Comments on: Tarantino Stole Grindhouse Idea?

By: Ross

Ross — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 12:29:11 +0000

Well said, Paul. Well said.

By: Paul Martinez

Paul Martinez — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 08:56:05 +0000

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.

By: Ray

Ray — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 06:30:29 +0000

It would probably be news if Tarantino DIDN’T rip someone or something off. His films are all “homages” to other films, with just a little more blood/ass shots and a few discreet uses of the word “nigger.”

He makes me ill.

http://therecshow.com/2007/04/11/tarantino-thief/

By: Chisox

Chisox — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 02:39:38 +0000

Somebody tell Stephen Tramontana that it’s 2007. It’s a dog eat dog world and he just got played.

By: Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 02:24:19 +0000

“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.

By: darren j seeley

darren j seeley — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 02:22:52 +0000

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.

By: bigsampson

bigsampson — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 02:20:07 +0000

man doug…..your post got a lot of comments fast…FYI..HOLLYWOOD HAS SNAKES, SO TREAD LIGHTLY….OR ELSE BUY SOME COOKIES!

By: haole

haole — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 02:18:20 +0000

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.

By: adam

adam — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 01:42:35 +0000

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.

By: alfie

alfie — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 01:07:47 +0000

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….

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 23:52:29 +0000

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.

By: Bob

Bob — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 23:49:34 +0000

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.