Tarantino Stole Grindhouse Idea?


Word has been circling like a flock of vultures around the internet for the Past few days that Tarantino lifted the idea for Grindhouse and the title from a group of Indy film makers. We get the following excerpt right from the horses mouth:

Quentin Tarantino is a thieving piece of shit and he knows it. He stole Grindhouse from a bunch of kids who were just asking for his help and he helped them by stealing their title and concept.

Let me explain. For those who don’t know, I made a film called Grindhouse in 2003. We actually started shooting it in 2002, but went to the festivals and got reviews in 2003, winning BEST HORROR FILM in the New York International Film and Video Festival. We also got many favorable mentions from established publications such as Fangoria and Rue Morgue. The movie was low, low, low budget. Which made sense, because that’s what Grindhouse films were – really low budget movies that had little artistic merit. Most of the reviewers got that. They realized what we realized – if you’re going to make a horror movie with $4,000 – the smart bet is to redo a Grindhouse film where the low budget and all that comes with it are celebrated.

The story goes on, and I encourage you to read it on their website. I have no way personally of knowing if they contacted Tarantino. On the other hand at .99 per download it hardly seems like they are using this publicity as a means to get rich. As a comedian I have no love for material thieves in any way, shape or form, and if what these mavericks are saying is true – then I wish them all the best and pump my fist in the air as they stick it to the man. If they be liars, then may locusts eat their faces!

Comment with Facebook

29 thoughts on “Tarantino Stole Grindhouse Idea?

  1. so these guys make a crappy movie no one wants to see and call it grindhouse, now if someone wants to make a movie people will actually want to see they can never use the name grindhouse again?
    these guys are so dumb, they are angry because they don’t have any good ideas and couldn’t do as much with their four thousand dollars as rodriguez did on el mariachi and they are trying to pass the blame. I hope they didn’t quit their day jobs.


  2. “Right, but there aren’t many Grindhouse movies these days… so resurrecting this “genre” could be considered an idea and it seems that Tarantino stole it.”

    The idea was used. They made their film. They called it Grindhouse after the generic term for the style of exploitation genre. It failed to regenerate the genre.

    Are they bitter about him stealing their idea, or doing it better.

    As mentioned before, a concept cannot be copyrighted any more than the term Pulp Fiction. Now if the movie had the same plot, that would be a different story.

    He made a movie called Pulp Fiction and it was a pulp fiction style movie. He called it Grindhouse and it featured movies like in old grindhouse theaters. I don’t see the conflict.

  3. You cannot steal an idea.

    Titles have been used for movies and re-used for movies. (examples: Gladiator; Bad Boys) which are unrelated to each other in plot, story, character and vice versa. The whole thing about Tarintino being a hijack artist is nothing really knew, as “Resevior Dogs” had some inspiration from a chunk of Ringo Lam’s “City On Fire”. Tarintino’s films are heavy on pop culture, nothing new here.

    But these young turks don’t have a peg leg to stand on. Tarintino’s Death Proof section had nothing to do with thier film, and shit, it is it really uncommon for low budget exploitation horror and action these days? And where does Robert Rodreguiez fit in?

    No, I think this is what happened. Tarintino & pals were unaware of the film and/or did not see it. Hell, before today I didn’t even know there was another film called Grindhouse.

    Not to mention they didn’t try for fake trailers, rainbow-like “feature presentations” and, like stated above, an honest double bill.

    BTW, overseas in some markets, the film is split up into two films. I don’t know where that leaves the trailers. Two each, perhaps? But it also is being said that people are walking out as the credits roll on the Rodregiez film. Go figure.

  4. what about the fact that Tarantino’s film isn’t even called Grindhouse, but Deathproof. And, truthfully, and no offense to these guys, but from the preview on the site I don’t think it looks all that interesting.

  5. This is a retarded fucking accusation. Lets boil it down:

    1) This fuckhead tries to get some attention from Tarantino by showing him his Grindhouse flick.
    2) Tarantino refuses, and years later makes a completely unrelated (plotwise) film.
    3) This fuckhead says he was the inspiration and wants… credit?

    …excuse me? He STOLE your idea? He ripped off your “artwork?”

    Let’s say for a moment that Tarantino did get approached by this guy and a little light went of in his head and said “Hey a grindhouse flick would be pretty cool.” Then he wrote a script, and got his buddy Rodriguez to write a script and then it went into production. So this guy wants what exactly? Tarantino should go “Oh yea I owe it all to this fuckhead I met at a party and said he wanted me to watch some movie called Grindhouse but I never actually saw it. He was the fountain of inspiration from which I penned my script. If it wasn’t for him, I wouldnt have ever thought of making this movie despite the fact that I’ve watched so many fucking movies my brain is like and encyclopedia of film history.”

    … Yea, how about no.

    His arguement makes no fucking sense and it stinks of bullshit. “Yea I’m so pissed that my movie idea got stolen and its not about the money or getting my movie out there or anything, I just want credit.”

    At least he is realistic in saying that he knows no one believe him… yea thats because the truth is that you are full of shit.

  6. I assume the reason guys like this keep quiet and time their claims to come out when the film whatever is released is because if you are after money for accusing someone of something like this you can only sue for money once the film is out and earning money….not profit (obviously as grindhouse aint doing well) but once people have started to pay to see it then you can make an attempt at getting paid as they have started to take money for “your idea”….

    That is what I am guessing anyway because you always see people coming out of the woodwork claiming this type of shit but only when the film or book or whatever it is is actually out..they never seem to pop up when something is announced so I am guessing thats why…..I mean how long have we been talking about grindhouse??? and they only come forward now…..the week it is released.

    Like I said if their film was a double feature with the same stories and they made fake trailers etc etc..it the entire idea was the same and they had proof that they had indeed showed it to him then fucking sue his ass off…but this just seems like a desperate attempt to try and cash in….

  7. They’re retarded. The director admits the films have NOTHING in common bar the title. This is like Starbucks suing the makers of You Got Mail because it has the general setting of a coffee shop. This is a nothing story and they should concentrate on making a decent movie instead of whining like babies.

  8. The movie isn’t even doing well as good as it was, so…. That says alot about a 3 hour flick. No one wants to sit in a theater for 3 hours. I really didn’t either and I was expecting at least a 10 minute intermission and got nothing. I missed some of the cool trailers. Plus….they might have played on the Grindhouse name, but put out some great seperate films. They were alot different but both hit the mark.

    The movie debuted at #4, I believe at $13 million or something…..absolutely terrible.

    They could of broken up the films and made more money.

    The “real” grindhouse thing isn’t going to get them anywhere. Trust me.

  9. You fools anger Grandpa Reno. Go outside and read a book then wait 5 years for Tarantino to make a “gritty” version of that same story. He steals ideas, don’t they all?

  10. I think you all need to read the entire article, and not just the small portion here.

    Tarintino is a professional rip off artist and they are either playing into that or its legit.

    I would suggest watching Lady Snowblood and then Kill Bill, and I dare you to tell me Tarintino doesn’t rip ideas off. Homage is one thing and plagerism another, he walks a fine line my friends, but I do enjoy movies.


  11. Exactly. Do they have a listing on imdb or anywhere like that and if so does it give a plot outline? What exactly is these guys film all about? Is it in fact a 2-parter, where two directors are on board, one about zombies and the other about a stuntman killer with fake trailers in between?! Then if so I will back down.

    And I think you are right Jaysmack – a couple of low budget film makers trying to make a quick buck. It’s shameful really…

  12. I think I smell a couple of parasites looking for a payoff. Somebody should tell them the Grindhouse concept didn’t make them any money and ain’t done a thing for Tarantino now either.

    Look, we see some version of this whenever some high-concept movie gets made. People come out of nowhere tossing lawsuits back and forth like so much fake blood in a slasher flick.

    Tarantino as a movie maker and a person is trapped in the 70’s and Grindhouse movies were a staple of that era. It as only a matter of time before he dipped into the “Shamelessly Playing to My Reputation by Counterfeiting the 70’s” well.
    I can’t count how many low/no-budget flicks I’ve seen with the title “Body Count.” or “Strike Force.” Why don’t those guys all sue each other? Then again those movies were made by adults and not overgrown babies.
    These guys sound more like they’re having a bitch-fit that Tarantino’s movie is getting all this press and theirs got a couple of compliments (allegedly) at a film festival.
    Grow up and shut up!

  13. this is ridiculous…….go on imdb and look around……

    there are tons of films with the same name…..thats where the comparisons starts and stops. with a name.

    if these kids said that their film as a double feature with fake trailers and one film was a zombie film and the second film was about a muderous stunt driver then sure they definitely have a case but to accuse him of theft because of the title Grindhouse is fucking stupid.

    these kids didn’t invent the term……..tarantino has been screening grindhouse films at his film festivlas for years…he is well aware of the term……I am not trying to sound like a tarantino fucking “fanboy” because there is no denying the guy steals..he even admits it…….but this is stupid.

    and why the fuck didn’t they speak up when this film was first announced like what 2 years ago??

  14. Terry, a fine point you have brung up. And also the makers of the film that he mis-heard the name of and thought it was called “Reservoir Dogs.” Tarantino is a homage director and writer, so either (since he has a VAST knowledge of this film genre and many others) he has came up with it himself (which I could easily see) or he has taken the “general” idea of reviving the genre and just decided to call it that.

    I really don’t get the guys arguments and points at all. It’s just a name, it doesn’t affect how good a movie is or who’s going to see it.

  15. I do think they would need proof that shows them actually talking to Tarantino but to be honest I do think it is possible that he did steal the idea. I don’t think he did though because Tarantino does have a vast knowledge of film and could have easily come up with the idea to make an homage film about old Grindhouse movies.

  16. What about the title? They even state that two movies can be called the same thing, and if one gets recognised a lot more then it’s down to the quality of the movie and NOT the title. Do you think the title of “Grindhouse” really is what the people went to see it for? So he’s hasn’t stolen their idea OR the title because the title is a word used to describe a certain kind of movies in the cinema. It isn’t owned by anyone. Even if Tarantino DID take their ‘general’ idea, he hasn’t stolen any of the stuff from the film etc, it’s just the title which I have stated already that they have no case arguing over.

  17. “I don’t see the story here. From how I’m understaning it, the only thing in common is the title of the movies. And Grindhouse is a generic term from the 70’s.”

    Right, but there aren’t many Grindhouse movies these days… so resurrecting this “genre” could be considered an idea and it seems that Tarantino stole it.

    That’s the story.

  18. Have the people who have seen the film said they are alike in any way? Or is it just wishful and bad tasted thinking on these guys part. Do they actually have PROOF that we can see that tells us they spokw to Tarantino and that he stole their idea. Until I have conclusive evidence then I am still very much on the side of Tarantino’s and that these guys are just trying to steal the limelight because their movie didn’t go down so well.

  19. I don’t see the story here. From how I’m understaning it, the only thing in common is the title of the movies. And Grindhouse is a generic term from the 70’s…

Leave a Reply