I call plagarism pure and simple.

This doesn't look good in light of the recent $100m copyright claim over Django Unchained.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/dec/31/quentin-tarantino-copyright-claim-django-unchained-screenplay

Stealing has been an issue that's plagued QT his entire career. Right out of the gate Reservoir Dogs was, in places, a shot-for-shot carbon copy of City on Fire with major plot points and dramatic developments being directly lifted from it.

yup

http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2015/12/tarantino-still-busted-by-leydon-over-numerous-similarities-between-hateful-eight-and-55-year-old-rebel-episode/#disqus_thread



~I see a little silhouette of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you do the Fandango.

And? Lol one of the best westerns ever made is a rip off of a Japanese Samurai film.

People blast Carlos Mencia for stealing jokes yet give Tarantino a pass and claim that he is simply "inspired" by old TV or is "paying homage". It's all very strange how people let things slide when they are fans of the person doing the stea....homage.

"No man yet found drinks his tea blacker"

for me it doesn't matter where the movie got it's ideas from, as long as i enjoy it

the plagiarism thing i don't care about

Though the line between homage, remixing and plagiarism can admittedly be complex, its a fair call you make here even if others might have a more lenient view of where to draw the line.

While every creative work is influenced by a previous work on some level of abstraction, the problem with many of today's current crop of filmmakers (with Tarantino and P.T. Anderson in particular) is that their primary influence comes from films and TV from the past, whereas the pioneering greats of cinema had their creative influences from works outside of film and TV itself. So this problem was inevitable.

True homage presupposes that an audience will already be familiar with the underlying work that it is trying to comment on or 'remix'. DePalma always assumed that his audience was familiar with Hitchcock, so he never fell into this trap, despite the obvious influence there.

But that is not the case with many of today's filmmakers with regards to their respective influences. Its as though they are counting on the ignorance of their audiences, hence people (especially younger generations who aren't as familiar with past works) often mistake their remixes for originality and heap unjustified praise upon the appropriators.

Thus you have people praising Dazed and Confused without knowing about The Pom Pom Girls.

Thus you have people praising Magnolia without knowing about Nashville or Short Cuts.

Thus you have people praising The Hateful Eight...

Had The Rebel remained prominent in the public consciousness throughout the decades, some might look on this debate a bit differently and argue that it is more akin to a DePalma-style remix, but that is obviously not the case in this instance.

"Good artists copy; great artists steal." Pablo Picasso

I dont know, there are some pretty strong accusations made in this thread, so I just watched that entire episode, and I dont see what all the fuss is about. Clearly inspiration was drawn from Old Westerns like this, and he admitted as such. But people are getting a bit carried away with the "plagiarism" claims.

Similarities:

1) Female fugitive brought into an Inn by a Marshall on the way to turning her in.

2) Marshall is poisoned.

3) One person at the Inn is working with her.

Yes, those represent a very familiar setting and theme for the story. But that isnt even an outline of Hateful 8, its like the opening paragraph of a 500 page novel QT ends up writing.

Differences:

1) Only 1 guy is working with the fugitive. The other people in the story arent conspirators like in the movie.

2) The fugitive woman is innocent in the TV show and actually covering for the guy working with her in the Inn. That guy also wants to kill the woman, not save her.

3) The guy "filling in" for the Inn Keeper is telling the truth. He isnt a bad guy.

4) There's no Samuel L Jackson character.

5) No Bruce Dern character.

6) No hangman Tim Roth character.

7) Nobody puts all the pieces together to figure things out. The Rebel guy just starts accusing people and then gets coffee thrown in his face.

I mean really, this TV show is nothing like the Hateful 8 outside of the setting, the Marshall, the Female fugitive, and the poison. Literally everything else is different.

This is about as much a rip off as Facebook was for whatever lame ass website those Winklevoss twins were trying to get Zuckerburg to build. Zuckerburg clearly got his idea out of what they were doing, the seed was planted, but he made it his own. QT did the same thing with Hateful 8. He used a familiar setting and theme, and ran with it.

I could point to hundreds of movies that have done the same thing.