The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

Please defend Pulp against claims of plagiarism


#1

Examples include:

Ezekial speech being taken from the kung fu film "The Bodyguard"

Adrenalin scene being taken from Scorses documentary “American Boy"

Marsellus’s " Pair of pliers and a blow torch” from "Charley Varrick"





Do you guys consider this to go beyond referencing into plagiarism? Explain?


#2

In my view, most cinema goers have never seen any of the films Q references, it’s only avid movie fans like us who get most of them. He puts them in for the benifit of the film not himself, when I here about references it influences me to look up the film. I was never into any Asian (or any foreign films) until Kill Bill, and many other recommendations heard from Q and he has introduced me to well the ‘Tarantino Universe!’ Nobody complains when he brings back a classic actor, so why complain about brining back a classic film.

A Thank U to Q


#3

I guess the best way to describe Tarantino is to liken him to a film chef where he samples the work of others and puts them together to create a new work. I guess one must except that he is part of the new breed of directors that make movies about movies. Thats why his films have that feel that the actions take place in a world not quite like the one we live in. Its movieland Tarantino style. That I guess is one of his gifts. Though I do think that if he references or for that matter samples other works he should acknowledge those references and samples in the end credits of his films. I guess if what he was doing was really plagiarism, he would have been sued a long time ago.


#4

yeah i agree


#5

everybody who does something is gonna learn doing that from somebody else…

when a mechanic fixes a car…is it plagerism to do it the way his father showed him?

with artists this is the same…it only gets tricky if you take work of somebody else and pretend that you have invented it…

There are more painters that paint in the same style…copying a painting and claiming its yours is something different than using the same style…



movies are slighty different also…a movie has to be entertaining…plus it takes great skill to make a great piece of another movie look good in your own movie…



QT is just a big moviefan making movies…he takes parts he likes from other movies and blends them into his own style…and does it in a great way…every director does this…only QT does this very evident…



tons of things have been stolen from asian movies…kurasawa has been robbed naked…but I think its a great compliment…but only if the director who used it first gets the credit…and in the case of QT they do…


#6

Like I’ve said before, but will repeat:



The difference between “stealing” and “hommaging” is the “accused’s” attitude towards it. Quentin has absolutely no problem taking stuff from other movies or admitting it, and to some degree I think he enjoys when people find it. He loves film and so I guess he doesn’t see the problem with it. The bottom line: are his films good? If so, why are we squabbling about this? The little things he steals don’t make the entire movie. I have a much bigger problem with movies whose entire plots essentially are rip-offs of other movies because a: That way the entire movie is dependant on what was stolen and b: they were bad.



Face it: When was the last time you had seen a movie made before 1994 that was like Pulp Fiction? He made an original film with some things weaved in from others that did not really affect the plot in any way.


#7

interesting appraisal. I may go share your views with the people at teh local liquor store. Do you have a newsletter? Do you have a phone number? Do you have an adress? Do you have a life?