and not while eating. The 18 certificate is honest and so is the tagline: every dog has his day, and this is a bad one.

*Fi1m score 86, published 12 September 2026.*

## What the critics say

Most critics like it. The praise settles on the dialogue, the pop-culture banter that makes criminals sound like men killing time in a café, and on the cast: Harvey Keitel, Steve Buscemi and Michael Madsen are named again and again. The reviews also agree it is an unusually assured first film, with a scrambled chronology that holds together. Nearly all warn about the violence, and most treat it as part of the point rather than a fault.

The reservations gather around substance. A run of American reviews from its first release find it showy but thin: Variety calls it nihilistic and hard to love, The New Yorker a lively picture about nothing, and the Los Angeles Times all energy and no feeling. Slant, writing much later, takes issue with its enjoyment of its own brutality. The spread is wide, from full marks to negative, and the later British reviews are noticeably warmer than the first-run American ones.

## Straight answers

**Is Reservoir Dogs worth watching?**

*Reservoir Dogs* is worth watching for anyone who can take ninety-nine minutes of men in one room talking, waiting and bleeding, and we scored it 86. Quentin Tarantino's first film is as good as its reputation and plainly a debut: the speeches run long, and there is a stretch in the second half where it enjoys its own cruelty a beat longer than it should.

**How long is Reservoir Dogs, and what is it rated?**

*Reservoir Dogs* runs 1h 39m and is rated R by the MPA in the US. It is a crime and thriller film.

**Where can I watch Reservoir Dogs in the US?**

*Reservoir Dogs* is not on any streaming or rental service in the US at the moment. It is available in 1 other country; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.

**How violent or frightening is Reservoir Dogs, and is it suitable for children?**

*Reservoir Dogs* carries an 18 certificate and earns it, so it is not suitable for children and we would keep it from younger teenagers. There is little violence by volume, but one scene, Michael Madsen alone with a captive policeman and a razor, is the one nobody recovers from, and Tim Roth spends most of the film on his back in a widening pool of blood. The squeamish should not eat while watching.

**How does Reservoir Dogs compare to Glengarry Glen Ross?**

*Reservoir Dogs* and [*Glengarry Glen Ross*](https://film.one/film/glengarry-glen-ross) are both films about men in a room for one night, and the talk cuts just as deep in each. Glengarry has no violence and gets its wounds from words alone, with Jack Lemmon making the desperation painfully convincing, while Tarantino's film is louder, bloodier and more alive. Choose Glengarry if you want the sharper drama, Reservoir Dogs if you want the thriller.

**What should I watch after Reservoir Dogs?**

After *Reservoir Dogs*, try [*Glengarry Glen Ross*](https://film.one/film/glengarry-glen-ross) (1992, Fi1m 86): Men in a room, one night, no violence, and the talk cuts just as deep. Then [*Sexy Beast*](https://film.one/film/sexy-beast) (2000, Fi1m 85): One retired thief, one unwelcome visitor, and Ben Kingsley making a villa feel like that warehouse.

### Reviews we read (14)

- **Radio Times**, David Parkinson (5/5): The critic highlights the film's runaway success despite its low budget and cult aspirations, along with its sharp, pop-culture-referencing dialogue. Standout performances from Michael Madsen as the sadistic Mr Blonde and Steve Buscemi as the exasperated Mr Pink make it brash, abrasive, and a must-see. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-bm2w3r/reservoir-dogs/)
- **Empire**, John Naughton (90/100, inferred): Tarantino's debut is a perfect, auteur-level crime film that stands out for its pop-culture dialogue diversions, knowing structure, and compelling performances drawn from a sharp script, rather than realism or conventional heist plotting. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/empire-essay-reservoir-dogs-review/)
- **Evening Standard**, Alexander Walker (90/100, inferred): The critic highlights how the film revitalized criminal dialogue with banal, pop-culture-infused banter and made crime look cool through its stylish, pop-video generation visuals and slow-motion credits sequence. He praises its subverted expectations, elliptical style, and influence as the most influential work of its time, noting the cathartic violence and black comedy. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/reservoir-dogs-still-barking-7222303.html)
- **The Independent**, Adam Mars-Jones (80/100, inferred): The critic calls Reservoir Dogs a gruelling but exhilarating first film and a remarkable achievement, praising its headlong approach to violence that insists on the simultaneous presence of perpetrator and victim, giving the suffering meaning and lending the film a kind of nihilistic integrity and almost moral weight. [Read](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/film-the-dog-it-was-that-died-the-dostoevskian-violence-of-reservoir-dogs-1477258.html)
- **The Hollywood Reporter**, Duane Byrge (75/100, inferred): The critic describes Reservoir Dogs as brutally violent and intense, likely to shock audiences at Sundance, but commends its masterful storytelling and strong performances by the cast. He singles out the writing and the actors' portrayals for particular praise. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/reservoir-dogs-review-1992-movie-904415/)
- **Slant Magazine**, Chuck Bowen (70/100, inferred): The critic sees it as indicating a remarkably fully formed cinematic sensibility that fetishizes coolness, objects, and genre situations while revealing vulnerability. It praises the extraordinary performances and vitality but critiques the infantile glee in violence and failure to fully challenge troubling elements like racism. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/reservoir-dogs-review-quentin-tarantino/)
- **The Guardian** (70/100, inferred): The critic finds the film an extraordinarily impressive debut marked by strong performances, particularly from Harvey Keitel, but warns that its extreme violence makes it unsuitable for many viewers. It is praised as a riveting treatise on betrayal set in a hopeless urban wasteland, with influences from Scorsese and others but its own distinct voice. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/1993/jan/07/1)
- **The New York Times**, Vincent Canby (70/100, inferred): The critic praises the debut feature as a modestly budgeted crime movie with dazzling cinematic pyrotechnics and over-the-top dramatic energy, adding Quentin Tarantino to a list of promising new directors. It highlights the film's brutal violence while noting its effective structure and dialogue. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/23/movies/review-film-a-caper-goes-wrong-resoundingly.html)
- **The Telegraph**, Simon Heffer (70/100, inferred): The critic views the film as a morality tale demonstrating that crime does not pay, with the bad guys mostly ending up dead. He praises its focus on character exploration and dialogue as a tour de force rather than action or thrills, while acknowledging the exceptional violence and profanity as part of its grim depiction of American low life. [Read](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2018/06/24/reservoir-dogs-pornography-violence-modern-morality-tale/)
- **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (65/100, inferred): Ebert finds the film an exercise in style with a talented cast and kinetic direction but criticizes the screenplay for excessive talk and lack of depth in characters. He likes it but wants more from the promising debut. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/reservoir-dogs-1992)
- **Los Angeles Times**, Kenneth Turan (55/100, inferred): Turan sees it as a brash, showy but insubstantial comic opera of violence, praising the dialogue, cast, and energy but noting it's one-dimensional and overly focused on violence without emotional depth. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-10-30-ca-760-story.html)
- **The New Yorker**, Terrence Rafferty (40/100, inferred): Rafferty views it as a lively but ultimately thin picture about nothing, a stylized parody of heist films with playful nihilism but lacking emotional weight and substance. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1992/10/19/men-overboard)
- **Variety**, Todd McCarthy (30/100, inferred): The critic describes it as an intense, bloody crime drama with snappy dialogue and a terrific cast that demonstrates a smart new filmmaker at work. However, it is ultimately nihilistic, about nothing more than macho guys and their guns, making the pic impressive but impossible to love. [Read](https://variety.com/1992/film/reviews/reservoir-dogs-1200429146/)
- **Den of Geek**, Mark Pickavance (4/5): The critic calls it a great movie with classic Tarantino touches like non-linear chronology and extreme violence, praising performances by Buscemi and Keitel, but notes it's slightly overshadowed by Pulp Fiction. The Blu-ray offers good image and sound quality. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/reservoir-dogs-collectors-edition-blu-ray-review/)

## Details

- **Director:** Quentin Tarantino
- **Director:** Quentin Tarantino
- **Writer:** Quentin Tarantino
- **Cinematography:** Andrzej Sekula
- **Editor:** Sally Menke
- **Production design:** David Wasco, Ken Kaufman
- **Costume design:** Betsy Heimann
- **Producer:** Lawrence Bender
- **Cast:** Harvey Keitel as Mr. White / Larry Dimmick; Tim Roth as Mr. Orange / Freddy Newandyke; Michael Madsen as Mr. Blonde / Vic Vega; Chris Penn as "Nice Guy" Eddie Cabot; Steve Buscemi as Mr. Pink; Lawrence Tierney as Joe Cabot; Randy Brooks as Detective Holdaway; Kirk Baltz as Officer Marvin Nash
- **Runtime:** 1h 39m
- **Certificate (MPA):** R
- **Release (the US):** 23 October 1992
- **Genres:** Crime, Thriller
- **Budget:** $1 million
- **Box office:** $3 million

## Where to watch in the US

Not streaming, renting or buying in the US at the last check.

Also available in: GB. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## If you liked this

- *The Killing* (1956): Kubrick’s racetrack heist, told out of order, is where the jigsaw structure comes from.
- *Le Doulos* (1962): Melville’s Paris crooks in hats and raincoats, betraying each other very politely.
- *City on Fire* (1987): Ringo Lam’s Hong Kong undercover thriller, faster and sadder, with a familiar standoff.
- *Glengarry Glen Ross* (1992), Fi1m 86: Men in a room, one night, no violence, and the talk cuts just as deep. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/glengarry-glen-ross.md)
- *Sexy Beast* (2000), Fi1m 85: One retired thief, one unwelcome visitor, and Ben Kingsley making a villa feel like that warehouse. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/sexy-beast.md)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/reservoir-dogs