» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society
Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Custom Search
This is a topic from the The 2000's forum on inthe00s.
Subject: Homage Vs. Rip-off
Written By: BeatGen on 10/19/02 at 04:14 a.m.
This is something that intrigues me...when and what defines an homage in a movie, compared to what defines a rip-off?
I don't believe that the recent remake of Psycho (shudder) was an homage, because it had nothing new to bring to the movie, it was a shot for shot remake, so what purpose did it serve?
The same thing with American Beauty. The dinner table scene (one of the first I think), where the camera slowly pushes into the family as they are sitting down eating dinner, is a direct rip-off of the dinner table scene in Ordinary People. However, in interviews, commentaries and whatnot, Sam Mendes (director) describes it as an homage.
Now to hopefully cut an end to my angry rambling, can anyone tell me the difference between an homage and a rip-off? Homage seems like a fancy way of recycling classic work, but paying recognition to what you recycled.
Subject: Re: Homage Vs. Rip-off
Written By: BeatGen on 10/19/02 at 05:08 a.m.
Yes American Beauty does directly rip off the Ice Storm, but what I was saying was the one scene, which Mendes has described as an homage many times, but is, in no other terms, a rip-off.
The line between heavy influence and downright stealing is more often than not completely blurred, mind you.