You're Still Not Fooling Anyone

[nowknowthis]

And if M. Wallace wanted to threaten someone why not bring up a movie quote, he is Marcellus Wallace, he can quote if he wants. And the breifcase thing is just cool, hell I'd use it. He likes Movie references, i do it all the time in my fiction hoping people will catch on that its from something else, and will get a good laugh. hey the Drug Dealer from the movie could have learned how to use it from the movie American Boy. and the cartoon thing, thats used everywhere dont give me that shit.

[nowknowthis]

Yea and Lucas stole from Kurosawas hiden fortress, and Fistful of Dollars is a blatent ripoff of Yojimbo. WHo cares. also in my point of view considering all the characters in Pulp Fiction are kind of Pop Culture weirdo (Tarentino loves those references" Yea i don't doubt they used those lines. Hell Jules could have watched the Bodyguard and thought "Hey man, that verse it motherfuckin amazing, i think i will use it."

[RichTheMixologist]

If the point that is trying to be made is, "Tarantino is a thieving asshole," then his name has to be put at the end of a very long list of writers and directors.

Since the beginning of storytelling, there has only been one story. The writer, or director, draws from personal experience and adds elements of all he or she has been exposed to in previous tellings of "The Story." Some draw from "The Story" more than others. In the end, it just doesn't matter because we're all thieving assholes.

[BoHoVsGolf]

well tarantino does it well

[DoubleTalkingJive]

Omg he used the illuminating case shot from the final scene in Kiss Me Deadly! String his ass up!!

I guess that means Spielberg's a fucking plaigirist too since he borrowed from that same scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark (case opened --> chaos unleashed).

Or how about the final scene in Raiders which borrowed from Citizen Kane?

Everybody steals. Losers. Do you guys watch even movies?

[Zerudah]

@DoubleTalkingJive Spielberg's still way more original than QT, and isn't just remaking other people's movies.

[DoubleTalkingJive]

@Zerudah And Pulp Fiction was a remake of what film? What about Kill Bill? Or Death Proof?

[Zerudah]

@DoubleTalkingJive Band of Outsiders. Lady Snowblood. Christine.

[DoubleTalkingJive]

@Zerudah I'll give you Lady Snowblood to some degree. But Band Of Outsiders and Christine are ridiculous comparisons. Unless you think a "killer car" automatically constiutues a remake, even though they are two entirely different films.

[DoubleTalkingJive]

@Zerudah And umm have you ever actually seen Band Of Outsiders??

[Zerudah]

@DoubleTalkingJive Yep.

[Rimbaud1531]

@DoubleTalkingJive lol! Death Proof is one of the worst movies of the decade. Yep, it's Tarantino original alright!

[spontaneous09]

lol title is called you're still not fooling anybody....and title of video is still not fooling anyone lol

[iKebs]

It's called intertextuality, it is one of the features of Tarantino's films which makes him an Auteur director. You're just an ignorant and jealous faggot. Go and make your own globally successful movies, dickwad.

[Zerudah]

@iKebs I didn't know calling people faggots or dickwads has anything to do with being an auteur.

[DocHackenbush]

I'm not mad about you, I still don't know why to make such a big deal out of it. All those movies are out there. The borrowed or stolen or influential stuff is available for everybody to be recognized. It's not like he has taken stuff and erased those other movies. What's more important for me, he might have copied some moments or even essential plot-parts. And still he did his own thing with it. Those "attached" movies or parts feel so different in every respect. QT is a rip-off artist. Cheers!

[DieCupcake]

@DocHackenbush Hear hear.

[Zerudah]

@DocHackenbush Well, actually, with Harvey's help, he's taken a lot of stuff off the shelves and screwed us with dubbed edits. Try getting a legal copy of Drunken Master 2, for example. Plus, if you wanted to import, say, the original uncut City on Fire, Harvey would sue sites which sold it. Hell, they even forced a video company to take down the name "Grindhouse", even though its a public domain term. Now they're trying to shake down Sony over the rights to Crouching Tiger.

[Benjomaster]

Okay, now I can understand when you say Tarantino ripped-off City on Fire with Reservoir Dogs as the storyline really is basically the same, only Tarantino focused on an other aspect of the plot. But this really is exaggerated, man. This is definately not "stealing" as you put it, it's just quoting. No harm done. Everybody does that. Tarantino says it himself, he never denies it...

[fucker661]

just awful. lost respect for him as a director and a person. nothing wrong with paying homage to a movie, but you can at least admit you are doing it.

[DieCupcake]

Sure, denying that he'd even seen City on Fire was a douchy move. He does make douche moves, as do we all sometimes. But see, Reservoir Dogs, original or not, is a better film. Honestly, I think Tarantino's "stealing" is exactly what makes his films so interesting. Every movie he does has tributes to a wide variety of films from different countries, eras, genres... I think he does it as a loving cinephile, and the fact that he can work so many of these refrences into one story is pretty cool.

[supermark69]

These are actually homages I think. I'm not so convinced the City on Fire/ ReservoirDogs ripoff can be called a homage though.

At least he has taste in what he steals

[jmg3116]

The first video made sense, but this one seems like you're stretching it to make it fit your case.

[JeffysPlayhouse]

this is horse shit. he was just using little references. thats like saying Waynes World 2 is plagarising The Graduate because of the ending, or Danny Glover in Death At a Funeral saying "I'm getting too old for this shit" when he said it in Lethal Weapon. this was just nit picky and not plagarism. bitch

[petrietri]

There is a HUGE fucking Difference between Plagiarism and paying Homage. Quentin Tarantino has made it a point to let the world know how much he loves movies, and when I see his movies I find it interesting to see how many I can spot. He has made it VERY clear that he Loves the Bodyguard series, which would clearly explain this. It's also no coincidence that a famous war movie icon of the 1940's was named Al Doraine. Quentin's love for movies is what makes his actors and his fans all love him

[Tarantinosucks]

Fuck Tarantino

[mokeymina]

it all PULP. something thats real but not real. it moreof a real tribute than arip off.i got the flu i cant type goodnight

[SyncrisisVideos]

these points I can see as homage and nitpicky. But the resevoir dogs comparison is more than just a few plot devices: the entire movie is copied! And to hear Kurt Loder here quote Tarantino as saying he's "dying to see the Hong Kong film" as if he's never seen it.... that's just blatant lying!

[nowknowthis]

@SyncrisisVideos No Reservoir dogs may have ripped off City on Fire, except all he did was rip off the last 20 minutes and making it an entire movie. Plus Tarantino does a lot more with it including dialogue and character development, people are too hung up on plot sometimes,take a look at the characters the dialogues they have in both movies from beginning to end and tell me if one of the Characters in City on fire says that "Like a Virgin is about getting fucked by a big dick

[checkeredgeek]

Personally, I feel like he meant most of this as tribute, but what bothers me is how he has become more famous than his sources (with the exception of Scorsese). The "pair of pliers and a blowtorch" line has been attributed to QT countless times, and I don't think many people my age (under 25) knows Charley Varrick at all. Even the fake bible quote could be considered tribute, but why'd he take the title color scheme, too?

[jpsplat]

I can agree with all of these clips except for the 3rd one, that's just a bit nit-picky if you ask me.

[darknessofkrish]

The big difference; one film is wholly enjoyable and the other is not...

[silent072]

Using a quote from the bible = ripping of f another movie. GG.

[KDol0]

@silent072 Try reading the other comments. The actual bible verse is nowhere in any bible translation anywhere and is far different from Jules' recitation. He wasn't quoting the bible, he was quoting The Bodyguard.

[Bluehawk2008]

Chop socky? There was no kung fu in City on Fire that I can remember, just a lot of shooting.

[AbsentWithoutLeaving]

It's really hard as a writer (and I imagine as a filmmaker) NOT to incorporate material you've seen elsewhere into your work. Especially if the material resonates with your own vision of something you are trying to convey. How many times have the classic Greek tragedies been incorporated into the literature of the proceeding ages? (Shakespeare????).

If someone else has said something, does that mean no one else can EVER say it again?

Tarantino is derivative. Everyone knows that going in.

[StillJammin]

Show me where he got the other 2 hours of footage for Pulp Fiction. Show me the library of obscure films where he plagiarized from to make Inglorious Basterds. And I hope you got permission to use both of these titles in this video. You wouldn't want to look like a hypocrite, now would you? That would probably bring shame to your glorious career as a film critic.

This video IS tongue-in-cheek. Why the uploader said that in the desc. and how it helps his argument is beyond me. Dictionary maybe?

[fkrunaway]

@impossiblefunky Why don't you make a movie, instead of spending so much time trying to destroy another filmmakers reputation.

[impossiblefunky]

@fkrunaway OMG! Why haven't I ever thought of that? Let's go to Hollywood right now! You can be my producer!

[diddymuck]

@fkrunaway plagiarism expose

[mrderrickmcguinty]

@fkrunaway

executives dumb as ones at Miramax can be found once in life of mankind.

tarantino had that luck.

[jalind1]

What idiots at MTV. CoF is not "chop-socky", it is classic HK police/gangster genre, and a good one.

Tarantino's "homages" are very clear and he admits them. I wonder why he has such a problem about CoF?

Remakes occur all the time. Woo remade Melville's Le Samourai as The Killer. Scorcese remade Lau's/Mak's Infernal Affairs as The Departed and these are all openly done. For these 2, the originals are as good as the remakes. Even though RD is better than CoF, why not credit it?

[medievalxsovereign]

HOLY SHIT HE RIPPED OFF THE BIBLE, STONE HIM! , STONE HIM WITH YOUR ROCKS OF ORIGINALITY.

[megamaid100]

bottom line is people are stupid simpletons and will credit quentin as a great artist, hes the best collage artist, thats about it. oh and a giant coke head.....

[ThatRantKid]

Tarantinos story is made himself. It even says on the movie that he took a lot of his favorite lines from movies and put them in and has said "It's just a pile of my favorite films. I hope that when people watch it(Pulp) that they get the references, or wanna go see the movies"

[Zerudah]

@ThatRantKid "Tarantinos story is made himself."

Tell that to Roger Avary.

[jerzy862]

oh please, these few little scenes dont constitute plagiarism by any means. 

[TEROCKMAN]

city on fire....i understand that .....but this one sucked!!!

[MelMojares]

tarantino undoubtedly used pieces from a lot of other films, and he admits it. his movies are just a bunch of great movies scenes put into one. i think its a given, because 90% of people out there wont go out there way to watch an older b movie... like the movies listed in this montage or reservoir and its very big similarity to city on fire..

[MelMojares]

i personally dont think tarantino is doing anything wrong because either way and no matter what perspective you look at it from... NO ONE owns an idea, whether its word for word or pieces from something else... the key thing tarantino presents, is he can make the ideas hes taken more presentable then the originals could... its show business and what makes the money is what wins... fooled or not fooled

[spideymayne]

Tarantino's movies are like mixtapes. But on the other hand, the man has to be given some credit for putting together some great movies from a bunch of random sources. And bottom line, Pulp Fiction is a great movie.

[redbandmagic]

So what if Tarantino isn't doing anything original... so what if he's copying other movies... It's not like he's the only filmmaker doing this. James Cameron copied the Pocahontas and Dances With Wolves stories for Avatar, George Lucas stole from Akira Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress for Star Wars, and Coppola pretty much copied Blow-Up when he made The Conversation. This is nothing new, folks.

[GoldenAshe9]

One point. Since intertextuality is one of the main postmodern techniques, and Tarantino was trying to make a staunchly postmodern film, doesn't it follow that it wouldn't be a quite-so-postmodern film if he hadn't paid homage to films that had come before? A film made by a film buff for film buffs, where finding all the references is part of the fun?

On another note, thanks for doing my homework for me, my essay on intertextuality in Pulp Fiction just became a whole lot easier ;)

[RYNO2511]

who cares i love pulp fiction

[Marty0Mcfly]

hey man, we all know tarantino has ripped off every obscure movie ever made. two problems. one, he figures out a way to incorporate all those "rip offs" so that his films are incredibly entertaining anyway. and two... hell man, do you know anyone who's seen chiba the bodyguard and three little bops?

[VoiceOverBerlin]

Um, excuse me, Kurt Loder, but CITY ON FIRE is not a "chop-socky flick." Just shows you how clueless the mainstream media really was regarding Tarantino's rip off.

[CrazeeNow]

The Ezekiel quote: I almost take that as an in joke. That maybe Jules never read the Bible, he just watched a LOT of Chiba movies. Pair of pliers and a blowtorch: homage. The light from the case: Tarantion never denied that he stole that from Kiss Me Deadly. The adrenaline shot: That was from a DOCUMENTARY. That's not stealing. That's research. That's like saying Dan Brown stole from Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

[VogtTD]

All the Tarantino fan boys feel the need to come on here and downrate all the comments... pathetic.

[RYNO2511]

@VogtTD im a tarantino fan and im not downrating your comment :)

[VogtTD]

@RYNO2511 Thank you.

[KramerJapan]

And goodness no! He used a scene reenacting the process in order to stop an OD.... plagerism!!!

[KramerJapan]

Ooooooh nooooooo he used he same bible quote.... as though no one else uses the same bible quotes ever.... goodness me!

[impossiblefunky]

Actually, if you look at the bible you'll see that the original quote is much different.

[luvodicus]

Ezekiel 25:15-17 15 Thus says the Lord GOD: Because the Philistines dealt vengefully and took vengeance with a spiteful heart, to destroy because of the old hatred, 16 therefore thus says the Lord GOD: I will stretch out My hand against the Philistines, and I will cut off the Cherethites and destroy the remnant of the seacoast. 17 I will execute great vengeance on them with furious rebukes; and they shall know that I am the LORD, when I lay My vengeance upon them.

[luvodicus]

Tarantino didn't even try.. He took verbatim a scene from another movie, and placed it in his script. He took a scene from another movie, and rewrote it and claimed it as his. That's the same as me taking Pepsi, pouring it into a Coke Bottle, Shaking it up, removing the label, and selling it Mr. Cola.

[rockerravers]

wooow. winny little bitches, make an awesome movie like pulp fiction , do that

[Wardfolio]

"He's dying to see the Hong Kong original?!!!" HE SAID THAT? How can you dick sucking fanboys support him?! THAT IS NOT A HOMAGE, THAT'S THEFT! Bottom line! He had to have seen it to copy that much! Fuck Tarantino!

[VogtTD]

They can support him because as you said, they are dick sucking fan boys. Occasionally they also bend over so he can fuck them with his little prick.

[MrJimmyNapoleon]

@VogtTD "they are dick sucking fan boys"

Now why is ad-hominem like that necessary?

[VogtTD]

@MrJimmyNapoleon I say they're dick sucking because regardless what evidence of plagiarism you put in a Tarintino fanboy's face, they still defend him.

[MrJimmyNapoleon]

@VogtTD That's some major generalizing...

Myself, I do still defend his films, but after seeing this, I don't defend him

[VogtTD]

@MrJimmyNapoleon Generalizing is what it is, just as there's always some origin or truth in a stereotype.

[deadpang]

cool to see all of these influences/sources in video form instead of just reading about them, but I'm with all the people who don't think his stuff is anywhere near as derivative as it might seem

[thor9754]

wow... QT just got knocked down a peg in my book... i cant lie...

i always knew he was inspired and influenced by crappy 70's movies, but never realized he was ripping them off this clearly... i mean, if its out and out done as a direct reference, in hornor to the movie, its one thing...but if he is like denying these scenes heavily inspired his movie, thats bullshit...

[thoomolong]

Who doesn't know he takes influences and scenes from other films? But who would've even heard of the scene from 'American Boy' anyway?

QT can take a few scenes of shit and turn it to gold (along with his original diaogue and story). Tell you what: if this offends you, stop watching QT films. And just try to get thru 10 minutes of the original 'Inglorious Basterds', 'American Boy' or the Sonny Chiba movie.

[VogtTD]

That friend is what we call stealing.

[Dudeamis]

haha fail

[blackenedlegions]

"He's dying to see the Hong Kong original" OMFG What a fucking douche bag! Moon face and his shoddy pastiche crap-fests are so over-rated.

[oakr8r]

there called homages... 90% of films do the same thing these days.

name 10 of your all time favorite films and any film buff can point out where that quote or whatever was "stolen" from...

look up WILHEM SCREAM on google if your still confused...

as for that suitcase thing... you can easily say that RAIDERS stole that same idea... come on now.

[Randomguy252525]

This is completely ridiculous. Its supposed to be a quote, who cares if its an altered version from a movie. The power of the scene is a character using it before he kills someone, not the literal text. It could be any of dozens of bible quotes.

And someone describing how to give an adrenaline shot looks like a scene in which someone gives an adrenaline shot? You don't say. Jesus.

Tarantino has lifted scenes, but these are terrible examples. And most don't even write their films anyway.

[antiXincorporated]

yes but why did he pick the same bible quotes?

[mamacornettesmoney]

I think it's pretty cool and creative the way he takes bits and pieces from a wide range of films and works them into his own, very well done film. I love the allusions and homages is these films.

[antiXincorporated]

Then you'll love kanye west, too. He's the tarantino of the music world...just ask daft punk.

[VogtTD]

Then you misunderstand what the word creative actually means.

[7armedman]

So Mr. White, how do you deride Tarantino for being a rip off artist but love a movie like Lethal Force which is the same thing? I just watched that movie and if ever a movie was made of homages and rip offs, it was that one. Or almost any other exploitation movie, half of them are just ripping off some other movie, but few do it as well as Tarantino.

[45axelh]

these points are so miniscule ... is he stealing because someone in another movie talked about adrenaline shots ? because there was light in a box ?

oh wait, people also drove cars in this movie, im sure ive seen that before ! STOLEN

also, people smoked cigarettes, STOLEN !

[antiXincorporated]

You named generic examples whereas this video depicts DIRECT quotations from other movies. That constitutes as plagiarism...which you so obviously support. Just because it's popular doesn't make it correct behavior.

[MrVill]

No it takes DIRECT quotations from the Bible.

[harrychalcraft]

Big deal.

[advantagesmith]

indy4242, a quick point of order. Take a look at Ezekiel 25:17. The actual verse isn't even close to what is said in these films, which means that Tarantino wasn't quoting the Bible; he was quoting the earlier film.

[G58]

@advantagesmith Wow! Did you work that out all by yourself?

Jeez, 28 years old. Sad.

[advantagesmith]

@G58 Now, now. In all fairness, I was only a bright eyed 27 year old when I wrote that comment.

Speaking of which, I appreciate your thoughtful deconstruction of said comment. It's nice to know that there's people out there that have made it their personal mission to stalk through the halls of the internet, taking to task anybody whose opinions they don't like. You're really a sort of a hero. Thank God for you, sir... Thank God... for you...

[G58]

@advantagesmith I didn't not like your comment, I was simply throwing you a compliment, in the same way one might throw a fish to a performing seal. Stating the obvious surely deserves no less. :)

[advantagesmith]

@G58 Sometimes, the obvious needs to be stated. The commenter that I was responding to seemed to think that the same Bible verse being used in both films was a function of parallel thinking. However, since the verse is not actually written that way, there's no denying that Tarantino's use of it was not parallel thought, but actual homage (or rip-off, depending on one's perspective). I don't like saying obvious things any more than you do, but sometimes you just have to.

[indy4242]

The first one was okay. It showed actual similarities. This one just takes cheap shots. WOW. Two films both quote the same passage of the bible. WOW. Two films both have a suitcase that has a light inside it.

This is just REALLY contrived.

[Pat2b27]

The suitcases scenes aren't even similar except for the fact that there is light in there. Was the "original scene" a horror film because the woman was freaking out.

[diddymuck]

right the fffff on! Pal, let me know when you're gonna make a film and I'll personally send all I can to support it. How that screwbrained plagerist got to be an a-lister is a complete mystery.

[StriderSoze]

Ok you had a point with the first one but THIS?

It seems like you're just pissed that they never showed your film.

[Animehermit]

evidence is circumstantial at best, similar scenes maybe, but not outright copying. try harder, bub.

[SuperHellFighter17]

Its copying, thats not just similar, thats the same.

[Agent12yan]

hahahaha, similar, that's funny.

So if I'm taking a test and I lean over and take a look at your test, and use your answers as mine, is that just "similar" too? hahahahaha... that's great.

[mainj]

Who's a bigger nerd the person who made this or Tarantino? In any case, it's a fact that Tarantino like to pay homage to old films and now he's a rich and famous film maker. Why doesn't the person who made this do something worth while instead of wasting energy exposing things no one cares about?

[Agent12yan]

it's people like you, who allow theft of material to happen. you hold no value for originality or creativity, and that's exactly why the Tarantino's and the Mencia's of the world exist. All you care about is being entertained with no concept of what bs the entertainers have to go through in order to get their material to you.

[mlanders99]

Tarentino never claimed to be an original moviemaker... he just brought back a style that had been dead for about 25 years. Of course he borrowed lines and scenes from his favorite flicks, he loved them so he pays tribute. If moviegoers don't know his references, then they are twice as entertained. Show me a truly original movie.

[ChevalierAguila]

A style that has been dead? Not really, he just took a bunch of stuff from old movies and put it together. Not, it's neither a homage either, he just steals.

[skins2153]

I'd pay homage to my favorite movies too. He must have had so much fun making Pulp Fiction. I hope I get a chance to do something even close to that in my lifetime.

[Agent12yan]

not an homage if it's plagiarism.

[JonRushing]

Synecdoche, New York

[evanbohn]

i'm upset to see no reference to Sy Richardson as Norwood in Alex Cox's "Straight To Hell", norwood from "sth" being a major influence on the character jules from pulp fiction

[timtak1]

True romance uses the music and southern drawl voice over of Terrence Mallick's 1973 film Badlands.

v=sWLvrOq4z2c

Or search for

Badlands "I grew to love the forest" Terrence Mallick

I am a Tarrantino fan too.

Sauthe seems to be missing the point. It is NOT a Bible passage, but lifted from the earlier film.

[evanbohn]

actually it is a bible passage. i've seen it in there. the earlier film did a whack job of transcribing it to a sonny chiba story, or whatever was going on there. tarantino is a big chiba fan.

the moral of the story is either develop your own material, or admit to your "homages". but incessant referencing is an act of laziness and creative redundancy. why bother "homage"ing at all?

[timtak1]

So it is a Bible passage that has been modified (done a whack job upon)? Where?

I think that everyone homage's to a certain extent. Rappers use bits of other songs. They admit to them though.

Tarantino does not seem to always admit as much as he might. But a pastiche of a lot of good bits of a lot of good movies can, when done well, create some brilliant movies. There is a good reason to bother, but I agree there could have been a bit more in the way of admition, perhaps in the credits.

[evanbohn]

get a bible, find ezekiel. i think it's towards the middle/back and very short.

whack job; re: chiba. tarantino's version may be more accurate, depending on which translation your bible is.

we all reference others, apparently nothing is original. Rappers and DJs "sample". journalists are legally required to cite their references.

tarantino makes no claim to originality. it seems that he maybe sits back and hopes others will label him as such

[timtak1]

This is Ezekiel 25, 17: "And I will execute great vengeance upon them with furious rebukes; and they shall know that I am the LORD, when I shall lay my vengeance upon them."

But all the bit before about the path of the "righteous man", path beset on all sides "brother's keeper", etc. I can not find at "online bible search."

"Am I my brother's keeper?" is from Genesis 4:8, Cain and Abel.

[evanbohn]

christianity, like any cult[ure] is famous for its quarreling sects and differing translations of holy books. you have read one version of the ezekiel quote. there was a time when out of boredom and given access to a bible, i would check the passage. i never found it phrased the same as in the film. call it "agendas". anyway.

[evanbohn]

it can certainly be said he stole the badlands formula for natural born killers.

i (try to) write screenplays, and often find myself venturing into unoriginal territory. but when i see i've done this, i make a sign post out of it, something film-buffs will recognise as a reference/tip-of-the-hat, rather than glossing over it with a kitsch/retro soundtrack and some "cool-beans-motherfucker" dialogue. tarantino's funny. but he's full of fucking shit. and he has no dick.

[timtak1]

I hope that many of your screenplays get produced.

Where is the eastoftheweb (please google it) of as yet un-produced screenplays?

[SaultheSensational]

I knew it wasn't the actual verse, but I was not sure of how different it was. Looking it up, of course, it's much, much shorter, but still similar in concept. While it is clear this is what Tarantino saw that inspired him to put it in the film, what the short documentary doesn't explain is the plot of the film from '79. Even if their interpretation of the passage has a meaning in the film, it also very much does in Pulp Fiction (it leads to Jules' final monologue, arguably an important moral).

[SaultheSensational]

And a similar gag of the "Don't be a *Square*" sequence, from an old cartoon. As if that had any relevance once the idea is utilized in a live action feature film with no other digitally-inserted cartoon elements of any kind, catching the viewer off-guard because it's genuinely unique and unexpected.

These 3 minutes infuriate me. No context to support their claims outside of the direct similarities (much like the longer first installment), and not even strong enough arguments to begin with.

[SaultheSensational]

Next we have the opening of a suitcase with a lightbulb in it, representing something special, except the first time it's a horror movie and the second time it's just something that catches the audience's eye, as opposed to controlling the scene (which the Travolta version absolutely does not).

A man explaining the exact events of the sequence with Mia's overdose... as opposed to the way in Pulp Fiction that it's brilliantly realized with.... actors. And... drama.

[SaultheSensational]

Let's go through this bit by bit:

A shot of the Ezekiel 25:17 monologue coupled with an out-of-context reading of it from another movie (which I could not find at all on IMDb. At all.) in a totally different situation than the original intention.

You realize it's a bible quote, right? People quote similar or identical bible quotes in dozens of movies.

[Beatlekid1800]

The reason that quote comes under fire is because, 1. That's not even a verse in the bible (look it up and read the real verse) and 2. That WAS the only movie that same quote comes from, oh and I found it on Imdb. Next time research the topic before discussing it. At least wikipedia it, damn....

[SaultheSensational]

And the reason I said I couldn't find it, was that I was searching the title only, a mistake on my part.

There WERE two films by that title made in 1979, but this film was made in 1976. If you're making a documentary that can easily be disputed, the least you can do is cite your sources correctly (not to mention, one of your FOUR sources, another big detractor from this, as, most likely any single movie you can possibly think of takes at leas that many influences from other films).

[Beatlekid1800]

Okay I'm taking about the quote that you said was was used dozen of times in different film when in fact it's only been used twice, once in Karate Kiba which in the US is known as The Believer and in Pulp Fiction quentin Tarantino. Their isn't any other film that uses a similar are almost identical quote because the quote isn't real, it's fictionalized for Karate Kiba. Now, I didn't make this video and I love Quentin Tarantino's films, but anyone can see from a mile a way he plagiarises films.

[SaultheSensational]

I never said this quote had been used more than these two times. I simply said that several bible passages which have been quoted several times in several different movies. A similarity isn't plagiarizing the source material if the context in which it occurs is totally different.

[evanbohn]

actually the light from the case is some sort of nucelar/atomic weapon/device. its from the crime thriller kiss me deadly, which is not a horror movie.

as for scorcese's american boy, it very much seems that the interview dialogue was transcribed to tarantino's screenplay, almost verbatim.

[evanbohn]

tarantino enjoys obscure american cinema [see: death proof, re: "vanishing point"]

just because he has used it differently, doesn't mean he didn't inspiration from its use. here's another point;

tarantino is a pot head. he probably forgot he was taking it from another movie, he may just have presumed he'd heard it in church, or whatever.

maybe he's not the great plagiarist some acuse him of being, but there are no equally strong arguments in favour of this possibility

[glitterdeath]

Search Karate Kiba