Quentin Tarantino's angle

:rolleyes::confused:
 

Attachments

  • 22347_540.jpg.jpg
    22347_540.jpg.jpg
    84.9 KB · Views: 246
He didn't actually direct From Dusk Till Dawn and yet Robert Rodriguez still went on to use it!

Hmm...

In my humble and learned opinion I believe that there is sufficient evidence here to create a case against Rodriguez in all seriousness. I mean it is Tarantino's angle after all (which from what I can tell has never been used at all before throughout all film history). What we really have to ask ourselves here is what exactly gives Rodriguez the right to use it and take it as his own without any reparations made to the true creator? Is it just because Tarantino is in the movie? No sorry, that excuse just isn't good enough.

You're going down.

Bastard!
 
"Something's moving in the trunk!":eek:
 
He didn't actually direct From Dusk Till Dawn and yet Robert Rodriguez still went on to use it!

Hmm...

In my humble and learned opinion I believe that there is sufficient evidence here to create a case against Rodriguez in all seriousness. I mean it is Tarantino's angle after all (which from what I can tell has never been used at all before throughout all film history). What we really have to ask ourselves here is what exactly gives Rodriguez the right to use it and take it as his own without any reparations made to the true creator? Is it just because Tarantino is in the movie? No sorry, that excuse just isn't good enough.

You're going down.

Bastard!

i'll help any way i can, i **** most of the movies he has done. and would love to be the trigger man in an plan you gots! :D
 
He didn't actually direct From Dusk Till Dawn and yet Robert Rodriguez still went on to use it!

Hmm...

In my humble and learned opinion I believe that there is sufficient evidence here to create a case against Rodriguez in all seriousness. I mean it is Tarantino's angle after all (which from what I can tell has never been used at all before throughout all film history). What we really have to ask ourselves here is what exactly gives Rodriguez the right to use it and take it as his own without any reparations made to the true creator? Is it just because Tarantino is in the movie? No sorry, that excuse just isn't good enough.

You're going down.

Bastard!

Uhhh...wasn't Tarantino the Executive Producer? You shoot the film like the boss says to. How else would a foot freak like Tarantino get Salma Hayek's foot in his Mouth??!! It's good to be the King!!! :D
 
Uhhh...wasn't Tarantino the Executive Producer? You shoot the film like the boss says to. How else would a foot freak like Tarantino get Salma Hayek's foot in his Mouth??!! It's good to be the King!!! :D

Well now, how convenient! :mad:

But Rodriguez isn't getting off my list that easily, I'll get him one day.

He'll make a mistake.

They always do.

It's only a matter of time..... MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!
 
Its a good angle I don't see the problem here. Plus some trunks are surprisingly roomy.

Agreed...down the road from where I live here in Arizona, there is a whole ****** living in the trunk of a 87 Buick. They have been working here lately to try and get it running too, as they said they are moving soon. Something about some new law.....:dunno:
 
Back
Top