Kill Bill Volume 1

[billythrilly7]

Tried to watch it last night.

Was enjoying the first half hour and then the ANIMATION OF LUCY LIU nightmare sequence just killed it for me. It wouldn't end. I wanted to put my head in a vice and squeeze my eyeballs out like in CASINO.

But I decided I should just go to sleep.

I did.

[refriedwhiskey]

It ain't for everybody.

[billythrilly7]

I hear that.

Hey, I tried. No regrets.

[santino2699]

Just get through that scene and you'll be rewarded. (I also wasn't a fan of the switch to anime, but I didn't have quite the same aversion you did.)


Or...try watching Vol. 2. Much more character work. All around, much better than Vol. 1 in my opinion.

S

[billythrilly7]

Just get through that scene and you'll be rewarded. (I also wasn't a fan of the switch to anime, but I didn't have quite the same aversion you did.)

I'll give that a shot.

[BottomlessCup]

I loved the anime sequence. To each his own, I guess.

[MacG]

Both volumes of KILL BILL were highly overrated, IMHO...as is QT.

[dclary]

Cartoon sequence was lame, but I understood why it was there.

KBv2 sucked ass except for about 15 minutes.

[Pipe]

I've watched Vol 1 several times recently 'cause my DVR caught a hold of it. While the anime bothered me the first time I watched it, it doesn't bother me at all now.

But the thing that stands out most to me in Vol 1 now is the music. Now let me be clear, I am totally astounded by the music. Such brave and brilliant choices. I could just sit and listen to the movie.

[whistlelock]

You might like V2 Billy, a lot of folks I've talked liked the second one but not the first. I, however, prefered the first one including the anime sequence.

[whitenavel]

Both volumes = BRILLIANT!!!

Try again Billy.

[Pen Dragon]

A 4 hour self indulgent directors cut packed with superfluous, unneeded information Miramax packaged as "Volume 1 and volume 2" as if Tarantino was some kind of important cinematic auteur whose every frame of film must be seen and experienced and savored for its sheer, world impacting importance, and it wasn't about eaking as much coin as possible out of the fanboys. And you all ate it up lol.

Ah lord

[Landis26]

I know how much QT is inspired by 70's films and Chinese Kung Fung movies for KB 1& 2. But I don't think he reached too far back for the anime scene. It was done more effectively in RUN LOLA RUN.

[BottomlessCup]

as if Tarantino was some kind of important cinematic auteur

Love him or hate him, he is an "important cinematic auteur."

[dpaterso]

The thing that astounds me most is why someone watching a DVD wouldn't flick past a segment they didn't like and watch the rest of the movie. You can do that with DVDs, you know.

You are aware that the most violent contemporary blood'n'guts swordfight homage ever filmed is on the same DVD, aren't you? Followed by a one on one with <bleep> and <bleep>?

I like Kill Bill but the older script version I read online was better than what ended up on film.

PS - the cartoon sequence in Run Lola Run was sh!t on a stick compared to KB's anime. Just my two cents. It was completely gratuitous for a start.

-Derek
Derek's Web Page - stories, screenplays, novels, insanity. (http://hometown.aol.co.uk/DPaterson57/scripts.htm)

[MacG]

Love him or hate him, he is an "important cinematic auteur."

No, he's a cinematic recycler....

[Pen Dragon]

Tarantino tears bits and pieces from hundreds of movies and makes frankenstein's monster out of them. He's hardly an auteur. He's a manic nerd who keeps waving his comic book, Drive-In hand flyer, and serial killer bubble gum card collections in your face

[BottomlessCup]

Exactly. His style is a pop-culture, self-referential decoupage. And ten years ago, it was a new and unique way to make films. I know he's notorious for stealing bits and scenes, but "Pulp Fiction" as a whole was a unique vision. (Notwithstanding the Roger Avery controversy.)

Kill Bill may have scenes that mirror other things (a fact QT has been gleefully forthright about), but as a film, it's a thing all its own.

Homage as a technique doesn't preclude "auteur" status, in my opinion.

I don't understand why he's praised for it in his dialogue and slammed for it in his visuals.

[dclary]

10 minutes in the penalty box for "decoupage"

[MacG]

You don't get to be an auteur simply because you take the best parts of (generally) crappy '70s flicks, filter them through your pop culture-influenced mind, sprinkle a healthy amount of snappy dialogue into it, and slap it on the screen.

[Landis26]

Like him or hate him, overrated or not, over the years I've learned to appreciate what he did. He shook things up. He may have not been the first to play with structure, referance to other films, but he hit at the right time with the right thing.

Kind'a like what the Sex Pistols did for rock n' roll in the late 70's.

[Pen Dragon]

all he's done in my estimation is make me read through 5 bad fanboy scripts a week emulating pulp fiction on triggerstreet. Every under 30 year old writer has at least one Tarantino script. He shook things up indeed. to the point of creative stagnation.

[BottomlessCup]

You don't get to be an auteur simply because you take the best parts of (generally) crappy '70s flicks, filter them through your pop culture-influenced mind, sprinkle a healthy amount of snappy dialogue into it, and slap it on the screen.

It makes you an auteur when you do it brilliantly, carry it over a series of films forming a distinct, personal style that's widely successful and influential. That's what an auteur is.

[whistlelock]

I still can't decide if he's an Illiterate who can only tell his stories by using piecees of other storries, or if he's a clever mimic that's used different movies to tell apparent stories.

[refriedwhiskey]

all he's done in my estimation is make me read through 5 bad fanboy scripts a week emulating pulp fiction on triggerstreet.
Ten years on, and people are still trying to write the next Pulp Fiction?

Damn.

[Pipe]

Ten years on, and people are still trying to write the next Pulp Fiction?

Damn.

LOL damn good point.

I think the thing I like most about Tarrantino is that he's making the movies he wants to make. The way he wants to make them. Love them or hate them, you have to admit his movies have heart.

[Erehwon]

He has made some incredible films.

Pulp fiction
R. Dogs.
Kill Bill vol 1 & 2

Yeah, he's self indulgent, but not unlike other directors have been. Hell, Speilberg makes films HEAVILY influenced by his childhood.

Same thing with Tarantino. He's not sublime, no, but he doesn't aspire to be. I, for one, appreciate his influences, for they're mine, also.

Outside of the "well, he's not for everyone" thing, he did start a movement in film that still resonates today, AND he's made some damn fine, AND FUN, films.

[Pencey]

I can't for the life of me figure out why people think everything Quentin puts out is gold. Maybe it's his winning personality. Creatively, he doesn't seem to be getting any better. In fact, his career is starting to veer the way of Orson Welle's.

Yes, Pulp Fiction is a masterpiece. And like QT said, it's a movie you can just leave on as you're doing the dishes and let it play in the background as you're doing something else and then watch your favorite scene or two when it comes on.

Reservoir Dogs was also very good; not as well-written as Pulp but still a very good film. It had a good story and some equally well-written dialogue that still holds up well today.

But after these two films, what has he really done? Kill Bill? Puh-leese. The direction was great, sure, but there wasn't the great dialogue he had in his previous two films. Many scenes fell flat or seemd forced, and even came across as self-indulgent. The dialogue between Bill and the girl before she got married was so, so bad...I couldn't believe it was QT who wrote that. After watching both Kill Bill 1 & 2, I'm almost convinced that Avary was the one responsible for writing most of Pulp.

[Hairy Lime]

So earlier this week I get notes on a script from a writer-director whose debut feature won a major festival award. In reference to my script, which he enjoyed but did not love, he said ...

"You know how in Pulp Fiction .... "

Yeah, Tarantino's an auteur.

[whitenavel]

Jackie Brown is an underrated and underappreciated gem. Great work from QT based on someone else's words.

He also gets exceptional performances from his actors.

IMO, he has yet to make a stinker. Even his chapter in Four Rooms was fun.

[Hairy Lime]

navel. We agree on something. I love Jackie Brown. Way underrated film.

[dodo1]

I like Tarantino's movies. QT has got his very own style. Reservoir Dogs was a good film indeed. And Pulp Fiction may be his masterpiece. I agree with that. I also would say that I love Jackie Brown (it's the best Tarantino movie, in my opinion). But I think that Kill Bill Volume 1 is the worst film Tarantino has made so far. The dialogues are bad and the story... Well... is simple. However, Kill Bill Volume 2 has been much better than v1. The dialogues are good and you learn much about the characters. KBv2 seems a lot more professional than v1. However, I think I enjoyed every of Tarantino's films, but I was a bit disappointed by Kill Bill Volume 1 (as many people seem to be).

[whitenavel]

navel. We agree on something. I love Jackie Brown. Way underrated film.

Robert Forster is soooooooo damn good in that film.

[Pen Dragon]

Forster was even good in Alligator. One of my first favorite actors when I was a kid. He was John Garfield crossed with Charles Bronson crossed with Robert Blake (Beretta era). A hard-boiled 40's noir-style tough ass who was cursed to have come along in the 70's

[Erehwon]

I, for one, never said everything he puts out is gold.

[refriedwhiskey]

Me, neither. Has anyone said that?

[Landis26]

"Jackie Brown" was his best "movie". It stood on it's own, no pop culture crap. At least not that much. But still his best in my opinion.

Just like "Hard Eight" is Paul Thomas Anderson's best movie, "Punch Drunk Love" coming in a close second.

[miles]

"Jackie Brown" was his best "movie". It stood on it's own, no pop culture crap. At least not that much. But still his best in my opinion.

Just like "Hard Eight" is Paul Thomas Anderson's best movie, "Punch Drunk Love" coming in a close second.

Yeah, I loved Hard Eight. Surprisingly, I liked Sandler in PDL. I also liked Boogie Nights a lot. I tried to read BG on script-o-rama but it was removed by request or something like that. Anybody know why it was removed?

[Pencey]

"Jackie Brown" was his best "movie". It stood on it's own, no pop culture crap. At least not that much. But still his best in my opinion.

Just like "Hard Eight" is Paul Thomas Anderson's best movie, "Punch Drunk Love" coming in a close second.

Whatever...

[Biohazard]

I did not like Hard Eight or Jackie Brown. I also did not like Magnolia, because it's a total rip-off, it's pretentious, it's incongruous, and it's a lot of other things that it should not be. I also do not like any tarantino films because they are just rip-offs of other films. 13 years after his cinematic career started...I think it's about time tarantino thought of something on his own.

[refriedwhiskey]

:rolleyes:

[whitenavel]

Bio, you rip QT and PTA all the time on this board. I personally love the works or both directors (especially PTA). I'm curious to know which recent, younger directors you admire or like.

[Biohazard]

Bio, you rip QT and PTA all the time on this board. I personally love the works or both directors (especially PTA). I'm curious to know which recent, younger directors you admire or like.

The only thing I dislike about both is their lack of creativity. tarantino has none, actually. Anderson could make something good on his own if he tried, but instead he's just copying Scorsese and Altman, which anybody can do and create something decent.

I don't know about you, but I don't enjoy counterfeit films. They may look pretty cool on the surface, but only the original is worth anything. Just like money.

As far as new directors go, there's hardly any good ones out there. I did enjoy Fight Club and I loved Se7en, so I guess I can say David Fincher.

[Landis26]

Whatever... PENCEY

WhatEver.

I brought up P.T. Anderson because, as like QT, he was the darling director for a while. Darling.

[Pencey]

The only thing I dislike about both is their lack of creativity. tarantino has none, actually. Anderson could make something good on his own if he tried, but instead he's just copying Scorsese and Altman, which anybody can do and create something decent.


I don't recall Scorsese making anything that resembles Magnolia.

[Biohazard]

I don't recall Scorsese making anything that resembles Magnolia.

But Altman did.

Just watch Boogie Nights to see Scorsese at work.

[flyingcactus]

I liked it a lot. I am not a fan of anime. The scene was a surprise/cool. I think it HAD to be animated because watching that in live action would have been just too much. Way too much. Yet it was important to the story. The anime was a really good decision/solution.

I can't even consider slogging through 5 pages of people trashing Tarantino. You either get him or you don't and so... Life is short, I skipped ahead.

I think the Kill Bill thing is right up there with Pulp Fiction.

Definitely preferred Kill Bill 2 but mostly because of the west and the black and white and the AMAZINGLY FANTABULOUS scene with Uma digging herself out. Wow.

And the operatic wails of spaghetti western music! :love:

[refriedwhiskey]

Anybody who looks at the best work of QT and PTA and thinks all they're doing is copying other writers and directors has vastly underestimated the creative work that must have gone into those movies. It's not like anything either director has done is a shot-for-shot Psycho-style remake.

I don't know why it's so popular to bash these guys -- QT in particular. I've never seen one other director get as much sh|t as QT gets on this board. He's not perfect, and not everything he's done has been great -- but the way some people react to the merest mention of his name, you'd think he tied them to a chair and made them watch him eat their puppies.

[refriedwhiskey]

Bio, would you be willing to detail all the reasons why you think Magnolia is a ripoff of Altman?

[Biohazard]

Bio, would you be willing to detail all the reasons why you think Magnolia is a ripoff of Altman?

Just watch Short Cuts.

taranitno is notorious for copying scenes shot-for-shot from other films. Given the budget and equiptment that he had to work with on kill bill, I could have duplicated shots from a Leone or Ford western or any of the countless samurai films that were stolen from in that distasteful amalgam. Anyone from this board could have copied the shots that were stolen from The Vanishing and SF: Episode 1. Or the numerous shots that were copied from City on Fire and used in Reservoir Dogs.

tarantino's "films" are the exact opposite of art.

[vig]

resevoir dogs was crazy good. what has hurt tarrantino is this moshpit of clones that have literally made many artists, or wanna be artists hate tarranintino by defacto. tarrantino completely changed the landscape of films paving the way for usual suspects and movies like momento.

i think the way he is, his abrasive almost self serving arrogance and total lack of style and horrible looks makes him, to many, look like this marilyn mansion retread.

he's not the retread, his clones are. his directing may steal from japanese animation and he may be a bird building his nest from others work, but he is passionate and entertaining.

pulp fiction and resevoir dogs changed everything and there isn't a movie that he has done that i still don't stop on and watch it. whether dusk till dawn or kill bill.

if you are observant movie watcher you can see scenes in every movie that you can draw parrallels to other movies.

for instance you and i could have a job, and the job is to make a ham sandwich. now, i might now what ham is the best, and what vingegar goes best with what bread, and what type of mustard works with what type of ham, and how toasted the bread should be to melt the cheese, and what kind of cheese do you want.... and on and on.

and you might take some ham and put it on wonder bread and throw yellow mustard on it and call it a sandwich, but your sandwich compared to my sandwich.... there isn't even going to be a question.

tarrantino is working with the prochutto and your working with the underbelly of the pig.

vig



vig

[Landis26]

Vig

I know one thing for sure now. I'm having a ham sandwich for lunch.

[Hairy Lime]

Pulp Fiction is a modern classic and Jackie Brown is a faithful adaptation of a pulp novel (ironic, heh?). QT's thing is like found art - artists who amalgamate old signs or news clippings or whatever and make it their own. He does the same thing with film except he reshoots everything he likes with his own style. I don't see anything wrong with that. He's got a great eye and can tell fun stories. Is that such a crime?

[Biohazard]

tarrantino completely changed the landscape of films...

pulp fiction and resevoir dogs changed everything...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I'll wait while you explain exactly how "everything" has changed.

Of course there's no doubt that films have changed in recent years, but don't mistake that statement for an exemplary act on the part of the filmmakers of today.

Pulp Fiction is a modern classic and Jackie Brown is a faithful adaptation of a pulp novel (ironic, heh?). QT's thing is like found art - artists who amalgamate old signs or news clippings or whatever and make it their own. He does the same thing with film except he reshoots everything he likes with his own style. I don't see anything wrong with that. He's got a great eye and can tell fun stories. Is that such a crime?

Copying other works of art without proper permission or compensation IS a crime. Just ask Sergio Leone (figuratively speaking, of course).

The difference between Leone and tarantino is that Leone proved that he could actually create great films on his own and didn't have to resort to copying great films all the time, like tarantino.

As for pulp fiction, there's many lines of dialogue that were most definately written by someone other than tarantino. And I don't just mean the lines taken from other films. And Jackie Brown was total crap.

All tarantino knows how to do is work with other people's material. And he does so with no permission, no compensation, and doesn't even tell people until the fingers start pointing. He's the cinematic equilavent of a cover band.

[vig]

obviously we are not getting through to bio.

you tell me a story that worked liked resevoir dogs, a heist with no robbery scene, played out the way it did cinematically, viscerally and scene by scene with as much style and inflection of tone prior to resevoir dogs and then we can talk.

resevoir dogs was unique. every scene told a new story, as episodic as a movie could get but it never felt that way, it always maintained a certain congruency.

now, kill bill, he made virtually the same movie but with a combination of pulp fiction and resevoir dogs.

vig

[refriedwhiskey]

Just watch Short Cuts.
So basically you consider Magnolia a ripoff of Short Cuts because both films have a big ensemble cast and tell a series of seemingly unrelated stories.

Okay. That's kind of what I figured.

[refriedwhiskey]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
You mean like "Just watch Short Cuts"? That kind of extraordinary evidence?

[Biohazard]

obviously we are not getting through to bio.

you tell me a story that worked liked resevoir dogs, a heist with no robbery scene, played out the way it did cinematically, viscerally and scene by scene with as much style and inflection of tone prior to resevoir dogs and then we can talk.

resevoir dogs was unique. every scene told a new story, as episodic as a movie could get but it never felt that way, it always maintained a certain congruency.

vig

I take it you never saw The Killing. Granted, it shows the robbery, which is the essence of a heist film. Would you have a gangster film with no gangsters? How about a romance where nobody likes anybody else? But regardless, The Killing pioneered the use of non-linear heist films, not reservoir dogs. In fact, the entire plot of RD is the same as City on Fire. Exactly the same.

Let's not forget about all the scenes in RD that drag on forever (mr blonde and mr orange retrospect), and the scenes that serve no point at all (Lady E discussion in the car should have never even been put on paper). It's a horrendously flawed film even for someone who never made a film before.

[vig]

i take it you've never made a film bio.

vig

[Biohazard]

So basically you consider Magnolia a ripoff of Short Cuts because both films have a big ensemble cast and tell a series of seemingly unrelated stories.

Okay. That's kind of what I figured.

- Both have odd events in the end that bring the characters together: The earthquake in "Short Cuts"; The frog storm in "Magnolia".

- Both have characters that are TV personalities: Bruce Davison from "Short Cuts"; Philip Baker Hall and William H. Macy from "Magnolia".

- Both have characters who are police officers: Tim Robbins in "Short Cuts"; John C. Riely in "Magnolia".

- Both mention game shows frequently: Alex Trebek and 'Jeopardy' in "Short Cuts"; 'What Do Kids Know' in "Magnolia".

- Both feature suicides by carbon monoxide poisoning: The cello girl in "Short Cuts"; Julianne Moore's attempted suicide in "Magnolia".

- Both feature Julianne Moore in the cast: Marian Wyman in "Short Cuts"; Linda Partridge in "Magnolia".

- Both have stories about fathers and sons reuniting after a long absence: Bruce Davison and Jack Lemmon in "Short Cuts"; Tom Cruise and Jason Robards in "Magnolia".

- Both have stories that include children as the center of the story: Casey in "Short Cuts"; Stanley in "Magnolia".

- Both feature characters whose occupations involve something to do with sex: Chris Penn's wife in "Short Cuts"; Tom Cruise in "Magnolia".

- Both have female characters that were abused by their fathers: Lili Taylor in "Short Cuts"; Melora Walters in "Magnolia".

I'm sure there are MANY more, but those are some off the top of my head.

And about Moore's character, it seems as if she is in Magnolia simply because she was in Short Cuts, considering her Magnolia character has nothing to do with the story at all. Her actions have no effect on anybody else.

[vig]

shortcuts was a pitiful movie. magnolia was far superior.

vig

[Biohazard]

shortcuts was a pitiful movie. magnolia was far superior.

vig

That's convincing.

[vig]

i'm not trying to convince you. your arguement is there to see. you make some great points, but in comparing anderson's uniqueness to tarrantinos is different.

anderson works on a completely different storytelling level than tarrantino and if i had my druthers i'd take anderson any day of the week.

but i don't consider the similarities in styles to their counterparts a discredit to their work. i look at the work on it's own merit.

both are entertaining and stylistically brilliant.

vig

[Hairy Lime]

And Jackie Brown was total crap.Not if you enjoy Elmore Leonard novels. JB ranks among the best adaptations of his novels along with Get Shorty and Out of Sight.

[refriedwhiskey]

- Both have odd events in the end that bring the characters together:
So do many other films. Are they all ripoffs of Short Cuts?

- Both have characters that are TV personalities: Bruce Davison from "Short Cuts"; Philip Baker Hall and William H. Macy from "Magnolia".
So does Network, among many others.

- Both have characters who are police officers: Tim Robbins in "Short Cuts"; John C. Riely in "Magnolia".
So does Starsky & Hutch.

- Both mention game shows frequently: Alex Trebek and 'Jeopardy' in "Short Cuts"; 'What Do Kids Know' in "Magnolia".
So does Requiem for a Dream.

- Both feature suicides by carbon monoxide poisoning: The cello girl in "Short Cuts"; Julianne Moore's attempted suicide in "Magnolia".
So do many other movies. Altman didn't invent suicide or carbon monoxide poisoning.

- Both feature Julianne Moore in the cast: Marian Wyman in "Short Cuts"; Linda Partridge in "Magnolia".
Oh, please. The woman has made about 50 movies. You're saying Magnolia is a ripoff of Short Cuts because she was in both films? So is The Forgotten a ripoff of Magnolia, or Short Cuts?

Etcetera.

These are straws you're grasping at, son. A bunch of superficial similarities do not add up to a ripoff. Again, this comes down to a vast underestimation of what goes into the making of a movie, and a willful ignorance of all the ways the movies are different.

[Biohazard]

Not if you enjoy Elmore Leonard novels.

I enjoy films for what they are, not what they are trying to be (which might explain why I constantly talk about Anderson's lack of creativity but also enjoy Boogie Nights). I believe that Jackie Brown was a bad, boring, and over-long film with no interesting characters or performances. I don't give a damn about the book.

refriedwhiskey, you failed to make the connection that everything I listed was featured in both Short Cuts AND Magnolia. Name one other films that has everything I just mentioned. I'm telling you right now that it's an impossible task.

[refriedwhiskey]

Superficial similarities, Bio. You want to call that a ripoff, enjoy yourself.

[Biohazard]

Superficial similarities, Bio. You want to call that a ripoff, enjoy yourself.

Superficial? Exactly how are those similarities superficial? Everything I mentioned in that previous reply exists in only two films. One of them was made by Robert Altman, the other was made by someone who openly admits that Altman is his favorite director. Do you suppose it's a coincidence that the Altman film came first? You are openly denying that all those similarities exist in the same two films. Why do all those things exist in only two films, one being made after the other by a guy who loves the guy who directed the first...? Open your eyes, god dammit.

What you are saying is that anybody can rip-off any other film and that's ok. That is exactly what you are saying. And you are wrong.

[Insanity In A Jar]

Those who do not want to imitate anything, produce nothing. - Salvador Dali

[refriedwhiskey]

Everything I mentioned in that previous reply exists in only two films.
:rolling:

Open your eyes, god dammit.
Jesus. Step away from the computer, Bio. Have some chamomile.

What you are saying is that anybody can rip-off any other film and that's ok. That is exactly what you are saying.
No, that's exactly what you THINK I'm saying, because you're so invested in being right about this that you can't see straight.

Take a breath. Watch a movie you like. (May I recommend Altman?)

And calm yourself.

[Biohazard]

I find it funny how you are still not accepting the fact that everything I listed is in both Magnolia and Short Cuts. Does Network have an odd event at the end like an earthquake or the frog rain? Nope. Does Requiem for a Dream feature a carbon monoxide suicide attempt? Nope. ONLY Short Cuts and Magnolia feature all of what I mentioned. Not one other film does. I am still waiting to hear why you call that a "superfical similarity".

The only thing I am intent on is getting you to see the truth. Magnolia is a Short Cuts rip-off. If you do not believe this, then perhaps you could give an example of one film ripping-off another? I really don't expect to get an answer on this, but it's worth a shot anyway.

Those who do not want to imitate anything, produce nothing. - Salvador Dali

Immitation is the nicest form of flattery, not duplication.

Many, many other filmmakers have sucessfully immitated other filmmakers without resorting to directly copying their work. Why can't tarantino? Because he is incapable of actually thinking of something on his own. If that was not true, then he would have been proud to show us HIS work by now.

[refriedwhiskey]

I find it funny how you are still not accepting the fact that everything I listed is in both Magnolia and Short Cuts.
I find it funny how you are still not accepting the fact that everything you listed was a superficial similarity.

Both films had a cop? Both movies had TV personalities? Julianne Moore was in both movies?

Come on, Bio. You could come up with 100 such similarities and it wouldn't matter. Superficial is superficial.

If you do not believe this, then perhaps you could give an example of one film ripping-off another?
I'm sure I could if I were as intent as you on finding ripoffs everywhere I look. But I'm just not. :D

[vig]

obviously tarrantino and anderson dated bio's girlfriend and he's a little peeved about it.

vig

[refriedwhiskey]

Ah.

[vig]

magnolia is clearly a better movie and it does have many, many similarities and anderson has already said he took many of the ideas of shortcuts to the screen.

but the movies are completely different. hell, 'four rooms' by tarrantino could have been rifted from a benny hill skit.

vig

[Biohazard]

Go ahead and name some real rip-offs then. Go on now. Your insistence on not doing so is making be believe that you subscribe to the idea that there are no such things as cinematic rip-offs. That means I can make a movie with the exact same plot as Bambi, not tell anyone, change the title, add a few lines of dialoue from other films, and then only speak of it, doing so by calling it an "homage" of course, after people start pointing fingers. That would not be a rip-off by your definition. Correct me if I am wrong.

[vig]

we've corrected you but you're obviously on track for your own agenda. carry on.

vig

[Biohazard]

magnolia is clearly a better movie and it does have many, many similarities and anderson has already said he took many of the ideas of shortcuts to the screen.

but the movies are completely different. hell, 'four rooms' by tarrantino could have been rifted from a benny hill skit.

vig

Anderson is wrong. refriedwhiskey said so. It's all superficial because he said so.

Actually, the tarantino portion of Four Rooms was taken from an episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents.

You never corrected me. You just said "you're wrong". I want to know what a rip-off in cinema is. Tell me already if you even have a definition.

[vig]

i like you biohazzard, but our reverence, or lack of it, of how you perceive what is ripped or isn't, is much different.

vig

[Biohazard]

Then give me an example of a rip-off in cinema. Why do you refuse to do this? If I am so wrong, then tell me what is right.

[vig]

are you seeing red? if what you are saying is correct then tarrantino and anderson are ripping off other movies. you've given good examples.

serpico has been ripped off more times than tracy lords bra.

blade runner not only theived from film noir of the 40s and 50s but it has been copied hundreds of times.

west side story is the outsiders.

vig

[Biohazard]

are you seeing red? if what you are saying is correct then tarrantino and anderson are ripping off other movies. you've given good examples.

serpico has been ripped off more times than tracy lords bra.

blade runner not only theived from film noir of the 40s and 50s but it has been copied hundreds of times.

west side story is the outsiders.

vig

What exactly was copied directly from Serpico or Blade Runner and put into another film? I have already listed exactly what tarantino has copied and what anderson has copied (the ending of Boogie Nights is the exact same thing as the ending of Raging Bull with only 2 differences...color photography and a penis). I have done so several times. I have given numerous examples and all you can do it say that blade runner was ripped off. Really? In what film?

[refriedwhiskey]

That means I can make a movie with the exact same plot as Bambi
Here's where the rusted bottom completely drops out of your argument, Bio.

The above is only analogous to Short Cuts/Magnolia if you believe Magnolia has "the exact same plot" as Short Cuts.

Do you see how far out in left field you're having to go to "prove" your point? Doesn't that tell you something?

Anderson is wrong. refriedwhiskey said so. It's all superficial because he said so.
Heh. Bio, do you really think vig's paraphrase of Anderson constitutes a confession that his movie is a ripoff of Short Cuts?

I mean, do you honestly think that?

Because, damn.

[Jake Schuster]

west side story is the outsiders.

Not to mention "Romeo and Juliet".

But then again, Shakespeare "ripped off" Plutarch, Thomas Kyd and a multitude of other writers.

[Biohazard]

The above is only analogous to Short Cuts/Magnolia if you believe Magnolia has "the exact same plot" as Short Cuts.

It was more in refrence to reservoir dogs and city on fire. I mentioned earlier that the plot of each film is totally indentical...a statement which you chose to ignore. According to you, a non-linear rip-off of Bambi with "hip, cool dialogue" (lifted from outside sources) is not a rip-off at all.

[refriedwhiskey]

According to you, a non-linear rip-off of Bambi with "hip, cool dialogue" (lifted from outside sources) is not a rip-off at all.
Oh, yes. I remember saying that. :rolleyes:

Seriously, Bio. Step away from the keyboard and get some perspective while you still can.

[Biohazard]

Might as well step away from the keyboard...you're not supporting your side of the discussion one single bit. You said the equivalent of "you're wrong", "that's not a rip-off", and that's about it. You have given not one example of what you believe is a rip-off, and you have also not explained why tarantino's and anderson's amalgams are not rip-offs. Are you just here for the post count or what? I am trying to have a serious discussion and you are intent on doing the complete opposite. I am very confident in my beliefs and will back them up (again) if necessary. But it seems as if you have no idea what the hell is even going on. If you want to be a part of a discussion, you need to have a point of view, and share it with those who disagree with you. As soon as you do that, let me know. Until then...

[flyingcactus]

You are such an inane broken record that no one cares to argue anymore. You won't listen.

Go sue the guy instead of yammering about it endlessly on message boards. Or else take a deep breath and write your own story.

[Biohazard]

I wouldn't have to repeat myself if people were intelligent enough to see the truth. I really don't give two f-cks if you like what I have to say or not, so just cry about it, ok? I'm allowed to be here as much as you are, so keep complaining and see if that gets you anywhere. If you don't care about what I have to say, then don't reply to my posts, genius.

[refriedwhiskey]

You said the equivalent of "you're wrong", "that's not a rip-off", and that's about it.
Bio, I honestly have no trouble believing that's all you saw.

I wouldn't have to repeat myself if people were intelligent enough to see the truth.
That's right. It's not you. It's all of us. :rolleyes:

[Biohazard]

Bio, I honestly have no trouble at all believing that's all you let yourself see.

Why don't you let yourself see my last reply, especially this part:

If you want to be a part of a discussion, you need to have a point of view, and share it with those who disagree with you. As soon as you do that, let me know. Until then...

:)

[refriedwhiskey]

I saw your last reply. And my reply to it stands. You're seeing exactly what you want to see and no more.

But there's no point continuing to argue with someone who does that, no matter how much he might be enjoying it.

[Biohazard]

I can only see what you post on this board. And in this entire thread, you have not posted anything to support your side of the discussion. You asked why Magnolia is a Short Cuts rip-off and I told you. I then asked you what your definition of one movie ripping-off another is and I am still waiting for your reply.

It's clear that you simply don't want to have a discussion on this subject, for whatever reason. So I will end this now by saying have a good day and I hope your taste in cinema improves. Not likely that is will degrade any more than it has, but that's unimportant. So have a good day. :)

[dpaterso]

This thread had a bad vibe from the very beginning. I'm slowly losing my respect for a lot of you people. There, I've said it.

-Derek
Derek's Web Page - stories, screenplays, novels, insanity. (http://hometown.aol.co.uk/DPaterson57/scripts.htm)

[refriedwhiskey]

This thread had a bad vibe from the very beginning. I'm slowly losing my respect for a lot of you people.
ouch. :rolleyes:

[Pen Dragon]

Tim Burton ripped off Stanley Kubrick in Batman.

Anyone know the scene?

[whitenavel]

Did you know:
-that PTA is ghost directing Altman's latest film "A Prarie Home Companion" in case Altman croakes during the filming.
-that Maya Rudolph from SNL is expecting a child fathered by PTA this summer?


Bio, I can see similiarities in Magnolia and Short Cuts, but what are the similarities in Boogie Nights and projects of Scorcese?
You keep mentioning that these two directors rip off others with nothing of their own to share.
I think Punch Drunk Love is completely original and stands alone as a unique work from PTA with no similarities to any other directors/writers.

[vig]

i was just thinking about how anderson ripped off shortcuts.

and i can't stomach tarrantino. he's nothing but a cook who uses other people's menu.

vig

[mdb]

Altman ripped off Kurosawa's DODESKADEN.

[vig]

let the truth be told you better slap the cuffs on me cause i'm robbing from everybody. you say tomato, i say tomatoe, you say neither, i say neither, you say stealing i call it embellishing.

vig

[Erehwon]

I say homage, you say fromage, let's cut the whole ear off.

[vig]

there is no way i'm ever cutting my ear off... her ear, well... that could happen.
ear, smear, hand me that bear... i mean bare. i mean beer.

vig

[Erehwon]

lol.

[Biohazard]

but what are the similarities in Boogie Nights and projects of Scorcese?


Boogie Nights is practically Goodfellas but with the porn industry instead of the mafia. Scorsese's use of the camera is also very evident in Boogie Nights.

And watch the last scene in Raging Bull and the last scene in Boogie Nights back to back. Like I said earlier, the only difference is the penis and the color photography. Same exact set-up otherwise: The main character sits in front of a mirror in his dressing room rehearsing lines that he will have to recite shortly. Someone comes into the room and says the equivalent of "we're ready" or something to that extent. The main character gets up and does his "trademark move", LaMotta's boxing punches and Diggler's karate kicks. It's a shot-for-shot (well, just a shot...one long take in both films) duplicate with the same set-up for the main character of the film.

[BottomlessCup]

Tim Burton ripped off Stanley Kubrick in Batman.

Anyone know the scene?


Isn't there a "heeere's Johnny" bit?

[refriedwhiskey]

Boogie Nights is practically Goodfellas but with the porn industry instead of the mafia.
:rolling:

[vig]

and bambi is basically deer hunter because bambi had a forrest fire and deerhunter had fire too.

vig

[vig]

"Boogie Nights is practically Goodfellas but with the porn industry instead of the mafia. Scorsese's use of the camera is also very evident in Boogie Nights." bio

wow, now you're either stoned, or reaching for straws. comparing similar styles and techniques to not being able to have an original idea and thieving is like saying evel kenievel shouldn't be consider a sucess because he failed on nearly half his attempted stunts.

vig

[whitenavel]

Other than the final scene from Boogie Nights, which is an obvious, almost identcal homage to Raging Bull, and perhaps the opening scene in the night club with the steadicam introducing us to the main characters, I don't see any other similarities to Scorcese.
And I stand by Punch Drunk Love being an original, unique piece of work from PTA.

[refriedwhiskey]

And I stand by Punch Drunk Love being an original, unique piece of work from PTA.
That can't be right, navel. Bio has already told us that "Anderson could make something good on his own if he tried, but instead he's just copying Scorsese and Altman."

Not sure which of those he ripped off for Punch Drunk Love. Maybe both.

[BottomlessCup]

For what it's worth, PTA admits to ripping off Scorsese in the first two minutes of the Boogie Nights commentary. In fact, the first sentence of it is "Hey, roll it, 'cause I learned a lot about ripping off movies from listening to laser disc commentaries." Half the commentary is PTA identifying which films he stole which scene's composition from.

But the idea that Raging Bull and Goodfellas make Boogie Nights redundant or less good is absurd. Some shots are ripped off, sure, but how frickin' different can two movies be? Seriously, it's ludicrous. And not just due to subject matter, either.

Look at the tone. Look at the dialogue, the characters, the pacing. How can you possibly think that the experience of watching any Scorsese film is the same as watching Boogie Nights? Seriously. I can understand peoples' criticisms of the film on its own merits, but the idea that Boogie Nights counterfeits Goodfellas (!) is not one I can understand.

Likewise KB and grindhouse kung-fu. He stole a lot of moments, but the whole isn't even close to redundant.

[Pen Dragon]

Isn't there a "heeere's Johnny" bit?

im thinking about the mimes distracrting bruce waynbe outisde city hall. stolen from killers kiss

i tred to edit thisdfor spellinngf 3 times

[refriedwhiskey]

Whoa! Put down the bottle!

[dclary]

Pen's on the tail end of a 6-month bender.

[Adam Isaac]

Good Lord!

Some thread.
Guess I will just add: I didn't think Kill Bill was that bad.

[cluckyburger]

oddly enough I watched boogie nights this wknd. I've not been a PTA fan for many years (mainly out of jealousy if i'm being honest) and i have to say, while i see the scorsese thing (as well as the altman/magnolia thing) you cannot deny that PTA has a singular voice and heightened technical ability. Even if you're aping shots, it doesn't mean it will cut, it doesn't mean the movie will be good and boogie nights is pretty effing good. I don't always agree w/ some of PTA's choices dramatically (he tends to underscore every emotional beat) but come on you have to admire someone who went balls out like that on his 2nd movie.

tarantino i can take or leave. if/when i see his movies i usually enjoy the hell out of them and never refer to them again. like a well made dessert. delicious in the moment but slight.

in any event, both pta and qt are talented. that they steal/ripoff/homage does not lessen their gifts. any artist worth anything steals from time to time.

[vig]

boogie nights 'was' the same style as goodfellas. any screenwriter or director worth his salt can see that. anderson chose that style to represent that story.

the scene at the end with the drugs and 70s music was so much like the GF scene in the bar when they killed the guy from the new york crew; and later manifested itself with the limo scene with roller girl; pesci was burt reynolds in that beat down scene.

while goodfellas was told in narrative and it was meant for us to be the camera, anderson chose to eliminate the narrative but maintain the feeling you had as you watched it. you felt like you were there.

now, in boogie nights he neatly kept that perspective by making it a porn movie so it had that voyeur quality to it, much like goodfellas did so a good portion of the shots originated from the camera. that was our minds eye.

the reason so many people feel the same way when they watch goodfellas and boogie nights is because they go away feeling like they knew these people. you felt like you were part of the entourage. that is the reason why scorcesee is so good and anderson decided to balance his creative instincts with what he knew worked.

i'm sure at one point he even thought about making this a voice over.

vig

[Biohazard]

Even if you're aping shots, it doesn't mean it will cut, it doesn't mean the movie will be good and boogie nights is pretty effing good.

From a technical standpoint, I agree. The acting, cinematography, editing, use of music, etc. All that is executed very well in Anderson's films. But why he doesn't just think of his own ideas, I'll never know. He's a wanna-be. A talented wanna-be.

Now as for tarantino...every good thing about a tarantino film comes from someone other than tarantino. He's a wanna-be. An un-talented wanna-be.

[whitenavel]

But why he doesn't just think of his own ideas, I'll never know.

Punch Drunk Love.

[Biohazard]

Punch Drunk Love.

I haven't seen the whole film, but what I did see was not that great.

Judging from the portion that I did see (mostly all of it), I'd say it's better than Magnolia but not as good as Boogie Nights. Hard Eight/Sydney? Who gives a hell about that. Probably his worst film.

[whitenavel]

Okay, you didn't think PDL was that great (the parts you did see). But the point is that it is an original and unique work from PTA. You keep calling him a wanna-be and someone who doesn't have his own vision. PDL is exactly that.

And Hard Eight is also a great film, especially from a first time director. Phillip Baker Hall is excellent. You need to give these films another look.

That is all.

[Bad Liver]

Punch Drunk Love was beautiful. His best film. I truly related to Sandler's character in it and found the love story to be incredibly rewarding. Love that movie.

[refriedwhiskey]

I haven't seen the whole film
And yet you feel qualified to say that PTA is a wannabe who has never had an idea of his own.

Right, Bio. Riiiiiiight.

[Hairy Lime]

Punch-Drunk Love may be my favorite romantic comedy and I hate romantic comedies by and large. PTA's able to make you feel like the protagonist in the first 5 minute and that emotional state carries you through the rest of the film. It's amazingly executed. A master craftsman at work.

[refriedwhiskey]

PTA's able to make you feel like the protagonist in the first 5 minute
I already felt like the protagonist all the time. :)

[whistlelock]

the reason so many people feel the same way when they watch goodfellas and boogie nights is because they go away feeling like they knew these people. you felt like you were part of the entourage. I agree with that, and it's the great strength of Boogie Nights. In fact, my affection for the film may come from the aping of Scorcesses's style.

But, aside from that movie, I despise PTA. For so many reasons that I've forgotten the exact number. I like Boogie. I hated Magnolia. My wife stopped PDL when I began to shout at the screen in a loud, angry voice. I will activily avoid anything he's involved with until one of us is dead.

If I were to rate PTA's,( I even hate his full name use too), directing ability I would give him high marks in the techinical area's. But his numbers would descend into the negatives so fast in the area's of creative direction and writing. The man should never have been allowed out of the second unit. He'd make a really great second unit director for the rest of his career.


And, to save FUB/Jordan some time, No, I would not work with PTA on a project.

Mostly, because he's gone on record as saying he'd never direct anyone else's work. He'll only ever do his own material.

Even then, if I were in a pitch room with him I'd probably kick him in the shins.

[flyingcactus]

And yet some people totally love him (PTA). I guess everyone has different taste.

[Sammy Glick]

So I'm guessing that all the QT and PTA haters are writing COMPLETELY ORIGINAL scripts without any outside influences...

Or are they just a tiny bit jealous?

[MacG]

So I'm guessing that all the QT and PTA haters are writing COMPLETELY ORIGINAL scripts without any outside influences...

Or are they just a tiny bit jealous?

No one's claiming to be able to write a script without outside influences, Glick. But I, personally, am perplexed as to why Tarantino and Anderson's films are called things such as "wholly original" when they really aren't.

I think that's what bugs people most.

[whitenavel]

Mostly, because he's gone on record as saying he'd never direct anyone else's work. He'll only ever do his own material.

His next project is Oil!
Based on the Upton Sinclair novel.

[billythrilly7]

Boogie Nights: One of the great films of all time.
Magnolia: Perrrrty good stuff. Nice work, PTA.
Punch Drunk Love: If I didn't worry about suicide possibly being a sin and having to come back and do my whole life over again, a couple of teenage movie theater workers would have had a horrifying story and a lot more sticky stuff to clean up than just popcorn, Skittles, and Dr. Pepper.

[whistlelock]

His next project is Oil!
Based on the Upton Sinclair novel. Well, I guess we can add Liar to the list of reasons to not like Anderson.


But, as to being influenced by previous work- that's fine, up to a point.
When does using a style of a previous director become just aping a style? Regardless of medium. When is it not your work anymore and just fanboi plagerism? Is it in the first 20 minutes of a film? the entire work? or multiple works?

Are Anderson and Tarentino just talented collage artists? Incapable of orginal art, but gifted in re-creating art?

[refriedwhiskey]

No one's claiming to be able to write a script without outside influences, Glick.
Surely Biohazard must be, if nobody else is, since he considers any outside influences to be outright theft.

[refriedwhiskey]

Punch Drunk Love: If I didn't worry about suicide possibly being a sin and having to come back and do my whole life over again, a couple of teenage movie theater workers would have had a horrifying story and a lot more sticky stuff to clean up than just popcorn, Skittles, and Dr. Pepper.
You should always go with your first instinct, Billy.

Keep that in mind next time.

[Biohazard]

he considers any outside influences to be outright theft.

Duplication/re-creation without permission is theft. Influence is something else. Les Diaboliques influenced Psycho, but Hitch didn't copy a god damn thing from Clouzot's film.

[refriedwhiskey]

Too bad QT and PTA couldn't be as inventive as Hitchcock. Guess they were too busy writing all their own screenplays.