I don’t support Tarantino’s comments, but you’re using the wrong comparison. Batman ‘66 and The Dark Knight are not the same stories, they just feature Batman. Tarantino is referring to remakes where they’re essentially telling the same story.
@@derrickket087 Yup, that nuance is true. The ironic thing is that the little twist Denis gave it made it worth it, and one only knows that by watching it (or by being told, I guess, but then that precludes the idea that being immersed in the visuals isn't a worthwhile part of cinema, which itself is ironic for the 70mm guy). It would be different if he watched it and found the twist to not be differentiating enough, though. The comments smack to me of, "I want to make the news cycle for a bit."
And to answer the question... Why we make it. I remember years ago when the History channel remade Roots. One of the producers was talking about how his kids did not want to watch the original Roots because it was old and it looked old. These young kids nowadays don't want to watch movies that look old. So that's why it gets remade to make it look new and fresh for our younger generation.
Yeah. And in the interview Quentin said he doesn't see the point of readapting stories. He asked why not choose a different book in a series. If that's his opinion, oh well. It doesn't affect any of us in any way.
On IMDB The Thing ( 1982) was listed as one of his favorites. Why watch the 1982 version when there’s the original from the 1950’s. The Killers(1964) and The Killers (1946) he has them rated 32 and 33 respectively out of 333 of his favourites. Why does he include and like the 1964 version over the 1946 version? I respect Quentin Tarantino’s knowledge and body of work but he should be consistent with his arguments.
I was going to mention Django until you posted that image. I remember watching the movie, And I enjoyed it and then I found out later on that there were several other Django movies made years ago 😂
Quentin Tarantino is the type of guy who likes movies that would cause a debate. For example, Quentin stated that Psycho II is better than the original. He also mentioned to Bill Maher that 1917 is a bad movie. While his views on movies are subjective, Quentin Tarantino knows how to stir out the conversation.
All of Quentin Tarantino's films are actually based on or contain elements from other films. So where he's saying is highly hypocritical. He took elements from several films and fit them like a puzzle into kill Bill
I think Quentin's point would be more valid if the original versions of the stories where already told well and so why see something that already be done perfect!
They are NOT remakes. They are adaptations of books. Also, Reservoir Dogs is not City on Fire, right? The Departed is NOT Infernal Affairs even though that is actually a remake.
40:35 another good example I would think is you can mention Friday the 13th or Jason in a movie like Scream by treating it like it's a fictional movie in that "universe" or "reality" BUT you can't then depict any scene in Scream as actually taking place at Camp Crystal Lake because that would be incorporating the IP of Friday the 13th into the real storyline setting of Scream.
One small tidbit: Tarantino actually got the title "Inglorious Basterds" from a 1970s action flick "The Inglorious Bastards," starring Fred Williamson and Peter Hooten (the original Dr. Strange 🪄). It actually an entertainingly violent movie. To his credit, Tarantino didn't outright remake the film.
The most stupid thing is he has always paraded himself as someone who appreciates actors body of work. So he misses some damn fine performances due to his stance. BTW I am so old I have seen the Ralph Bashki version of LOTR/Hobbit on film, still negative carousel with audio tape accompaniment with the beeps to forward the carousel. I grew up in the 80's.
John I think the reason you don’t like ghost face is primarily why many do like him, it’s not some un-killable monster that comes back for 20 sequels, it’s a flesh & blood person
No, it isn't a flesh and blood person. It's no one. There is no Ghost Face. Every movie is just a different bunch of people putting on a Ghost Face mask. Freddie is Freddie. Michael is Michael. Jason is Jason. But there is no Ghost Face.
I don't know, I feel like there's a tiny bit of a difference here. The new Dune movies, Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings and Shogun were fresh takes on previous stories, whereas Django Unchained and Inglorious Basterds were fresh stories inspired by previous stories. So they're not necessarily remakes.
The remakes and sequels getting churned out at the moment is absolutely ridiculous. However, I can’t complain all the time as I absolutely love the latest ‘Dune’ movies for example.
Dune is a good example of films that use new technology to bring a complicated story to life. It's very different from Lynch's version (although I heard his script was much better, but impossible to execute at the time). But I don't think a remake automatically means a good movie. A good story is a good story and a good way of telling it is a good way. In the best of films, they push themselves to tell stories in the best way. I think it will go back to it more and more and we can already see it in some films although unfortunately it is a minority.
You know his debut film Reservoir Dogs is famously known to be a complete rip off of an older foreign crime film called city on fire. There's even a clip of him admitting that he copied that film.
I don’t have any interest in watching the remake of The Crow, but not because it’s a remake; it’s because I think it looks bad and the reviews are bad.
No disrespect to guys like Tarantino, or Scorsese, but I'm lumping them in with the "Old man yells at cloud" category when it comes to their personal opinions. Will I still enjoy their movies? Very likely. But as what commonly happens when people start sharing their actual opinions, we find out that they are not things most of us agree with. And that is fine. I just brush it all off now. If I get told something now, I'd say, " Quintin said what? Oh, of course he did." and I just move on with my day.
Quentin is one of few directors that can say stupid shit and walk away unscathed. His cinematic signature touches are nothing short of epic, and his filmography is undeniable.
I personally don’t like his movies. I will say that quetin’s movies clearly all have a uniuly distinct style. You can spot a tarrintino movie from a mile away.. But I don’t think that style is for me
@@therealeverton here are some others with distinct style : •Wes Anderson •Cowen brothers (spelling) •Nolan (kinda. Not as much as the others) There’s probably a couple others I’m not thinking of
@datmarshy There are many directors with a distinct style, and nobody has earned the right to talk nonsense without being called out on it. No human in history has.
@@jasonone8726 and Jonh Campea saw the original Django? The only thing tarantino used was the name and a came of the main original actor. Everything else is different.
Why do we always have to freak out if a director/actor doesn't like a certain movie or genre of film that we all like? Them not likeing something that I like is their own opinion and it doesn't ruin my enjoyment of it.
The "on your left" scene always bothered me. It should be the "behind you, slightly to your left" scene. I mean, it's not on his left until AFTER he's almost turned around. Go back Marvel, and do it again. Get it right this time. (Just Joking).
Tarantino's comments are the equivalent of saying "I'm not interested in seeing The Dark Knight because I've seen Batman '66" lol
I don’t support Tarantino’s comments, but you’re using the wrong comparison. Batman ‘66 and The Dark Knight are not the same stories, they just feature Batman. Tarantino is referring to remakes where they’re essentially telling the same story.
@@derrickket087 Yup, that nuance is true. The ironic thing is that the little twist Denis gave it made it worth it, and one only knows that by watching it (or by being told, I guess, but then that precludes the idea that being immersed in the visuals isn't a worthwhile part of cinema, which itself is ironic for the 70mm guy).
It would be different if he watched it and found the twist to not be differentiating enough, though. The comments smack to me of, "I want to make the news cycle for a bit."
I don’t need to watch The Last Airbender. I already saw Shamalan’s movie.
That's like saying "I refuse to watch the US version of the Office because I've watched the original"
By Tarantinos logic, you don't need to watch any movie more than once, and yet he still watched Lynchs Dune TWICE!
Lunacy.
And to answer the question... Why we make it. I remember years ago when the History channel remade Roots. One of the producers was talking about how his kids did not want to watch the original Roots because it was old and it looked old. These young kids nowadays don't want to watch movies that look old. So that's why it gets remade to make it look new and fresh for our younger generation.
Dune isn't even a remake. It's an adaption.
Yeah. And in the interview Quentin said he doesn't see the point of readapting stories. He asked why not choose a different book in a series. If that's his opinion, oh well. It doesn't affect any of us in any way.
On IMDB The Thing ( 1982) was listed as one of his favorites. Why watch the 1982 version when there’s the original from the 1950’s.
The Killers(1964) and The Killers (1946) he has them rated 32 and 33 respectively out of 333 of his favourites. Why does he include and like the 1964 version over the 1946 version?
I respect Quentin Tarantino’s knowledge and body of work but he should be consistent with his arguments.
You can’t be consistent when you’re trying to be cool and counter cultural.
That’s kind of like saying “I don’t need to see ‘The Magnificent Seven’, I already watched Kurosawa’s ‘Seven Samurai’.”
I was going to mention Django until you posted that image. I remember watching the movie, And I enjoyed it and then I found out later on that there were several other Django movies made years ago 😂
What a hypocrit quentin is lol
Quentin Tarantino is the type of guy who likes movies that would cause a debate.
For example, Quentin stated that Psycho II is better than the original. He also mentioned to Bill Maher that 1917 is a bad movie.
While his views on movies are subjective, Quentin Tarantino knows how to stir out the conversation.
Paul Dano played the cuckold father in The Fabelmans. Great actor.
Thanks for doing this Open Mic for us, John. I needed this today to get my mind off things.
There’s this thing called jealousy test among writers/artists. That’s why there’s a strange statement like this against great piece
All of Quentin Tarantino's films are actually based on or contain elements from other films. So where he's saying is highly hypocritical. He took elements from several films and fit them like a puzzle into kill Bill
That’s called inspiration, not remaking the same story or film.
The shogun comment was fighting words huh John? 😂😂
I think Quentin's point would be more valid if the original versions of the stories where already told well and so why see something that already be done perfect!
They are NOT remakes. They are adaptations of books. Also, Reservoir Dogs is not City on Fire, right?
The Departed is NOT Infernal Affairs even though that is actually a remake.
That’s actually why I like scream because it’s a mystery who ghost face is
He’s not a genius!
Quentin Tarantino watching this like: 👁👄👁
Glad you enjoyed it John! Personally , wouldn't go that far, it's a good bit better than the first though. At least where I am concerned
40:35 another good example I would think is you can mention Friday the 13th or Jason in a movie like Scream by treating it like it's a fictional movie in that "universe" or "reality" BUT you can't then depict any scene in Scream as actually taking place at Camp Crystal Lake because that would be incorporating the IP of Friday the 13th into the real storyline setting of Scream.
One small tidbit: Tarantino actually got the title "Inglorious Basterds" from a 1970s action flick "The Inglorious Bastards," starring Fred Williamson and Peter Hooten (the original Dr. Strange 🪄). It actually an entertainingly violent movie. To his credit, Tarantino didn't outright remake the film.
I love Quentin Tarantino don’t get me wrong but sometimes I feel like he really just needs to keep his opinions to himself
Reservoir Dogs contains large chunks of stuff "inspired" by the Hong Kong film City on Fire.
The most stupid thing is he has always paraded himself as someone who appreciates actors body of work. So he misses some damn fine performances due to his stance.
BTW I am so old I have seen the Ralph Bashki version of LOTR/Hobbit on film, still negative carousel with audio tape accompaniment with the beeps to forward the carousel. I grew up in the 80's.
John I think the reason you don’t like ghost face is primarily why many do like him, it’s not some un-killable monster that comes back for 20 sequels, it’s a flesh & blood person
No, it isn't a flesh and blood person. It's no one. There is no Ghost Face. Every movie is just a different bunch of people putting on a Ghost Face mask. Freddie is Freddie. Michael is Michael. Jason is Jason. But there is no Ghost Face.
I don't know, I feel like there's a tiny bit of a difference here. The new Dune movies, Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings and Shogun were fresh takes on previous stories, whereas Django Unchained and Inglorious Basterds were fresh stories inspired by previous stories. So they're not necessarily remakes.
NONE of them are remakes. The Muppet Christmas Carol is not a remake of any previous Christmas Carol film, it is a new adapation of a BOOK.
@@therealeverton Fair but it still proves John's point wrong.
The remakes and sequels getting churned out at the moment is absolutely ridiculous. However, I can’t complain all the time as I absolutely love the latest ‘Dune’ movies for example.
Except, Dune is an adaption, not a remake.
Dune is a good example of films that use new technology to bring a complicated story to life. It's very different from Lynch's version (although I heard his script was much better, but impossible to execute at the time).
But I don't think a remake automatically means a good movie. A good story is a good story and a good way of telling it is a good way.
In the best of films, they push themselves to tell stories in the best way. I think it will go back to it more and more and we can already see it in some films although unfortunately it is a minority.
Didn’t Quentin Tarantino love The Lone Ranger movie? Isn’t that a remake?
Why does ANYBODY listen to Quentin Tarantino?
Just another old Italian director who's mad that
No one is watching their movies. Lol
Suprisingly i go back to the thor entrance of wakanda scene the most, ive never went back to the endgame one lowkey find it lackluster.
You know his debut film Reservoir Dogs is famously known to be a complete rip off of an older foreign crime film called city on fire. There's even a clip of him admitting that he copied that film.
Quentin is an edgelord. Stereotypical contrarian. Yeah, he may be super talented. Doesnt mean hes not a douche.
I don’t have any interest in watching the remake of The Crow, but not because it’s a remake; it’s because I think it looks bad and the reviews are bad.
11:18 John May a point there
No disrespect to guys like Tarantino, or Scorsese, but I'm lumping them in with the "Old man yells at cloud" category when it comes to their personal opinions. Will I still enjoy their movies? Very likely. But as what commonly happens when people start sharing their actual opinions, we find out that they are not things most of us agree with. And that is fine. I just brush it all off now. If I get told something now, I'd say, " Quintin said what? Oh, of course he did." and I just move on with my day.
One of Hollywood’s most derivative directors says one of the most moronic things anyone has ever said about another movie.
Was there no Filthy Sports today because of the problem with the show earlier?
Quentin is one of few directors that can say stupid shit and walk away unscathed. His cinematic signature touches are nothing short of epic, and his filmography is undeniable.
I personally don’t like his movies.
I will say that quetin’s movies clearly all have a uniuly distinct style. You can spot a tarrintino movie from a mile away.. But I don’t think that style is for me
Nobody can do that.
@@therealeverton here are some others with distinct style :
•Wes Anderson
•Cowen brothers (spelling)
•Nolan (kinda. Not as much as the others)
There’s probably a couple others I’m not thinking of
@datmarshy There are many directors with a distinct style, and nobody has earned the right to talk nonsense without being called out on it. No human in history has.
So you kiss his ass no matter what he says, then? 😂
Quentin Tarantino should run for president. He couldn't lose. Those voters would love him!
And when I called him a bozo all his stans had their panties in a bunch lmfaooo.
Come on. Tarantino is making a point: Cinema needs original things!
Feels like you didn't even watch this video. 😂
@@jasonone8726 and Jonh Campea saw the original Django?
The only thing tarantino used was the name and a came of the main original actor. Everything else is different.
Why do we always have to freak out if a director/actor doesn't like a certain movie or genre of film that we all like? Them not likeing something that I like is their own opinion and it doesn't ruin my enjoyment of it.
No one's freaking out, QT just said something incredibly absurd and is being called out for it.
The "on your left" scene always bothered me. It should be the "behind you, slightly to your left" scene. I mean, it's not on his left until AFTER he's almost turned around. Go back Marvel, and do it again. Get it right this time. (Just Joking).