Tarantino's Top 20: From Reservoir Dogs to Now

rustyscout34 said:Look, I’ll just say one thing to defend my favorite director, because honestly, people have been talking way too much trash lately.
Coming in here to argue about his movies, his talent, or his legacy—and then attacking the people who actually enjoy them—is just a waste of time. It’s like walking into a room full of Harry Potter fans just to lecture them on why Harry is overrated or why the series is trash. I don't bother with that. I mean, what’s really the point? If there are a thousand die-hard fans out there—people who are literally sobbing in the theater—what am I going to gain by dropping my "modest opinion" on some legendary wizard? Not much, I guess.

Emily Thomas3, I'm with you on everything you said.

True, except this thread wasn't started as some sort of Tarantino fan club. We were all invited to weigh in on the list provided by the OP.

quietdriver3 said:True, except this thread wasn't started as some sort of Tarantino fan club. We were all invited to weigh in on the list provided by the OP.

Fine, I get it. It's just that some people weren't actually sticking to the list itself—they kept bringing up his range, his filmography, his talent, and stuff like that. So, I guess my comment was just a reaction to that... 😉

The whole thing is just a product of his mind, I guess... and since that mind is such a huge part of the QT brand, it’s honestly pretty hard to tell where the director ends and the total weirdo begins, you know? Like, as people keep saying on this thread, he just pours so much of himself into every single movie he makes. 😁

Laura Palmer25 said:Regarding the bolded part: what makes you think a Tarantino film that doesn't lean so heavily on references would be unwatchable? Or worse, "forced"? That seems like a massive underestimate to me. My take is that you can't live off recycling forever; eventually, it just stops being interesting. But I truly believe he's a director with massive potential. I'm waiting to see his next big move—his third real one, since Reservoir Dogs was the solid start—just to see him build another tight, celluloid micro-world like the one in Pulp Fiction. Something impactful, self-contained, and memorable. How many movies from the 90s can actually say they stuck with people like that? Very few.

I stated how I *suspect* such a situation might unfold; I did not claim to possess certain knowledge. While I agree that Tarantino is a director of great potential and ultimately a master of his craft, I maintain my view that directing a purely straightforward film—devoid of allusions, quotes, and intertextuality—would likely lack the specific resonance found in everything he has produced to date.
This isn't an attempt at disparagement; rather, I believe my perspective is firmly rooted in the established patterns of Tarantino's body of work.

Emily Thomas3 said:Sadly, I think you've got it wrong. There are tons of people who act like they're being objective and speaking for everyone, especially when they're tearing down movies or music. 🤷

I am hardly acting as a stranger here, and any individual who chooses to present themselves to the public must be prepared to face criticism and commentary; whether that feedback is positive or negative is ultimately irrelevant. I was not attempting to insult Q, but rather I stated that their taste is quite dreadful—though, of course, judgment remains entirely subjective, and this user maintains all intellectual and civil rights regarding her own subjectivity.

Quentin is basically just a guy who watched way too many cult classics growing up...and honestly, it feels like his whole mission in life is to recreate the stuff he obsessed over as a kid. Sometimes he nails it, and sometimes—well, not so much. He’s definitely not your run-of-the-mill Hollywood director. Is he some groundbreaking visionary with a filmography that demands deep academic study? Not really. But hey, since we're talking about him... there are some gems in there, but also some absolute disasters (I mean, "Speed"... give me a break). Honestly, the worst action flick since *Terminator 2: Judgment Day* (which, let's face it, will probably get a remake soon anyway). In a weird way, if you view his work as a deliberate tribute to B-movie trash, you could draw some parallels to that French director Luc Besson and his campy stuff—though, frankly, Quentin is lightyears better than him.

Karen Smith9 said:Quentin is basically just a guy who watched way too many cult classics growing up...and honestly, it feels like his whole mission in life is to recreate the stuff he obsessed over as a kid. Sometimes he nails it, and sometimes—well, not so much. He’s definitely not your run-of-the-mill Hollywood director. Is he some groundbreaking visionary with a filmography that demands deep academic study? Not really. But hey, since we're talking about him... there are some gems in there, but also some absolute disasters (I mean, "Speed"... give me a break). Honestly, the worst action flick since *Terminator 2: Judgment Day* (which, let's face it, will probably get a remake soon anyway). In a weird way, if you view his work as a deliberate tribute to B-movie trash, you could draw some parallels to that French director Luc Besson and his campy stuff—though, frankly, Quentin is lightyears better than him.

Wait, what's the deal with hating on Speed? That movie is a freaking blast from start to finish! I haven't met a single person who thinks it's boring or bad.

Peter Reed70 said:Wait, what's the deal with hating on Speed? That movie is a freaking blast from start to finish! I haven't met a single person who thinks it's boring or bad.

That movie is absolute garbage... seriously... just drive, speed, drive, drive, drive... and that's the whole plot. It's easily one of the biggest pieces of trash released in the last thirty years—I mean, I don't know anyone who actually thinks that movie is good. Keanu Reeves? Please...👎

Karen Smith9 said:That movie is absolute garbage... seriously... just drive, speed, drive, drive, drive... and that's the whole plot. It's easily one of the biggest pieces of trash released in the last thirty years—I mean, I don't know anyone who actually thinks that movie is good. Keanu Reeves? Please...👎

Look, I’ll say it too—he’s actually pretty damn good... that puts us two in agreement... me and Keanu... ☕

hiddenhound3 said:I am hardly acting as a stranger here, and any individual who chooses to present themselves to the public must be prepared to face criticism and commentary; whether that feedback is positive or negative is ultimately irrelevant. I was not attempting to insult Q, but rather I stated that their taste is quite dreadful—though, of course, judgment remains entirely subjective, and this user maintains all intellectual and civil rights regarding her own subjectivity.

Facts. 🙂

Karen Smith9 said:That movie is absolute garbage... seriously... just drive, speed, drive, drive, drive... and that's the whole plot. It's easily one of the biggest pieces of trash released in the last thirty years—I mean, I don't know anyone who actually thinks that movie is good. Keanu Reeves? Please...👎

Well, I certainly do 😍 (since we're looking at Tarantino's list, it's hardly surprising Speed made the cut). For instance, Roger Ebert (and yes, you read that right—four stars. For those of you who struggle with clicking links, or for anyone looking to defend QT's honor or our very own Jan De Bont against Karen's blistering critique, I'll just lay Ebert's review of Speed right here alongside her take):

Karen Smith9 said:That movie is absolute garbage... seriously... just drive, speed, drive, drive, drive... and that's the whole plot. It's easily one of the biggest pieces of trash released in the last thirty years—I mean, I don't know anyone who actually thinks that movie is good. Keanu Reeves? Please...👎

"Speed is like an ingenious windup machine. It's a smart, inventive thriller that starts with hostages trapped on an elevator and continues with two chases—one on a bus, one on a subway—so that it's wall-to-wall with action, stunts, special effects and excitement. We've seen this done before, but seldom so well, or at such a high pitch of energy. Films like 'Speed' belong to the genre I call Bruised Forearm Movies, because you're always grabbing the arm of the person sitting next to you. Done wrong, they seem like tired replays of old chase cliches. Done well, they're fun. Done as well as 'Speed,' they generate a kind of manic exhilaration. The director, Jan De Bont, has worked as a cinematographer on many action classics, including 'Total Recall' and 'Die Hard.' Here he shows his own mastery, in a great entertainment."

Karen Smith9 said:That movie is absolute garbage... seriously... just drive, speed, drive, drive, drive... and that's the whole plot. It's easily one of the biggest pieces of trash released in the last thirty years—I mean, I don't know anyone who actually thinks that movie is good. Keanu Reeves? Please...👎

"Keanu Reeves has never had a role like this before. In fact, in his previous film, he played the mystical Prince Siddhartha, and generally he tends toward dreamy, sensitive characters. That's why it's sort of amazing to see him so cool and focused here, a completely convincing action hero who is as centered and resourceful as a Clint Eastwood or Harrison Ford in similar situations. He and Bullock have good chemistry; they appreciate the humor that is always flickering just beneath the surface of the preposterous plot. And Hopper's dialogue has been twisted into savagely ironic understatements that provide their own form of comic relief."

(Wait, what? Speed actually snagged some awards? It probably just swept the Razzies. My mistake, that list is way too long).

We could really dive deep here: what did Spielberg, Lucas, and Coppola have to say about Speed (it’s almost hard to believe); how it stands as Keanu Reeves' only decent role besides Matrix; plus, if we ignore that tiny cameo in Crash, it's the only legit performance from Sandra Bullock; and of course, the consistently great Dennis Hopper (back then he was drifting through all sorts of low-budget B and C-list productions, when he wasn't being great, that is)... Last but not least, all my friends seem to think Speed is a pretty okay or even great movie...

Off-topic:

Okay, so Seven isn't there—but Fight Club is! (either way, northerncrane4 would probably recommend a hospital visit 🤦). No Oldboy—but we've got South Korea! We have Speed, so does that end the debate? Or is everything included and nothing is actually good? (hiddenhound3, you broke my heart—what about Michael Mann's The Insider??? Good grief, where in the 21st century have you seen something like this, such a massive breakdown of how and why America sold its soul?).

Personally, looking at that famous Quentin Tarantino list—at least from my uneducated perspective—I don't think Speed is a true interloper. Brothers and sisters, let's find the real intruder! Singular, plural, whatever. Squawk, scream, call 911—which title on Quentin's list hits your stomach, your liver, or your nerves the hardest???

p.s. as for me, the sequel—who in their right mind even watched that?

Just finished watching Audition.
Man, that beginning was such a drag—seriously, I almost fell asleep! Just when things finally start getting weird and interesting, the movie wraps up. Honestly? Kind of a letdown.

Christian Taylor3 said:Well, I certainly do 😍 (since we're looking at Tarantino's list, it's hardly surprising Speed made the cut). For instance, Roger Ebert (and yes, you read that right—four stars. For those of you who struggle with clicking links, or for anyone looking to defend QT's honor or our very own Jan De Bont against Karen's blistering critique, I'll just lay Ebert's review of Speed right here alongside her take):

"Speed is like an ingenious windup machine. It's a smart, inventive thriller that starts with hostages trapped on an elevator and continues with two chases—one on a bus, one on a subway—so that it's wall-to-wall with action, stunts, special effects and excitement. We've seen this done before, but seldom so well, or at such a high pitch of energy. Films like 'Speed' belong to the genre I call Bruised Forearm Movies, because you're always grabbing the arm of the person sitting next to you. Done wrong, they seem like tired replays of old chase cliches. Done well, they're fun. Done as well as 'Speed,' they generate a kind of manic exhilaration. The director, Jan De Bont, has worked as a cinematographer on many action classics, including 'Total Recall' and 'Die Hard.' Here he shows his own mastery, in a great entertainment."

"Keanu Reeves has never had a role like this before. In fact, in his previous film, he played the mystical Prince Siddhartha, and generally he tends toward dreamy, sensitive characters. That's why it's sort of amazing to see him so cool and focused here, a completely convincing action hero who is as centered and resourceful as a Clint Eastwood or Harrison Ford in similar situations. He and Bullock have good chemistry; they appreciate the humor that is always flickering just beneath the surface of the preposterous plot. And Hopper's dialogue has been twisted into savagely ironic understatements that provide their own form of comic relief."

(Wait, what? Speed actually snagged some awards? It probably just swept the Razzies. My mistake, that list is way too long).

We could really dive deep here: what did Spielberg, Lucas, and Coppola have to say about Speed (it’s almost hard to believe); how it stands as Keanu Reeves' only decent role besides Matrix; plus, if we ignore that tiny cameo in Crash, it's the only legit performance from Sandra Bullock; and of course, the consistently great Dennis Hopper (back then he was drifting through all sorts of low-budget B and C-list productions, when he wasn't being great, that is)... Last but not least, all my friends seem to think Speed is a pretty okay or even great movie...

Off-topic:

Okay, so Seven isn't there—but Fight Club is! (either way, northerncrane4 would probably recommend a hospital visit 🤦). No Oldboy—but we've got South Korea! We have Speed, so does that end the debate? Or is everything included and nothing is actually good? (hiddenhound3, you broke my heart—what about Michael Mann's The Insider??? Good grief, where in the 21st century have you seen something like this, such a massive breakdown of how and why America sold its soul?).

Personally, looking at that famous Quentin Tarantino list—at least from my uneducated perspective—I don't think Speed is a true interloper. Brothers and sisters, let's find the real intruder! Singular, plural, whatever. Squawk, scream, call 911—which title on Quentin's list hits your stomach, your liver, or your nerves the hardest???

p.s. as for me, the sequel—who in their right mind even watched that?

Exactly. Se7en is an absolute masterpiece—flawless—whereas Fight Club is just a visually flashy, narratively clunky attempt at adapting Palahniuk’s work. Personally? I'd argue The Game carries way more weight than Fight Club.

EDIT: Also, "Bigger, Longer & Uncut" is a much more powerful, impactful film than "Team America."☕

northerncrane4 said:Exactly. Se7en is an absolute masterpiece—flawless—whereas Fight Club is just a visually flashy, narratively clunky attempt at adapting Palahniuk’s work. Personally? I'd argue The Game carries way more weight than Fight Club.

EDIT: Also, "Bigger, Longer & Uncut" is a much more powerful, impactful film than "Team America."☕

Both of them look awesome to me! 🤷 I actually lean toward Team America a bit more, mostly just for that Pearl Harbor song and that one wild sex scene. I know "significance" is totally subjective, but what makes you say BLU holds more weight? (Not being sarcastic or anything, I’m genuinely curious!) Personally, I’d argue Team America is the bigger deal because it brought puppetry to the big screen in such a groundbreaking way. BLU is definitely great, but it feels like an extension of South Park with a slightly more subtle political edge, whereas Team America is just unapologetically blunt. Not sure if that changes how much impact it actually has, though.

Emily Thomas3 said:Both of them look awesome to me! 🤷 I actually lean toward Team America a bit more, mostly just for that Pearl Harbor song and that one wild sex scene. I know "significance" is totally subjective, but what makes you say BLU holds more weight? (Not being sarcastic or anything, I’m genuinely curious!) Personally, I’d argue Team America is the bigger deal because it brought puppetry to the big screen in such a groundbreaking way. BLU is definitely great, but it feels like an extension of South Park with a slightly more subtle political edge, whereas Team America is just unapologetically blunt. Not sure if that changes how much impact it actually has, though.

Maybe it’s just me—but pulling off the jump from a 22-minute TV format to a 90-minute feature film this smoothly, without it feeling like a "stretched episode," is a massive achievement. I'm not certain if anyone else has pulled that off before or since. Plus, BLU is arguably much more subversive than that polished, hyper-explicit Team America.

But clearly, Tarantino's brand of explicitness works. To hell with Jan de Bont.

Peter Reed70 said:Just finished watching Audition.
Man, that beginning was such a drag—seriously, I almost fell asleep! Just when things finally start getting weird and interesting, the movie wraps up. Honestly? Kind of a letdown.

I have to agree, unfortunately... I actually gave it another watch just yesterday...

northerncrane4 said:Exactly. Se7en is an absolute masterpiece—flawless—whereas Fight Club is just a visually flashy, narratively clunky attempt at adapting Palahniuk’s work. Personally? I'd argue The Game carries way more weight than Fight Club.

EDIT: Also, "Bigger, Longer & Uncut" is a much more powerful, impactful film than "Team America."☕

You. You. You're very good... It's hard to argue with you there (regarding The Game)...

So, here's my heavy-hearted list...

1. Battle Royale 🙄 Watching it again tomorrow...
2. Anything Else 🙂 🙂
3. Audition 🙂 Please, Audition is nothing compared to Oldboy!
4. The Blade ☕ That's where Oldboy could have easily fit in.
5. Boogie Nights - I guess you could say that.
6. Dazed & Confused - That explanation sold me on it, it all makes sense...
7. Dogville - meh
8. Fight Club 🤷 Still loses to Se7en, obviously.
9. Friday - give me a break
10. The Host - meh
11. The Insider - I absolutely love this one.🙂
12. Joint Security Area - I really need to rewatch this too...
13. Lost In Translation - meh
14. The Matrix - meh
15. Memories of Murder - meh
16. Police Story 3 - come on, really?
17. Shaun of the Dead - meh
18. Speed - meh
19. Team America 😕 No, I'm not being deceptive—TA is great, but... "Bigger, Longer and Uncut" feels like a more logical choice for QT. By the way, I prefer BLU too.
20. Unbreakable - meh (mostly because hardly anyone seems to get it)

northerncrane4 said:Maybe it’s just me—but pulling off the jump from a 22-minute TV format to a 90-minute feature film this smoothly, without it feeling like a "stretched episode," is a massive achievement. I'm not certain if anyone else has pulled that off before or since. Plus, BLU is arguably much more subversive than that polished, hyper-explicit Team America.

But clearly, Tarantino's brand of explicitness works. To hell with Jan de Bont.

Fair point, but I still find myself leaning toward Team America just a tiny bit more😍 even though they're both absolute gems.

I’m not particularly surprised by this list; it makes perfect sense given how much Quentin Tarantino was influenced by grindhouse cinema and East Asian cult classics growing up. You’ll find a mix of hits and misses here, but there are several undeniable modern masterpieces included—films like *Boogie Nights*, *Fight Club* (though I have a slight soft spot for *Se7en*), *Lost in Translation*, *Unbreakable*, and *The Insider*. In my opinion, *The Insider* is actually the standout achievement on this entire list, though I can't help but feel *Heat* really deserved a spot here too.

As for *The Matrix* and *Speed*, those are two stellar examples of genre filmmaking. Even Tarantino's nods to his Far East inspirations, such as *Kill Bill* or *The Host*, are certainly worth watching, though personally, I think a film by Takeshi Kitano would have been a more fitting addition.

Emily Thomas3 said:But why even take it personally? Is it because of snobbery? Or some high-brow view on art? Maybe it's because movies shouldn't just be made for those little boys living inside men even when they hit their 20s? You have no idea how many memories can be triggered by that goofy scene where Keanu Reeves is on a skateboard trying to defuse a bomb. Forget Proust and his madeleines! Tarantino has dedicated a huge chunk of his career to chasing lost time, and he does it with a genuine love for his characters that you rarely see from any other director.

I don't mind if you aren't into Tarantino's "pre-teen" action flicks, but don't dismiss them so easily. They actually mean something to people. For some, it's just ninety minutes of mindless fun, but for others, it's a massive connection to their childhood.

It’s been a while since I’ve come across such a beautifully written and concise post. 🙂 👍

You’ve gotta check out *Four Rooms* if you haven't lately. That fourth segment, "The Man from Hollywood," is absolutely killer. There's this one monologue where he starts dropping all these references to other movies—it’s just phenomenal. 😁