Atticus Rollins
1/16/2012
The Dogs and Jules Winnfield
Aspects of Morality and God
In Tarantino Films
Reservoir Dogs and Morality
It’s easy to say that Quentin Tarantino’s first feature film, Reservoir Dogs, portrays four men without any moral code in sight. I’m not sure how Tarantino wanted to present these men in the first place. Some say that he created a film about men who had no moral values, who killed and felt nothing. Others, like one of the author, of the book, Quentin Tarantino and Philosophy, James H. Spence, beg to differ. He says that morality is spread throughout the film, that every scene supports the fact that each guy in the movie has a sense of morality.
I was willing enough to put that theory to the test by re-watching the movie and scanning it for morals. What I found was, to me, huge. Never had I thought that any of these cold-blooded criminals could have and live by their own moral code. The film is, in fact, filled with a staggering amount of morality. I would recall every scene, but that would take too long.
I am by no means justifying the actions of these men. I am simply investigating their moral fibers. Also, I’ll start by saying that though they do live by moral codes, these codes are subject to interpretation, as I don’t agree with them, and you, reader, may not agree as well (though they are completely valid). I’ll start off slow. In the introduction scene, the Dogs are finishing breakfast at a diner. Joe, the leader, says that he’ll pay the bill, as long as everyone else pays the tip. Everyone coughs up a dollar. That is, everyone but Steve Buscemi’s character, Mr. Pink. When asked why he doesn’t give up a single dollar, he replies by saying that he shouldn’t need to tip because society says he should. Perfectly valid, but what about the waitress? She practically lives off tips. Well, Mr. Pink says that she isn’t starving, that she could quit any time she wanted to, and find another job. He would tip, though, assuming she really deserved it. Otherwise, she’s just doing her job, no? If she did a truly outstanding job, he would tip her, and according to him, she didn’t. This is a perfectly valid moral choice, though I don’t agree with it, being a generous tipper myself.
Now it begins to get a bit bloody. Mr. White and Mr. Orange are in a warehouse, the rendevous point for the Dogs after a jewelry store heist gone completely awry. Mr. Pink and Mr. Blonde both eventually make it back to the warehouse as well, and the morals come out. Mr. Blonde killed many people in the jewelry store. He said that it was their fault. Now right there is a hint of morality. He had the need to defend his position. He said that if anyone pulled the alarm, he would kill them. Someone hit the alarm, and he started killing. Now the fact that he placed the blame on the victims, according to Spence, proves Mr. Blonde’s morality. He blamed them in order to distance himself from the act of wrongdoing, which was killing them, in order to avoid thinking of himself in a bad light. Also, Mr. Blonde wanting to distance himself from the killings proves his knowledge of committing a wrongful act. This is clearly a sign of morality.
Throughout the film, professionalism comes up quite a bit. Mr. Pink uses the word to try to quell heated words between Mr. White and Mr. Blonde. Mr. White uses the word against Mr. Blonde, when the subject of the killing spree comes up. Professionalism, to the Dogs, was getting the diamonds from the jewelry store without killing anybody. They all knew that killing someone was wrong, unless it was a cop (to protect their views of themselves, they dehumanized police, whose sole purpose was to stop the Dogs from being successful in their heist). Mr. Pink said that he didn’t want to have to kill anybody, but if someone was between him and the door, he’s gonna get to that door one way or another. Even Mr. Orange, who was an undercover cop the whole time, killed a woman who shot him first. He was clearly distressed about the woman’s death, but it was either him or her. The infamous Mr. Blonde even acknowledges his wrongdoings indirectly.
Now remember, I am not trying to defend the Dogs’ actions. I am only providing insight to their moral codes. I feel it is impossible for a human being to be immoral. Morals may be something we humans use to gain the upper hand, or acquire power, but that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. Morals have to do with what we try to avoid. Murder is morally wrong because we don’t want to be murdered. Same for robbery, lying, and cheating. If Reservoir Dogs really portrayed immoral criminals, as the public likes to think, it would have to either be silent, or nonexistent, because there is a trace of morality in everyone.
Pulp Fiction: Ezekiel 25:17
In Quentin Tarantino’s most popular film, Pulp Fiction, one of the main characters, Jules Winnfield (Samuel L. Jackson) uses a falsified quote from the Bible, Ezekiel 25:17;
“The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you.”
Now, as you, reader, may see, Jules refers to himself as God before killing someone who attempted, and clearly failed, to rip off his boss, Marcellus Wallace. Jules even says the quote again, though a little differently after experiencing a “miracle” (which will be explained further in a few lines) to a restaurant thief, who he call Ringo. The audience expects Jules to kill Ringo, but this aformentioned “miracle” changed him for the better.
The miracle: Jules and Vincent Vega (John Travolta) gun down the supposed leader of the group of guys who tried to rip of Marcellus. The two hitmen have no idea that there is another guy in the bathroom of the apartment that this scene takes place. They also have no idea that he is holding a “hand cannon,” basically just a huge revolver. The man comes out of the bathroom and fires all six shots at Jules and Vincent. The audience watching the movie see only the last man holding the smoking gun, with no idea of whether Jules and Vincent survived or not. The camera then shows them standing there, a bit confused. They look over themselves for bullet wounds, then after they find none, they scan the other. They find nothing, and shoot the unlucky assailant.
Jules inspects the wall behind them, which has six bullet holes in it. The man missed all six shots. To Jules, the bullets passed through them, as an act of “divine intervention,” a miracle. Vincent throws his claim aside, saying that they just got lucky. Because of this miracle, Jules decides to change his ways, and walk the earth for God.
Okay, now the change Jules goes under seem a bit drastic, but the diner scene actually proves his change for the better. He used to say the quote before killing people, as he made explicit early on in the film. When Ringo tries to take Jules’s wallet and briefcase, which he retrieved for Marcellus from the group of men, Jules isn’t having any of it. The scene ends up like this: Jules got the upper hand against Ringo, and is now pointing a gun at him. He says the quote, but this time, he doesn’t kill Ringo. He instead analyzes the quote, and in his change, starts to question his motives. He used to refer to himself as the Lord.
In the diner, he comes up with a couple of different conjectures as to what his role is from his quote. One version is: Ringo is the evil man, Jules is the righteous man, and his gun is the shepherd protecting him in the valley of darkness. Then he says that maybe Ringo is the righteous man, and Jules is the shepherd, and the world is evil and selfish. This is what he wants. But, he looks at the situation and realizes that it isn’t true; “The truth is you’re the weak. And I’m the tyranny of evil men. But I’m tryin, Ringo. I’m tryin real hard to be the shepherd.”
Now, the final realization Jules makes is a perfect fit. He is the tyranny of evil men. The evil men in the quote are a reference to his boss, Marcellus Wallace, who goes through his own terrible, terrible change. He is hitman for a mob boss. What could possibly be a better job for the tyranny of evil men? Ringo is the weak. This is easy to grasp because Ringo is holding up a diner, and one of the people eating there managed to stop him. Now, he leaves out who the righteous is. This is pretty important because in his final realization, he makes himself a tool of destruction trying to become a tool to guide the righteous, or the shepherd. Because he is trying real hard to be the shepherd, the righteous has no option but to exist, or someone is trying to be the righteous. Now I’m going to zoom out a bit. Keep this information in your head, reader, as you will need it for later examination.
Butch (Bruce Willis) is a prize fighter who Marcellus paid a large sum of money to lose a boxing match. He wins, actually, he kills the other guy. Marcellus, being the evil men from the quote, sends his tyranny, Vince, to kill Butch. Butch kills Vince, and drives to get his girlfriend and leave town. On his way to the hotel that his girlfriend is staying, he sees Marcellus, and figures he could end his problems by killing him. So Butch hits Marcellus with his car, which gets totalled in the process. Butch is also injured, and chases Marcellus into a pawn shop. He is about to kill Marcellus when the clerk points a shotgun at him. The clerk calls Zed, and the two enemies are tied up in the basement.
Zed gets there, pretending to be a cop. He and the clerk turn out to be a couple of perverts who plan on doing horrible things to the two unfortunate men. They choose Marcellus to go first, and bring him into the other room of the basement and close the door. Butch, being a prize fighter, breaks the chair he was strapped to and starts to leave, but has a change of heart. The man who wants Butch dead is in the other room. If Butch just left, he would have no problems for the rest of his life. But he decides to help Marcellus. He goes upstairs and grabs a sword. He kills the clerk in the basement, and knocks Zed off of Marcellus, who decides to let Butch live for saving his life.
Now here’s my analysis. Butch and Marcellus are the righteous in the valley of darkness, the basement. Zed and the Clerk are the wicked and evil men. Butch has the chance to leave, but instead becomes the Shepherd, and shepherds Marcellus, the weak, through the valley. He struck down upon the evil with great vengeance and furious anger, as can be established based on the furious look on his face as he cuts down the Clerk.
It’s only one of many analyses that can be made about this film based off of that one quote, and I would include others if I could. But this is as much as I feel I need to say. Now, reader, use what I have told you and interpret Pulp Fiction in your own way.
Works Cited
Greene, Richard, and K. Silem. Mohammad. Quentin Tarantino and Philosophy: How to Philosophize with a Pair of Pliers and a Blowtorch. Chicago: Open Court, 2007. Print.
Pulp Fiction. Dir. Quentin Tarantino. By Quentin Tarantino. Prod. Lawrence Bender. Perf. Samuel L. Jackson and Uma Thurman. Miramax, 1994.
Reservoir Dogs. Dir. Quentin Tarantino. By Quentin Tarantino. Perf. Quentin Tarantino, Harvey Keitel, Michael Madsen, and Christopher Penn. Miramax Films, 1992.
