Resevoir Dogcrap???

LoLth

Anyone else see Res. Dogs on CH4 on Sunday night? Good film. Tarantino is excellent! or is he???

How many of you also saw the Chow Yun Fat movie after that called 'City on Fire'. The introduction said that this was the movie Tarantino supposedly copied but the denies it. Right. OK. The films were almost identical except the Hong-kong version had more storyline in it. OK,Res. Dogs had big actors and a high budget so it 'looked' good, but considering the piddling amount the Hong-kong films are made on, City on Fire leaves Res. Dogs in it's dust. Way, way, waaaaaaaay better.

Now, if Tarantino had said 'yes, my film was greatly influenced. in fact it was a tribute. Here Hong-kong film guy, have a wad of money to make up for Copyright infringement (god knows we can afford it after Res. Dog's success). Go make another movie.' I would be happy. But, as far as I know now, Tarantino blatantly ripped of a low budget film, tore it to shreds, bloodied it up (a bit) and generally ruined it. 'Dogs will never be the same again.. <sniffle>

Jason.

PS. Maynooth lads, I've got both on tape! Next weekend. OK?

LoLth

Ah, ****e! Now look.. so ****ed off that I double posted!

mewso

Remember Heat (the much touted Pacino, DeNiro starring vehicle) by Michael Mann. Well he ripped off his own movie "La Vice" or something like that (might have been LA Crimewave - not sure
I watched the older film after Heat (which I thought was excellent) and couldn't believe it. A total remake.

M

DeViant

Hmm,
Ok May be Tarantino plagerised the plot, but what I enjoy about Tarantino is the Dialog
"Im hungry, Lets get a Taco"
and the camera work. I saw one of his student film on CH4 on night ages ago, it was full of Wacky camera shots, like the Camera was on the floor at the other end of the room, but the microphones were right beside the actors, so you got this wired feeling of standing beside them , but lookin gdown the other end of a telescope.

J, Whut have you on Vid, Resevoir Dogs or City on fire??

B.

mewso

Just thought I'd clarify the background to ResDogs that I know of. The script somehow got into Harvey Keitel's hands and he liked it. As a result he helped raise the money and probably starred for a minimal fee.
The budget was quite small as far as I know. Good cast but not your million dollar stars.
The big money for Quent came after.

M

DeViant

Phew!!!!
I deleted the right one
B.

LoLth

Ah, but my point was not about how much money the film made for Tarantino but rather the backing that the film had. The budget was quite low, but the resources available in an emergency were quite large, especially when it opened to rave reviews. The smaller, original, film makers had no hope of seeing any of that money, they were literally too broke to bring anyone to court (I would say a lot of their money went on the copyrights in the first place.). So, where Resevoir Dogs shot Tarantino to stardom and earned him a nice tidy sum, it was solely at the expense of the makers of City on Fire, who are only really known by Hong Kong fans and 'cult' people in the Western World.

In quake terminology (sorry non-quakers but Muso is a level designer so this is the most apt way I can put this)..

You design a level, you spend ages, you do the best you can and you make what you are sure everyone will agree is a classic level. You play it on a LAN. Everyone loves it. Someone sees the level and steals the basics. Adds on textures and effects that your machine was just too slow to add on (but that you probably would have added if you could). He releases the level, an unknown editor, and everyone agrees that it is the best looking, fastest, most innovative and worthwhile level of the year. And when one of your LAN friends says 'Hey! That was Muso's level' the thief/redesigner answers 'Who? I've never even met thi Muso'. And he goes on to release levels. The things he's learned from your level improve his later ones, but even when he releases a turkey it is still played because it is done by the same guy. Meanwhile you are playing your levels on a LAN that is losing players one by one to other games that use the 'good' levels.

Same thing. And I think you'd agree, not fair. I'm not saying Tarantino is a bad director, just that after finding out how much better City On Fire was I am wondering whether or not Tarantino deserves all of his praise. How much of it is solely because of his success with Dogs? How many tricks from Dogs has he used in other films? In short, it's a shame he won't help another director out by giving credit where credit is due. Dogs is still a good film. But City is better..

I believe one of the reviews of ResDogs was 'breathtaking....wonderfully original...'

J.

LoLth

hmmmm, would this be considered 'supporting the UnderDog'??



(I know, sad. but I'm bored!!!!!)

LoLth

I've got both on tape. Missed the diner scene from Dogs though..

The Heat original was a film called LA Takedown, and apart from some very minor changes (a lot due to actor interpretation and improv.) Heat is a Carbon copy, not even a remake. While Heat was a good film, it seems that it was an excuse for getting two famous actors together. Why couldn't they act together in an original screenplay??

There's nothing wrong with remakes. I'm not against them if they are done well AND give the original credit. King Kong did. Dracula has always been attributed to Brahm Stoker (Francis Ford Copolla's name is less obvious on the poster even though he would be more recognisable to American audiences). My problem is with a talented director like Tarantino (he is talented) who has huge backing (how else could he afford the line-up in 'Dogs?) not only ripping off a film, not even bothering to be original, but also denying that they ever even SAW the original. Because of 'Dogs high profile, everyone who doesn't know better would be forgiven for believing that City on Fire is a cheap Hong - Kong knock off. Same applies for Heat and LA Takedown (though the Heat director did admit to a remaking).

Speaking of remakes, any of you who studied King Lear for the Leaving, or anyone who likes a bloody good film, check out RAN, it's a Japanese King Lear. Excellent battle scenes and nicely converted to suit Japanese etiquette and ethics. Very colourful. Seemingly it DOES credit Shakespeare as 'The Great Bard' but I can't read Japanese so I can't be sure about that. (BTW, subtitled).

J.

[This message has been edited by LoLth (edited 06-04-99).]