Why is Quentin Tarantino such a genius to some people?

I am not saying Howard can't direct movies. I am just saying he can't come up with idea's on his own. He may have movies with original feeling to his films yet the stories are anything,but original, yet he gets praised as being one of the most innovative and original directors out there. Ranson, EdtV, and parenthood are movie remakes. All others are eigther movies he fell into or were inspired from stories that have already been written, or has had other writers write the screenplays for him. the only films that he has written which are far and away and grand theft auto. which are heavily inspired by many published stories. the guy can make movies,but when it comes to creating stories the guy doesnt have an original bone in his body. Even his techniques are greatly inspired by lucas, and Da palma.

When Howard goes into making a movie, he has a crew of writers, and editors by his side. It is known he rarely writes the scripts and screenplays for his films, and also has an editing team. He say's he trusts his writers and editors because they have worked with him for so long. I don't think this is any exscuse though for taking the credit that he does. I'm not saying he steals anything from anyone, that was an exageration.

Tarentino Gains inspiration for his films. He doesnt steal a damn thing . When he uses inspired characters from stories or previous movie characters he always makes it known. Tarentino also writes all of his scripts and screenplays, and takes a full both hands in editing. He cares about his films,and does whatever it takes to make sure they get made in his vision. Saying he steals his stories is like saying every director in the business steals their stories for having inspiration. If anyone in the business is a thief it would be Howard, every movie film he makes is eigther directly taken from a published story, or movie, or is dominated greatly by other films and stories.

I'm going to quote you a few times, so if this looks messy, I apologize in advance.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
I am not saying Howard can't direct movies. I am just saying he can't come up with idea's on his own.

That's not what's in question here. If that's the case, and you're arguing in the defense of Tarantino, he and Howard are in the same boat.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
Tarentino Gains inspiration for his films. He doesnt steal a damn thing . When he uses inspired characters from stories or previous movie characters he always makes it known.

"Inspiration", "homage", use whatever word you want other than plagiarism. To cover his bases, he claims that he's "inspired" by grindhouse, blaxploitation, yadda, yadda, yadda. All he does is take characters and storylines from the most obscure movies imaginable, and uses them as his own, because he knows nobody is going to go through a video stores library, looking for the sources.

How many times has Quentin Tarantino said "Yes, I took the story from "The Bride Wore Black" and applied it to "Kill Bill."

How many times has Quentin Tarantino said "Yes, I took the story
from "Lady Snowblood" and applied it to "Kill Bill."

How many times has Quentin Tarantino said "Yes, I took the story
from "City on Fire" and applied it to "Reservoir Dogs."

How many times has Quentin Tarantino said "Yes, I took the story
from "Badlands" and applied it to "Natural Born Killers."

How many times has Quentin Tarantino said "Yes, I took the story
from "Kalifornia" and applied it to "Natural Born Killers."

How many times has Quentin Tarantino said "Yes, I took the story
from "Rum Punch" and applied it to "Jackie Brown."

Really? How many times has he acknowledged these "inspirations"?

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
Saying he steals his stories is like saying every director in the business steals their stories for having inspiration. If anyone in the business is a thief it would be Howard, every movie film he makes is eigther directly taken from a published story, or movie, or is dominated greatly by other films and stories.

Stories and characters can only be used in so many ways. There is a very THICK line between "inspiration" and straight up theft. How Ron Howard is a thief, merely by making screen adaptions from books, which a solid 50% of movies come from as it is, or by directing movies written by other people is beyond me.

Tarantino is a thief. Plan and simple, and he has all his fans duped. No matter how nonchalantly they carry themselves when approached with the evidence, we all know that his lack of originality gets to them, and they are wallowing in some insufferable stage of denial.

A common thread of blood, sexism, and foul dialogue doesn't make him original. It makes him the Milli Vanilli of cinema.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
Tarentino Gains inspiration for his films. He doesnt steal a damn thing . When he uses inspired characters from stories or previous movie characters he always makes it known.

Sorry guy but thats horsepoop - I'll limit myself to RD as an example

When people began to point out that Reservoir Dogs wasn't as innovative as we first thought - but was in fact mostly ripped off from Chow Yung Fats City on Fire and A Better Tommorow II QT was all "Who? ME? Noooooo..."

It's only recently that with the evidence becoming so overwhelming (and Kill Bill being such a patchwork quilt of other directors styles characters and situations) That he's having to come clean.

Like I say - I think he's amazing for pulling this grab-bag thing off with such style. He can write some snappy dialog but he can't put a plot together for shit and directorialy he's like a rap artist that can't write a tune so has to sample some old classic and mumble over the top about how big his dick is.

what are you talking about? He never lied about that crap. I remember when pulp fiction Came out Tarentino was questioned about that a great deal. He always said that it was a heavy motivator for the film, that he has loved chow yun fat, and when watching city on fire he was overwhlemed with idea's on how to elaborate on the films story, and yes he did so greatly. though the idea of an undercover cop who befriends one of the villians was taken. The movie was so great because of the execution and the rawness in his writing. so your pissing about a remake that is remade into a totally different story.

as to kill bill. Yes he says all the time that the concept of the bride was taken from the bride wore black and snowblood very openly. Every talk show he appeared on he always talked about it, and also the other schenes in the films that he took from old gring house films. Shit he even talks about the bride concept on the DVD. He says also that the movie was made for fans to the genre like me.

Tarentino has also never tried to hide the fact that jackie brown was from the novel rum punch. He also always gives the author recognition. Saying Tarentino cant create a plot is crazy. He makes movies that he wants and feel are worth making. Even with the stories that he borrows and elaborates which are fewer than you claim. He writes the entire screenplay and script. This is a man that understands story telling. Many producers and directors have apporached tarentino many times to write seagments or elaborate on characters in their stories.

Tarentino wrote the story for the film true romance, which was directed by tony scott.this was an entirely original and well written story, he wrote and sold the story to fund his project reservoir dogs. True romance is a great movie and is acclaimed. this proves that tarentino diddnt just steal the story of RD because he knew it would sell well,or he would have just made true romance himself. he did it because it was a vision he had in making a great movie That revolved loosely around a film he grew up loving.

Tarentino is a writer to rival any hollywood writer, and has a cinematic vision and excution that is totally unique.

I thought it was the yellow jumpsuit from "Enter the Dragon" that inspired "Kill Bill", CA. 😛

Now then, it's always been public that "Jackie Brown" is adapted from Elmore Leonard's novel "Rum Punch". It's insane to suggest that Quentin tried to cover that up, especially since Leonard is even acknowledged in the film's opening credits.

As to whether he's first denied, then admitted to using other films as inspiration to one extent or another, I'm not seeing any documentation here. Like I said earlier, even his most hardcore followers would support any evidence of such machinations on Quentin's part, then chastise him accordingly.

I would, i would bash him into the ground if he ever took credit for somthing that wasnt his, but it is the cinematic presence he creates on film with his characters,dialogue and story that i like so much about him.

Even if he stole the plot for reservour dogs directly from city on fire, and never acknowleged it as being a motivator of his, and not only a dream of his to be his first film. even if his claims of having the script written years before he made it, it would still be a different totally different film from city on fire, but have the same under basis. If he would never have acknowledged this, my views on tarentino would be different. I would still like his films because there all products of great movie making, but i wouldnt be as fanatic about him. He is a regular guy who dropped out of high school and was working a dead end job and decided to enter a film at some festivals. Theguy has no reason to lie. He parties with his fans and recognizes his fan base as being the only reaosn he is able to make movies. He has no reason to lie, and when he says that he has taken certian characters or scenes in amovie to create a vision he was given from there inspiration, i tend to believe him especially since he gives credit where credit is due, even if he doesnt get all his credit.

I see I've wasted my time in this thread.

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
I see I've wasted my time in this thread.

You say that like you are surprised? It was a forgone conclusion...

(in unrelated - where is your little mini-me today?)

I left the door open, given there was little hope for salvation, but alas.

As for Stormydiction; he was last seen licking his wounds in the "Mona Lisa Smile" and "Blade" threads.

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
As for Stormydiction;

I actually seriously hurt my gut laughing.

SD isnt going to be around for about 2 weeks.

Originally posted by SlipknoT
SD isnt going to be around for about 2 weeks.

So I read. Sorry for the derailment, Q.T. fans.

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
I see I've wasted my time in this thread.

Yes, that's starting to be a real problem for you, apparently. Maybe you'd be happier in a place where everybody agrees with you all the time; where your cut-and-paste opinions are never disputed, and nobody calls bullsh*t on your double-edged and/or fallacious "arguments".

Originally posted by Jedi Priestess
meh I think 98% of QT's movies blow.

I concur 😄 ....

Originally posted by Jedi Priestess
meh I think 98% of QT's movies blow.

Originally posted by RaventheOnly
I concur 😄 ....

Indeed

Originally posted by cal31
Don't get me wrong, I don't think he's horrible or anything, I like many of his movies, but I don't get why some people think he's the best thing ever. I mean he's a good action director, but what has he done that is so much better than other good action directors? I'm not criticizing him or anybody, I just want to know why people love him so much.

I'm a huge fan of QT and wouldn't label him as a genius. Great director and filmaker yes!

Why do we like him? One factor is that QT like the rest of us here loves movies. The man is an Encyclopedia of movies. Whether is classic Hollywood or Cult or foreign, QT has seen tons of those films. Some of us identified ourselves with his movies. Take for example Kill Bill look at the elements of the film like Kung Fu, Assasins, Revenge. We'd all seen that before in other movies. But NEVER in the style that QT presents the film.

I speak as Kung fu, Spaghetti Western, Sci-fi fan and what I want is to see some one assemble all these genres into ONE single film. And QT did it in Kill Bill. I'm sure there are ppl who don't like QT movies and that's understandble. I mean not every director can be like Spielberg or Lucas. Which btw-speaking of Lucas HE'S the one that really BLEW it with Episode II. But that's a thought for another time.

One reason I think that Mr. Tarantino is a genius is because he has a tested IQ in the 160's -- well above genius level.

However, the main reason I think that QT is a genius is because of his movies like Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction.

Detractors will say that Tarantino is unoriginal and simply steals his work. Supportes claim he is merely paying homage to his favorites. What both sides seem to be forgetting is that Tarantino is an artist who has chosen film as his way of expressing himself. And, like all true artists, his goal is to say as much as possible in a unique way with the medium he is using.

While there is no argument that Tarantino "borrows" heavily from outside sources, you really need to consider why Tarantino chooses the homages to pay when he does choose them.

Tarantino hides so much in his movies that the average movie goer fails to see. For example, read these quotes from Pulp:

"Blessed is he, who in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper, and the finder of lost children" -- Jules, from his Ezekial speech.

"This is the Valley, Vincent, Marsellus ain't got no friendly places in the Valley" and "If Jimmy's ass ain't home, I don't know what we're gonna do" -- Jules, in the car after Vincent shot Marvin. They were in the Valley of Darkness, now they needed Jimmy to be their brother's keeper.

"When you came pullin' in here, did you see a sign outside my door that said Dead N****r Storage? Do you know why you didn't see that sign? 'Cause it ain't there, because storing dead n******s ain't my business!" Jimmy, when Jules and Vincent arrive at his house with Marvin's body. Now, if he was truly his brother's keeper, wouldn't storing dead n******s be his business? At least a part of it?

"Stay out of trouble you crazy kids." The Wolf. Did he find these lost children?

"Totally f*******g cool." Jules, describing his impressions to Vincent about the Wolf in the Hawthorne Diner.

"We're gonna be like three little Fonzies. What's Fonzie like?" "Cool?" "Correctamundo, and that's how we're gonna be, we're gonna be cool." Jules, to Pumpkin and Honey Bunny, as he tries to nip their crime spree in the bud.

"The truth is, your the weak, and I'm the tyranny of evil men. But, I'm trying, Ringo, I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd". Jules. Who was he trying to be like?

Also, consider this line from Reservoir Dogs, when Nice Guy Eddie confronts Mr. Orange about the death of Vic Vega:

"The man you just killed was just realeased from prison. He was caught in a company warehouse full of hot items. He could have walked. All he had to do was say my father's name. But he didn't. He kept his mouth shut and he did his time and he did it like a man."

Mr Orange was silent. What he should have said was:

"Oh yeah? Well, the man YOU just killed was just released from a TRUNK. He was caught in a company warehouse full of hot PEOPLE. He could have walked, all he had to do was say MY name, but he didn't. He kept his mouth shut, and he did his time and he did it like a man."

QT is a genius.

Originally posted by bizarroEd

QT is a genius.

Just because a guy has great dialogue, doesn't make him a genius.

If that's the case, I'm the ****ing Stephen Hawkins of KMC.

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
Just because a guy has great dialogue, doesn't make him a genius.

If that's the case, I'm the ****ing Stephen Hawkins of KMC.

Um, did you read the rest of the post?

Originally posted by Cinemaddiction
Just because a guy has great dialogue, doesn't make him a genius.

If that's the case, I'm the ****ing Stephen Hawkins of KMC.

Wow! what an arrogant mind you posses. yeah, for the record. Stephen hawking has shitty dialogue. Great, ground breaking studies and theories on quantum physics, but shitty dialogue my friend. So yeah, i would say you very well could be the stephen hawking of KMC