As told by the original screenwriter of Alone in the dark. I'm sure some here have seen this, as for others, set your brains to stunned.
http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2649&p=
I read this article before and I thought it was funny. He makes his movies so bad that you will remember him. Love him or hate him hes going to be around awhile butchering video games. The amazing thing is that after how low "Alone in Dark "made in the box office they still give him a budget to work on.
Personally the reason I don't like his work is because he uses video games that I enjoy playing and like and he just comes along and destroys it. I think if I never played "house of the dead" or "alone in the dark" games and liked them, I would see he movies in a different light.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can’t give it, you can't buy it, and you just don't get it!-Aeon Flux
He's a Grade A cluster f**k, and he's an arrogant a***ole to boot.
If he was an Ed Wood style director who at least had his own ideas and wasnt an arrogant a***ole I wouldnt mind him so much but hes not.
He's basically a German Eric Cartman.
His e-mails are a form of entertainment all their own. Why do I get the feeling they still wouldn't make much sense (or be as much fun) if his English was better.
From what I've read in other articles, he's rather proud that he secures the financing for his films and the film rights for the games without Hollywood studio support. I guess there are plenty of gullible rich people in Europe who want to buy into the movie business willing to back him. I just wonder how many he can get distributed as his infamy and the knowledge of the bad box office his films get grows. Do they really do well overseas, as he has claimed, or is that just another example of the usual defense that some directors use when their films flop? Oliver Stone has been using the "America didn't get it, everybody else did" defense to explain why "Alexander" flopped. Imagine mentioning the once great Oliver Stone and Uwe Boll in the same paragraph, it's kinda sad.
http://www.uweboll.com/
:-)
QuoteThankfully Dr.Boll was able to hire his loyal team of hacks to crank out something much better than our crappy story and add in all sorts of terrifying horror movie essentials like opening gateways to alternate dimensions, bimbo blonde archaeologists, sex scenes, mad scientists, slimy dog monsters, special army forces designed to battle slimy CG dog monsters, Tara Reid, "Matrix" slow-motion gun battles, and car chases.
Other than the Matrix stuff, that sounds like my idea of a good movie. Could only be improved if it was straight-to-video.
I think it's gotten to the point where most movies end up making money some way or another---I think what's probably changed the game is that people actually purchase the movies on DVD, whereas in the old days it was rare that VHS movies were priced with the home market in mind. DVDs being priced to own probably has added a lot of revenue that didn't exist before, which makes it easier for them to keep going even when movies don't do well theatrically.
I don't really see how movies really ruin videogames. It's apples and oranges. I can't remember who it was, but a best-selling author was asked if it bothered him the way Hollywood had ruined his books, and he replied, "They haven't. I've checked my shelves, the books are fine." or words to that effect. It's the same way with these videogame adaptations.
I dunno, I do think this article is a MUST for any bad movie fan so they can see how the mind of an incompetant filmaker works. this is a rare treat, really.
Post Edited (02-16-05 23:46)
A pretty entertaining film, but I'm glad there's somebody like Boll around. The serious, dark horror those screenwriters had planned would have been decent, sure, but we see serious, dark horror movies all the time and there's a part in all of us who craves the type of entertaining escapist comic-book stories and big monsters. If AitD was a 'false based on truth' movie like they had described, I'd have probably enjoyed it but then never watched it again, whilst the movie we did get, I own the DVD of and would happily watch it multiple times.
Anybody feeling me on this?
If Resident Evil was a Romero flick, it'd probably have done well, but wouldn't have gotten two sequels... At least that's what I think.
I remember seeing the trailer for Alone in the Dark, it looked like the best horror movie of the year! Whoever put that thing together deserves some credit.
QuoteI AGREE BUT WE STILL NEED A BUILDING UP TENSE /SHOWDOWN OR WHATEVER. WHATEVER IT IS: EDWARD FNDS IN THE END SOMETHING WHAT BLOWS THE AUDIENCE AWAY...
I just remember being confused as hell at the end of it. What was that stupid gateway?
I think it was the seal keeping the monsters under the ground.