Ah well, but then the problem is why the media talk about "authors" without defining what things are great in a filmmaker or what is the things that changes that. Tarantino doesn't need to do shit, because he is not the one talking about this or proclaiming to be a great director left and right. The problem are his fanboys and people who talk whitout knowing what the fuck they are saying, is the same problem with other fans like the Lynch ones.
If you ask me about this kind of trouble, at least for me is meaningless, this is not a problem bacause i don't give a fuck about copyrigths, and going even far i don't believe in original thinking.
But if Tarantino was just this, he will be a good director but nothing impressive. There are other great things about Quentin's cinema that there are not talking usualy, for example in his latest two movies (Death Proof and Inglorious Basterds) the dialogue is useless in a narrative way but the conversations are longer every time, in this moment the camera begin to define the ambient and dissect the characters in a perfect way, look for example at the two tables scenes in Death Proof. In this way when the action scene began, you know the role every character has so the conversations are vacues but structuraly important. In Inglorius Basterds this go even far when Tarantino begins to extend the Conversations like a form of suspense ala Hitchcock and experiment with languages, look at the bar scene for example. This is just one of the others elements i'm talking about
This are some of the reasons i believe his latter work is better than the first ones. The first ones are just a cinephile making a lot of good references, good but at least just references and collages. So in some sort of way we agree in this point
Even then the thing Tarantino does is not something that new at all. Godard, to name one, was making the same thing in the 60's with the references and is one of the the most influential filmmakers of all time. Again is how you make things the important.
Fanboys can blow things way out of proportion, and his success can be attributed greatly to the word of mouth his movies benefited from. Quentin really got lucky when Harvey Keitel showed interest in his script, tying him to the project and giving it instant credibility, he started off and still is at his core a movie Geek. So in a sense I don't blame him for wanting to recreate concepts to a newer generation, but like i've mentioned, I find that he relies too frequently on this without admitting to this fact. I've seen many interviews of him where he remains vague when the topic of inspiration comes up if not ignoring the topic altogether.
I do agree on the Lynch fans. To some people, Lynch can do no wrong, which is a myopic way to look at things.
I don't believe in original thinking ether. I think that all human thought is juggled according to our cognitive reference points. We are the sum of our experiences, we just mold our ideas with the tools at our disposal. Perhaps every conceivable idea has been thought up and expressed in some form or fashion throughout the history of written and spoken language. I do think there comes a time when we can make a distinction between blatant plagiarising and creating something while being aware of certain influences, but only incorperating them subtly so that they're hardly noticeable. There's also are different degrees in the extent someone will do this, and whether or not they're even conscious that what they've done was previously incarnated. When it comes to Tarantino, he's built his career on doing this, to some it might not be noticeable which is great, but it is to me.
I'll also agree with you that Tarantino's done well with his recent film. I can site some of his clear influences for Inglorious Basterds, but it was subtle and the direction, acting and dialogue was much more focused. I do see Tarantino evolving somewhat, i'll give him props for that.
With Godard, I know he was very influenced by written fiction, but he did take from other movies without citing them like when he made Alphaville after watching Orpheus. I mean fuck, even the greatest Director of all time ripped off Secret of the Incas when he made Indiana Jones. I won't deny that this happens.
Bottom line, I don't mind Tarantino's movies for their entertainment value, I just get irritated by the fanboys hailing his work as original or revolutionary, and it sucks to see Tarantino play mute on the whole thing. Personally, the plagiarism doesnt kill his movies for me, but it does take away a bit from my enjoyment nonetheless.