Pulp Fiction is personally in my top 5 favorite movies of all time, but for those of you who are looking for comparisons to films people say he ripped off check out this page http://www.impossiblefunky.com/qt/RD_4.html

Jonah: A vegie tales movie was such a copycat of Pulp Fiction!!!!!

Well, he seems to be doing quite well for himself.

Good for him, you hater.

I hate people that try to piss others off, but can't back up their statements.

There is a hint toward Kill Bill in Resevoir Dogs. Somehow.

Look at the radio station's name in the movie.

I think It's like KBill

Funny... ripping off other movies is the only thing you all can come up with about not liking it?

I think I should add something that is relevant to this thread. Anyway, this refers to Debaser & is from this thread.


Debaser:

He 'stole' more than just certain shots from directors. If PTA wants to believe that's all he did than he seriously needs to re-evaluate his ability as a filmmaker. And if it's ok with him than he joins the ranks like Quentin Tarantino, Michael Bay, and Tony Scott as talented hacks.

Bottom line is PTA like Quentin Tarantino likes to watch 70's movies and do creative 'borrowing'. It might be ok for some people and not a big deal but it's a 'bitch' way of doing things.

It's a 'bitch' way to write. It's a 'bitch' way to direct. It's a 'bitch' way to think.

PTA is a talented 'bitch'. I'll give him that. Magnolia and Boogie Nights honestly looks very professional. They really look like 'good' movies and if you didn't know any better I know why you'd be fooled.


Tarantino:

Everyone 'borrows' from everyone. There's nothing original now. I guess everyone is a 'bitch', probably even your favorite directors 'borrowed' from someone. It's called inspiration.


Debaser:

No. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. I'm not talking about inspiration I'm talking about plagarism.

Theft.

You know, 'Tarantinoism'

I'd love to freebase the drugs your taking where stealing is called 'inspiration'.

Thumbs up on your assesment.

PTA and Quentin are 'prison bitches' then.


DVD-ho78(DTS):

Quote - plagarism

Could you give some examples? You have me interested.


jaeufraser:

Yeah, I'd be interested in some examples also. Cause I don't recall the movies that PTA and Quentin directly copied off of. Or maybe he hasn't seen the 1998 version of Psycho, which IS more in line with what he is saying.

Honestly, while these guys lift ideas from here and there, disregarding the fact that their films aren't really the same as the films they borrow things from (is anyone really going to pretend Magnolia is a rip off of short cuts? or that Reservoir Dogs is a direct rip off of City on Fire cause there share a story? Or that Kill Bill is somehow a lesser film because it borrows ideas and stylistic flourishes from many many movies that weren't nearly as good as Kill Bill?).

I think we need some perspective. Debaser, your rant against these guys is just silly, and just seems like bashing. So what if they borrowed stuff? Name me a director who hasn't. In the end it's about the movie itself.

I know some bash The Lion King for ripping off Kimba: the Japanese cartoony thingy but let's be honest, how much of a rip off is it anyway? The story is a direct lift from Shakespeare, and the animation, art, and music is a million times better than that old cartoon and hardly the exact same thing whatsoever. But some people like to latch onto the surface similarities and completely ignore everything else in the film for...whatever reason.


Debaser:

Quote - jaeufraser's entire post

Fair enough.


-------------------

Now, for his comments in this thread:

A & F aren't even gripes with the film, so we are left with B, C, D, E & G.

-------------------

B- "rips off other films and calls it 'homages"

Seems odd he still feels this way after his comment above from the other thread.

C- "acting skills of Quentin Tarantino"

Not exactly a reason to hate the movie & not in the least bit surprising you include this since you hate the man.

D - "the 'hipness' of the film when to me it comes off as 'forced' and 'cheesy'"

Ok?

E - "the basic structure of the film is almost identical to a Japanese film from the 80's"

Which film?

G - "the Uma Thurman scene with the needle is a straight lift from another movie so I don't see how the hell that is considered an homage."

What movie?


Edit: Didn't include E before. :)

I would just like to know the name of the two movies from E & G. I don't need an analysis.

I asked that several hours ago, and Debaser has replied to this thread several times since then. Yet remarkably, he hasn't been able to produce the titles.

KBLY "Super Sounds of the Seventies" (pronounced K-Billy).

I've already said the names it just got bleeped out for no apparent reason.

Pretty cool, huh?

Oh well, guess some people like to make themselves look like an utter...

I would finish that sentence but someone might interpret it as a personal attack even though it is painfully obvious under the present circumstances it would be true.

Newsflash:

I really don't care what you think.

You already know what I think of Pulp Fiction. Now play connect the dots.

You hate Pulp Fiction because it rips off two movies that only exist in your imagination. Not a bad reason, I suppose. Put that in your essay, Rypro. :lol:

Groucho, learn to use the search function on Google. :lol:

You made the charge, you back it up. Or withdraw the comment.

This thread, so funny.

I withdrew my comments but added a new one:

People who like Pulp Fiction are great fantastic people.

I'll withdraw my comments. No problem. Have a nice day!

Hey scooter, settle down.

ha, yes it is. I'm glad I cut my losses and just hanged back and watched the fun.

I will never forget a discussion in a meeting I was in (true story). The vice President said "I rented a couple of movies this weekend 'Pulp Fiction' and 'Patch Adams'. Patch Adams was great. I loved it. Pulp Fiction was crap. People don't talk like that, and it was way too violent. (and nobody in that room said a word to dispute him or support him even though me and my buddy couldn't look at him without grinning for a couple of days)

Debaser, I'm surprised you're still showing your name in this thread. You've clearly come off as an idiot and you can't back up any claims you make. It's obvious you're only in here to threadcrap and it's fucking annoying.

I don't have to back up any claims I've made because it's a fucking opinion. I also have the opinion that people who get all defensive and flip out over an opinion are fucking 'dorks'.

I like Star Wars but if I started a Star Wars thread and someone started saying Star Wars sucks or people who like Star Wars are fucking annoying morons I could care less. How is this going to change the fact that I like Star Wars?

I've already stated my reasons why I don't like the movie. The fact that he 'copies' dialogue and scenes is icing on the cake.

The fact that I don't like the movie is justifcation enough. I don't have to back up or prove anything. And like I said believe it or not because I certainly could care less what somebody's bullshit opinion that I can 'back it up'. Why don't you prove that QT didn't steal anything. You can't.

So applying your logic I come off as an idiot when my opinion is that people who like Pulp Fiction are idiots. I think we just cancelled each other the fuck out.

It's time to move on. It was opinion if you don't agree great.

Next time I'll try to keep my chocolate bar out of your peanut butter. :)

don't really hate the movie, but i don't love it and don't own it.
if i had to argue the con point of view i would say that
1) the fractured timeline comes off more as a gimmick- unlike Memento where the the moasic of memory conveys an essential point of the characters dilemna, in PF it is used to just be 'cute'.
the "because i can" excuse.
2) the dialouge is self consciously 'hip'.
to a point i enjoy it, but usually there will come a time before the end of the film, where the writer QT overplays his hand and i lose appreciation of being in the moment of the movie and am removed and merely witnessing written banter whose raison d etre is to inspire appreciation for how clever it sounds.
3) the excess of violence, drug use, and language appeal to a nihlistic, spoiled punk sensibility- the kind of sensibility that is numbed to emotional nuance and has a hard time appreciating subtlety.
you can usually get a laugh out of these kinds of people if you yell an obscenity after a silent 'beat'.
it's cinema of the explicit which can be equated with "the film does everything for you therefore you can just be a paasive observer"-in some ways it is actually like a Michael Bay film, except that MB overuses physical camera movement and editing, where QT overuses unpleasant detail and incident.

personally, i think QT is amusing to a point.
but what he achieves in his work is quite overrated.
if these same viewers could approach the films that he is riffing off of with an active imagination and meet them more than 1/2 way (which is what QT did), they would find that QT is an amusing, clever synthesizer, but not quite the iconoclastic sensation he has succsessfully hyped himself to be.

Not to name names, but it certainly amuses me when a poor sap who realizes he's been outclassed in a debate resorts to ignorant comments and abusive language.

Then again, this wasn't exactly a great topic to begin with. Pulp Fiction just isn't everyone's cup of tea, that simple. It had to grow on me...

That's a pretty ignorant comment itself because it isn't accurate.

Outclassed my ass. It wasn't a debate.