Why does Quentin Tarantino deny that he has never seen City on Fire? It is very obvious after watching this film that Reservoir Dogs was a rip of City on Fire. It is like Mark McGuire denying that he used steroids. The more he denies it the stupider he looks.
share[deleted]
Actually he calls it one of his all time favorite movies and has a poster of it. Whe he does deny is how much Reservoir Dogs ripped it off.
share[deleted]
Inspiration my ass, Reservoir Dogs is a complete rip off of this film, the story is indentical, the scenes are identical, the characters are identical. It's not called inspiration, it's called stealing! I can't believe Tarantino got away with this, I guess not many people have seen City on Fire when Reservoir Dogs was originally released.
I don't understand how people can view Tarantino as original or groundbreaking when he is just stealing from other people's films and submitting it as his own. The guy should have no place among other writers and directors, he is a fraud.
i don't agree at all. as far as i can tell after multiple viewings only the idea of a cop infiltrating a gang and then it all going wrong is the only similarity. i suppose you could argue for characters being identical if by identical you mean carbon based life form.
as for what is and is not appropriation, all artists are influenced by other artists. the degree of course varies as does peoples patience for it.
There is a little discussed film called 'the true story of jesse james' that charts the events leading upto and consequences of jesse james' last bank robbery. Apart from showing the robbery (when resevoir dogs did not) the chronological mixing of events (for want of a better expression) in the jesse james movie is remarkably similar to that of resevoir dogs.
This leads me to believe that to create resevoir dogs Tarantino borrowed/stole/whatever the story from city on fire, inserted it into the framework of the jesse james movie and finally added some pop culture references. This of course does not diminish the style with which he carried it off, kinda like a good cover version.
If you watch the jesse james movie, which is a decent movie in it's own right, I think you will see what I mean.
g
Quentin Tarantino is THE finest director and writer working today. The basic idea of RD and City on Fire are the same but the latter concentrates MORE on the infiltration, RD focuses more on the aftermath of the actual robbery. They are two DIFFERENT films. The dailogue and character are not the same. The direction is not the same. Where in City on Fire is there 6 guys with names relating to colours, robbing a bank in LA? Judge them as two SEPERATE films.
share[deleted]
Well he got the idea of using colours for names from the noir film The Big Sleep
Only Ben Affleck can judge me
[deleted]
If it was truly 'stealing' as so many of you are quick to point out, then why have the makers of the film not done anything about it?
Kurosawa wasted no time in going after Leone, the makers of Clonus wasted no time in going after the makers of The Island...
Surely, something would've been done about it by now.
i sleep nowshare
Actually, the reason why most people don't sue is because there actually is a Hollywood blacklist, whether anyone wants to admit to it or not. If you ask people, they will deny it outright, but it is there and it is lethal. Several people I know have had their television shows blatalntly stolen out from under them and were even advised by their lawyers not to press charges.
One lawyer asked, "Do you want to continue to work in this town?"
When my friend answered, "Yes," the lawyer replied, "Then do yourself a favor and don't sue. Just keep smiling like nothing's wrong and putting your stuff out there and eventually something will sell. It's all you can do."
Ringo Lam was angry about "Reservoir Dogs," btw. I remember reading about it several years ago in an interview. His POV was, so many HK films are direct ripoffs of American films that who knows where it all begins and ends?
As far as Sergio Leone lifting "A Fistful of Dollars" from Kuroasawa's "Yojimbo," several of Kurosawa's friends urged him to sue. His response was (paraphrased): "I stole the idea from Dashiell Hammett's 'Red Harvest,' so I can't really complain."
Recently, an Indian filmmaker remade "Oldboy" without the original filmmaker's permission and they're going to court soon. We'll see how it goes.
I know this post is old, but the Clonus Horror dispute was settled this year I think.
Thats, what, 20 some odd years in the making?
As to why the filmmakers didn't go after him, it might be cultural, it might have been logistical. Thing of the money they would have had to spend to take the makers of Resevoir Dogs to court. Also, since it was a cult film itself they might not have seen it until later. By that time, they might figure that karma will work things out. As we are discussing here, Tarantino has clearly taken elements from several films to make a very unoriginal film that literally just steals from other films.
The Rotten Tomatoes Show just did an Homage or Stealing segment about the two movies. Also what is said about Taking of Pelham and the Jesse James movie is telling. So what if Tarantino has his characters talk about a Madonna song, does that make him the next Stanley Kubrick or Steven Speilberg or Francis Ford Coppolla? Unfair comparisons? Those guys have real talent. At least Kubrick was open about the fact that he was creating movies adapted from novels in the case of "A Clockwork Orange."
When Tarantino creates original films, he shows he is rather unoriginal. His film for Grindhouse sucked. Pulp FIction becomes more tedious and stupid with every viewing. Take Inglourious Bastards that is a hack piece of film compared to the original italian masterpiece. The action scenes suck. The characterization is minimal at best. Its nothing to sneeze at.
Think of the great directors of Chinese cinema in the 80s and 90s, Tsui Hark, John Woo, Yuen Woo Ping. Tarantino doesn't hold a candle up to them. Or the American and British action directors like James Cameron or Ridley Scott.
Yes, call him an enthusiast and even has enough charisma or whatever to get some films made. The fact that he did literally steal from City on Fire says alt about his ethics or lack thereof as an artist. The man isn't going to fess up. He's just going to milk his fame and continue to make crap hyped-up movies because that's the limit to his talents.
[deleted]
Ummmm...Tarantino has always acknowledged that Dogs is a quasi-remake of City on Fire. I am a huge fan of Lam and of his work, and as much as I like City on Fire, Reservoir Dogs is a better film. Better written, better shot and less cluttered, as well as better dialogue.
Tarantino has ALWAYS worn his influences and homages on his sleeve.
@FSK
Sorry, I totally disagree--as good as Tarantino's film is, it just seemed kind of like an exercise in showing off/trying to be the new hip thing or whatever. CITY OF FIRE was better basically because you could connect with the characters---they were more real--after all,it's a drama,AND a good one. I've seen both films, and basically all Tarantino did was take the last ten minutes and build the drama around that. CITY ON FIRE is tougher,grittier, and way more realistic----plus the criminals are just flat-out vicious and terrifying,especially when someone gets in the way of something they want. Plus I used to watch practically anything Chow Yun-Fat and Danny Lee would appear in--they were some of my favorite HK movie stars couple of years back.
>I don't understand how people can view Tarantino as original or groundbreaking >when he is just stealing from other people's films and submitting it as his own. >The guy should have no place among other writers and directors, he is a fraud.
B i tch, be cool!
Damn near every movie today has some elements of movies made before it. Just about any and every story worth filming has been filmed. So quit bitching about Tarantino; he makes good films.
All he did was take the ingredients of other movies and make a recipe for his own movie.
goddamn! that is the best! and i mean the best! analysis ive ever heard of tarantino! he is a fraud and should sentance in jain instead of bathing in money
i qoute:
"Inspiration my ass, Reservoir Dogs is a complete rip off of this film, the story is indentical, the scenes are identical, the characters are identical. It's not called inspiration, it's called stealing! I can't believe Tarantino got away with this, I guess not many people have seen City on Fire when Reservoir Dogs was originally released.
I don't understand how people can view Tarantino as original or groundbreaking when he is just stealing from other people's films and submitting it as his own. The guy should have no place among other writers and directors, he is a fraud."
"Inspiration my ass, Reservoir Dogs is a complete rip off of this film, the story is indentical, the scenes are identical, the characters are identical. It's not called inspiration, it's called stealing! I can't believe Tarantino got away with this, I guess not many people have seen City on Fire when Reservoir Dogs was originally released.
I don't understand how people can view Tarantino as original or groundbreaking when he is just stealing from other people's films and submitting it as his own. The guy should have no place among other writers and directors, he is a fraud."
so true!
Pablo Picasso said "Bad artists copy, great artists steal."
share[deleted]
Stupider IS a word.
share1) He has said it is an inspiration for it many times.
2) It is very fra from a rip off of City on Fire. It has a similar scene and the plot has minor similarities. They are two equally good films and are completely different.
There are too many similarities in the last half of the film. Here are some I caught:
-Their meeting place is a warehouse, which sounds generic but Chow ends up on the floor and being accused of being an undercover cop, just like in Resevoir Dogs.
-The Undercover Cop gets shot in the gut and starts bleeding.
-He becomes close friends with one of the criminals and convinces him that he's not a cop.
-There is a Mexican stand-off with a bunch of people pointing guns at a different person.
-Chow confesses he's a cop, the reactions are almost identical in Resevoir Dogs as well as the timing and circumstances.
-It's a film about robbers being infiltrated by an undercover cop (weren't both about jewels?).
Tarantino did do some original things and instead of focusing on action he focused on the drama, so it's not like it's the same movie, but the relationship between the undercover cop and the crook who became his friend is too similar in both movies and the specifics of the plot were lifted from City on Fire. You can't copyright an idea, but Tarantino used the same conceptualization of basic plot and passed it off as his own. City On Fire is a relatively unknown film and if people don't get the reference, you're not really paying homage. I have the same problem with Kill Bill, too much is taken and not enough was created for the film. Tarantino seems to just pull together a bunch of influences and reorganize it. Is that making a film? I think he makes good movies, but it's like P Diddy sampling "Every Breath You Take". Tarantino used City On Fire to make something else, but what he made didn't really advance the concept.
-The Undercover Cop gets shot in the gut and starts bleeding.
get the Hell out of here, he started to BLEED...thats definantly a rip off
"I met Death today. We are playing chess. "
Youre so right man... Seen both movies and you are 100& correct.. In my opinion I think RD is a bit better... I voted RD 9 and COF 7.
share>Tarantino used City On Fire to make something else, but what he made didn't >really advance the concept.
Yet Tarantino is sitting on several million in the bank while you are sitting on your ass behind a computer bitching about him on a message board.
Get over it.
You can't just REMAKE a movie. You need to PAY for the remake. Have the people who made this movie recieved FINANCIAL COMPENSATION from Tarantino?
shareNo he did not pay anyone because it is not a remake at all. watch the movie it is not a remake!! There are a few similarities, thats all. City on fire is not original either. There are many similar movies to it.
If it was a rip-off Ringo Lam or the studio who financed the film would of sued the crap out of Tarantino.
The real hack is Ringo Lam. Directed himself right out of hollywood. Got the "you'll never work in this town agian" speech and everything.
I did notice there where alot of people in city on fire, what a rip off of Deep Impact.
Too crazy for boystown; too much of a boy for crazytown.
[deleted]
Lots of movies had people with black suits in them. Many before any of these directors were born.
Too crazy for boystown; too much of a boy for crazytown.
[deleted]
Really I thought complaining about black suits was idiotic. How can someone argue that such a common thing was created by a single director? I can't think of a single thing in a john woo movie that he could claim as his own. Well maybe the baby catching rescue scene in hard boiled. That scene almost ruined an otherwise fine action movie.
Agian if tarentino plagerized the movie there would of been a lawsuit and a very pissed off ex-director (Lam).
I've actually watched both movies and there are scenes that are very similar and the generic robbery theme which has been used in countless movies is there but the movies are about very diferent things. Its been a while since I saw either movie but if I remember correctly COF is about the strain put on a detectives life as he tries to deal with his crappy job and RD is more about the relationship between the criminal and the robbery itself.
Too crazy for boystown; too much of a boy for crazytown.
[deleted]
Finally, someone gets it right....
Too crazy for boystown; too much of a boy for crazytown.
As far as I can remember, Tarantino wasn't complaining about the Matrix ripping him off at all. An interviewer asked him about the similarity of the action scenes with suited henchmen in Kill Bill and Matrix Reloaded and Tarantino said that he hadn't noticed right up until the premiere and that he was thinking about Resevoir Dogs when he wrote them wearing suits.
share[deleted]
*beep* there have been heaps of HK flicks were they wear suits. They were ripping off each other? I don't see how you can rip off such a common costume choice. Get a clue.
shareWhat's this stuff about suits? Far as I could see, only two of the gangsters wore black suits, white shirt and a tie during the robbery.
"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan
I think Hollywood is to blame for directing Ringo Lam right out hollywood. In china he has much more control over his films. In Hollywood next to nil. You ever here John Woo talk about his experiences when he first got into Hollywood of how producers and stars are telling him what to do, like Van Damme was telling him what angles to shoot him from etc. He never experienced anything like that. Have you ever heard why Jackie Chan left Hollywood the first time, people had a chain on what he could or couldn't do. You can def see a difference between their Hong Kong films and the Hollywood ones.
shareYou may think that hollywood is to blame but I know ringo screwed himself. Movies at this level are a business and if you purposely don't follow the directions of the producers and cost them millions of dollars and a theatrical release no one will ever hire you again. Would you?
What a crazy nation of socialist republics that are together in a federation, of craziness
Oh yea, and how bout the scene where they talk about not tipping. Total ripoff...:]
I find your lack of faith disturbing.
Tarantino Gives credit to Chow yun Fat as a source of inspiration before the reservoir dogs screenplay.. Go here http://www.godamongdirectors.com/scripts/reservoir.shtml to see for yourself
Hamburgers! The Cornerstone Of Every Nutrious Breakfast! -Pulp Fiction
There are only so many stories in the world. I give Tarantino props for telling the story in a much better way.
I can't remember the quote, but Tarantino says it on one of the Pulp Fiction disks. It isn't exactly about this, but he talks about why he jumbled up the Pulp Fiction stories.
"I can't think of a single thing in a john woo movie that he could claim as his own."
That's a ludicrous statement. While John Woo isn't the most trailblazing director
ever, none of his proper homages come near to Tarantino's plagiarism. The thing
about Woo is that he can actually take a plot (Melville's "Le Samourai"), call
it a remake and give proper credit while still reinterpreting it drastically, whereas
Tarantino likes to just blatantly rip things off. It's commendable that Tarantino admits
he steals, but that doesn't make him talented.
Woo also reinvented Hong Kong cinema almost single-handedly, and makes
highly personal films with innovative action choreography. He invented a formula
by himself ("A Better Tomorrow") and is actually a pretty original filmmaker.
I do not think, therefore I am a mustache.
I cant see how you can say that about QT, he has to be one of the greatest directors of the last god knows how many years. RD is an amzing film and City on fire is ok, i do see the INSPIRATIONS and he has even said its one of his favourite films of all time, in "The Video Archives" he has a signed video copy of the film. How can someone who has made something like PULP FICTION and JACKIE BROWN be apparenty not very good. We have enough of every other type of director. Without him thousands of people would not have got into films, i know i wouldnt have. He is ticking all the box's that need ticking. If you think he is a rip off dont go and see inglorious bastards or grind house, i bet you cant do it!
shareIn the credits of resvoir dogs you will find that the movie is dedicated to chow yun-fat. Alot of hollywood films are remakes or are inspired by better films else where in the world, i would complain but hollywood's best scripts are usually "stolen".
i'm still trying to track down a copy of city on fire, it is not availible through normal channels in AUS, if anyone kmows where i can purcahse a copy PM me
other than ebay, or some independent movie store like in my hometown of winnipeg "movie Village", theres no where else dude. i found a copy of hardboiled down in the states before but i missed the oppurtunity of purchasing it, and its been bugging me ever since.
"this sh!t is between me, you, and mister-soon-to-be-living-the-rest-of-his-short-ass-life-in-agonizing-pain rapist here, it ain't nobody else's business."