MovieChat Forums > Bande à part (1964) Discussion > Tarantino is such a theif

Tarantino is such a theif


enough of this hommage talk, alot of the Movie Brats in the 70's paid hommage to these films by letting it influence their style and form, and also to the same extent their copntent.

But Tarantino, he just rips things off.

Firstly there is no comparison between the dance scenes, they are completely different, according to some IMDB members on here he showed the dance scene to Thurman and Travolta and told them to improvise on their moves, if you watch closely (or not even closely) the dancing in Bande a part is the same moves over and over, so how could you improvise?

Second, the minute silence, Taratino used it, yet in Bande a part, there they are having a minute silence in the Cafe.

Anything else I may have missed?

Long Live Roman
Member of 'The Fearless Roman Lovers'

reply

you say he rips things off yet your examples show none of this. He wanted a dance scene because he liked the one in bande a part. You even point out however, the dances have nothing in common and even the content surrounding the lead up to the dance are completely different. Sounds far from a rip off.

There is no minute of silence in tarantino's film. Uma mentions a comfortable silence. again there is nothing linking the two. Content wise, there is no similiarity. Also, a comfortable silence and a minute of silence are as related as a duck and penguin. You wouldn't confuse a duck with a penguin would you

You don't have to like Tarantino. Its okay. But why do people make fools of themselves when attempting to convince others of their own opinion? Its not even a very original thought, everyone knows Tarantino references (and borrows from) other films. You would think they could come up with a compelling arguement about it now.

The Funniest part is that Tarantino's "theft" from other films is something he learned from watching Godard movies. it's easy to see what things Godard "homages" in his films from American B-movies.

oh yeah, and you left out that Uma's brunette wig in Pulp Fiction was used to make her look like Anna Karina.

reply

it's a good point though. QT's homages are getting too much.
Wouldn't mind seeing something that isn't a homage some time soon but with Grindhouse coming out, may be another few years until that happens.

reply

i wouldnt say he stole from bade a part (lets not mention the production company lol) but yeah he refferences/homages it..so? it's a great movie. one of the best of all time. its a compliment. i dont remember a minute silence in a QT movie.

kill bill...he stole there. i mean uma's suit and trainers were straight up bruce lee..he could of made that different i mean a martial arts pic is homeage ok..but come on...he does need to tone down the homeages and become original before ppl will start deeming him a con artist and 'thief.'

funny you should say that.
what's funny?
no. funny you should say that. - 25th hour.

reply

Anyway, I think Tarantino is overrated. It's cool to "quote" and such, and Tarantino's films I would say are: Big homage's to his favourite films-genres with some naturalistic/funny dialgog. But nothing else. I think it runs around people who know some world cinema history, that they recognize tarantino as even boring. Yep. I mean, it is not surprising that someone who's film history starts let's say, as late as the 80's, and with hollywood films, goes head over heels with pulp fiction. I'm not saying it's a bad film, hey, it's funny and i like it, but it's just okay and cool. A little film COMPLETELY overrated. The thing is, if you know your history, Tarantino is like the boy in the class with good memory but no imagination. Or little of it.

Now it could be Tarantino's own great faculty to lavish expensive production values to films that never originally did. He's a genre vomiter. He eats the old films (blaxploitation, old kung fu films, hong kong action movies), eats some money the Weinstein's gave him, then regurgitates it all and disorders it a la Kubrick, etc. Show it to film-alzheimer ridden youngsters and there you go - you hit the jackpot.

Tarantino is the master quoter-translator-embellisher.

Maybe he's not even trying to pass as an ateur, but he is certainly taken for one by all those obliged information eaters without film memory. I mean, come on: how difficult is it to watch a film just because it's in black & white and not english?

I wish they would let Tarantino alone and make him do his little nerd films so they would have more integrity. Maybe they would have... or maybe, Tarantino wouldn't be at all withouth this whole system around him... Hmmmm...

Anyway, my favourite Tarantino film is Jackie Brown and i wish I'd seen the long version. I think that's one case of artistic integrity broken by the savage money makers - supported by the idiotic masses that feed them the money in the first place. It takes one hysteric to make a half assed product be better remembered than it's original rich inspiration.

Even though I may say that I myself don't particularly like hong kong action films and kung fu stuff that inspired Kill Bill, I can say it's okay that you can watch it as a summary of those old films. Nonetheless, I didn't like the film so much, and this is not one of those old films perfected - it's one passed through the lens of gringo cinema, digested for it's massive disgusting audience. And they love it! ...I wonder how much they would enjoy old kung fu films if they were in english...

Reservoir Dogs is another case of quote... wait a minute: almost ripoff, of City on Fire by Ringo Lam. Downright to dialogues and camera placement and whole sequences. Yeah, Tarantino doesn't deserve all that money. The world is a strange place indeed.

Let's remember what he did to Roger Avery on the crediting and participation on Pulp Fiction (he's the guy who co-wrote it). I remember certain incident on an awards ceremony... ;)

This guy sometimes looks like an opportunist! Ha ha

Has anyone read his last interview in Cahiers Du Cinema? He does seem to be a bit out of it lately... I think all that fame isn't necesarily good to your head.

Now if Tarantino would really want to make a homage, why doesn't he help Godard go on making films? Maybe he could have a double "Arthouse" film, replacing that studio rubbish churner, time loser hack of robert rodriguez for Godard and letting the master take charge. But Tarantino is on the side of Hollywood, never forget that... it's the side where you go into films to forget your life rather than remember it.

I think all cinema's should have a sign before buying the ticket that says: Are you ready to risk around 2 hours of your day (of your life!) on this film?

Then maybe people would think twice, be more clear on their tastes and do a bit of research before going into a hollywood movie again. Maybe the film world would be better. Oh the beauty! hahaha

Well, all of this may seem a jealous ranting because he's doing the big films and Godard isn't. Well, that's exactly what it is. I wish the world would be more in tune with what I like (and some others do too) and give space for art and reflection that melds with life, like Godard and so many others, rather than let Tarantino choke on cocaine and chicks and make forgettable films like his...

But, it's always been like this and I hope really hard it changes. Or are the masses always the biggest common d(en)ominator?

reply

Though my film library has gaps (Renoir, Cocteau, Eisenstein) I feel I have a pretty good understanding of film history, and I still like Tarantino's films. I don't feel they're derivative enough to stop me from liking them. While "Grindhouse" isn't my favorite Tarantino film, mainly because it feels like a simple, hollow, "tribute film." I feel his other films, such as "Pulp Fiction," are much more than that. I'm not saying he's Godard, but I still think he's a very fun and talented filmmaker. I also like Rodriguez.




Do you know who I am? I am a huge fan of radio control!

reply

I think you are right, and maybe i didn't express myself clearly enough. I think both Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown (at least in potential) are films on themselves - meaning that they're not only well done entertaining derivations, but rather use the quoted matter and riff on it for their own sake in their budding own language. It is in this riffing where we start to see Tarantino himself. Nonetheless, I think Pulp Fiction is great fun but still immature storytelling and Jacki Brown a truncated project. After the great trauma that experience probably was (the madness of being so famous so fast, and the castration of his follow up), we see a Tarantino petering off into endless self referencing when even his self is somebody (or something) else.

All of this, of course, if we try to redeem him ;)

In respect to Rodriguez, it's one of those cases of people that do no harm to me directly, but I still seem to want to wipe him off earth! I mean, what problem do i have with someone making films i am completely unimpressed about, completely bored about and that i personally think are a complete waste of time? I don't know. Maybe it has to do in how little understanding i have in a project like Sin city and people actually liking it. I am at such a loss of understanding that it does make me feel weird. Who's freaking out here?!

I still think that, how I see things, he should be vastly unimportant but is instead somewhat of an influence for some people. Go figure.

reply

I think every filmmaker more or less borrows and takes from another filmmaker. It's just the way it is. The ones who started it all already get the credit. People like Godard, Truffaut, and even Orson Wells always get credit for being the first ones to make films the way they did. So I don't see the big deal. It happens all the time.

One of my favorite films is the Dreamers. One can say that it coppies everything out of the French New Wave films. Sure it does, but it pays tribute to them by recreating certain scenes and moments. It's just the way it is.

Anyway, I think Bande a Part is the coolest movie ever made, and Pulp Fiction is the second coolest movie ever made. So I don't care who copies who as long as the films are good.

reply