An All-Star Cast, a $60 Mill Budget and a 3 Hour Runtime... for Uwe Boll

Mr_Vindictive · July 07, 2005, 07:39:48 AM

I have yet to rent Alone In The Dark on DVD. It was a good laugh in the theater... I can only imagine it being inhanced by Boll's commentary.

As for Mark Altman's commentary on House Of The Dead....didn't Dave Parker from The Dead Hate The Living have a hand in HOTD? I seem to remember an interview with him a while back saying he had been brought in for rewrites at some point.

Foywonder · July 07, 2005, 11:54:04 AM

Dave Parker wrote the first draft but hardly any of it turned up in the film they shot yet he still had his name sullied by being attached.

Mr_Vindictive · July 07, 2005, 12:18:25 PM

Foy,

That's really a shame. The Dead Hate The Living wasn't too bad, and I was quite surprised at how bad the HOTD script was. I figured that Parker, being a horror buff and all, would have done a better script.

The "Holy Trinity" line from HOTD was classic Parker though:

- "You know the Holy Trinity. Night Of The Living Dead, Dawn Of The Dead, Day Of The Dead!".

DistantJ · April 27, 2008, 04:36:18 AM

Quote from: Skaboi on July 02, 2005, 09:57:15 PM
Nothing against you, but I'm really sick of everyone blasting Uwe Boll's flicks. I'm starting to wonder if I'm the only person alive who honestly loves his films.

Boll's films are about the most fun damn films out there. They are insanely bad, plot holes abound, acting is atrocious, yet are 100% entertaining from beginning to end. I say bring on the films Boll, even if it means that my wife and I will be the only ones in the theater as was the case with Alone In The Dark.

I'll join ya, buddy. Have some +Karma.

QuoteA Bloodrayne movie . . . if it was set in the proper time and place (1940's Germany).

Well, Bloodrayne is a prequel. The idea was that that was to show how she became the Rayne you know from the videogame, then the sequel is an interesting inbetweener, and Bloodrayne 3 is to adapt the videogame. It's been planned from day 1.

Jack · April 27, 2008, 08:12:54 AM

Saw Bloodrayne Deliverance last night. Well, most of it. Got bored in the middle and started wandering around the house looking for something to do. I'd suggest just watching the trailer, it hits all the important parts of the movie, in order, and the actual film doesn't really expand on the trailer one bit. It tries hard to be a spaghetti western, but it lacks any sort of interesting, well developed characters. I was sort of hoping for something weird when the opening credits rolled, and the production design was credited to somebody named "Tink", but it was just a very average Sci-Fi Channel Saturday night movie.

DistantJ · April 27, 2008, 08:43:48 AM

It seems to be a common problem in Uwe Boll movies that things randomly slow down at the mid-way point. It was also my only real complaint about Deliverance, otherwise it had everything which makes a good spaghetti western - a quiet town being terrorized by bandits, a mysterious Clint Eastwood-like hero(ine) who shows up and quietly kicks a lot of ass, an "in jail" segment and a final duel, but adding vampires into the mix was rather cool in my opinion and reminded me of this videogame I played once, "Darkwatch". Having Billie the Kid as a centuries old vampire who just happened to hang out in the wild west was pretty cool, too.

RCMerchant · April 27, 2008, 09:19:48 AM

I've never seen a Uwe Boll pcture. But I would like to see POSTAL.

CheezeFlixz · April 27, 2008, 10:24:41 AM

Quote from: RCMerchant on April 27, 2008, 09:19:48 AM
I've never seen a Uwe Boll pcture.

NEVER?!! You my friend have missed some real treats, they are not any where near as bad as some would have folks believe. This movie "In the Name of the King" is a decent film, is it lacking? Yes. Is it going to win an Oscar? No. It's not 3 hours in run time, it's actually only 2:07 ... but it thread was started long before the movie was released.

I think Uwe Boll as become everyones cinematic whipping boy, with large expanses of the viewing public slamming his films. Well I've got one question to all of those that dislike with a passion the films of Uwe Boll? How many films have you made? At least the guy is out there making something, good or bad. Personally I've seen plenty of movies far worse than anything Boll has made, where is the disdain for their director? "The Maize" come to mind, where is the dislike for Bill Cowell?

Oldskool138 · April 27, 2008, 11:07:19 AM

So the last time somebody posted in this thread before today was July 07, 2005?! Wow!

DistantJ · April 27, 2008, 02:26:30 PM

Yeah, lol, sorry, I was having an Uwe Boll season to prepare for an article for HooplaNet and I've been wondering what you guys thought of the films I'm being pleasantly surprised by, so I did a search for Uwe Boll and found this :P

Quote from: CheezeFlixz on April 27, 2008, 10:24:41 AM
Quote from: RCMerchant on April 27, 2008, 09:19:48 AM
I've never seen a Uwe Boll pcture.

NEVER?!! You my friend have missed some real treats, they are not any where near as bad as some would have folks believe. This movie "In the Name of the King" is a decent film, is it lacking? Yes. Is it going to win an Oscar? No. It's not 3 hours in run time, it's actually only 2:07 ... but it thread was started long before the movie was released.

I think Uwe Boll as become everyones cinematic whipping boy, with large expanses of the viewing public slamming his films. Well I've got one question to all of those that dislike with a passion the films of Uwe Boll? How many films have you made? At least the guy is out there making something, good or bad. Personally I've seen plenty of movies far worse than anything Boll has made, where is the disdain for their director? "The Maize" come to mind, where is the dislike for Bill Cowell?

+Karma for you!

Killer Bees · April 27, 2008, 07:26:11 PM

Quote from: nobody on July 02, 2005, 11:15:58 PM
I could've enjoyed Uwe Boll in the same manner you have, but he put his filthy paws all over Bloodrayne- a video game I absolutely loved- and I can't forgive him for that. A Bloodrayne movie, filmed by a competent director, could've been an outstanding film- especially if it was set in the proper time and place (1940's Germany).

I don't play video games, so I'm not so reactive when they get made into bad movies. I did see Bloodrayne and thought it was lame. The acting was wooden and I kept expecting things to get better and they didn't. It was just a b-grade movie to me. Very much in the mould of Dungeons and Dragons with Jeremy Irons. I was disappointed in that one as well.

Newt · April 27, 2008, 10:42:20 PM

The only Boll film I have seen is "In the Name of the King". We liked it so well, we saw again. Not a 'great' film; but it was fun. I could go into details but I don't want to run on. There were those in the audience who obviously had come just to heckle. They were greatly outnumbered by those who, just as obviously, were enjoying the film.

I really did not see where the usual criticisms of Boll's work applied. Which confirms for me that a great deal of the condemnation is a knee-jerk response. I have read two reviews of In the Name of the King that accurately reflect what I saw in the film; both were attacked as having been written whilst the reviewer was not in his/her right mind.

Boll spoke at the first screening we saw (at the Toronto After Dark Film Festival). The man has humour and yes, a certain arrogance. But then, I always was under the impression that arrogance went with the territory.

KYGOTC · April 27, 2008, 11:09:50 PM

Quote from: Dunners on July 05, 2005, 01:03:07 PM

To be honest you almost sound like a 'Boll troll' with your support of this guy.

BWWAAAHAHAHA! a WHAT?! What did he say?! Did he just say "BOLL TROLL"?!! HAHAHA!!! who SAYS that?!!

Hheh, im not making fun of you Dunners, i just think its a goofy thing to say. You get +karma.

ulthar · April 27, 2008, 11:48:13 PM

Quote from: DistantJ on April 27, 2008, 08:43:48 AM

It seems to be a common problem in Uwe Boll movies that things randomly slow down at the mid-way point.

That's really not random, that's by design. Just about every major motion picture released nowadays does this.

Given the supposition that "we the people" have short attention spans coupled with small bladders and dry lips, this lull in the action/story is built into Act 2 for bathroom + concession stand break.

Back when movies were only 70-80 minutes long, it was less than a problem. Now with "normal" being 90-120 minutes, that break midway is viewed by many, I suppose, as welcome.

RCMerchant · April 28, 2008, 06:44:16 AM

Quote from: ulthar on April 27, 2008, 11:48:13 PM
Quote from: DistantJ on April 27, 2008, 08:43:48 AM

It seems to be a common problem in Uwe Boll movies that things randomly slow down at the mid-way point.

That's really not random, that's by design. Just about every major motion picture released nowadays does this.

Given the supposition that "we the people" have short attention spans coupled with small bladders and dry lips, this lull in the action/story is built into Act 2 for bathroom + concession stand break.

Back when movies were only 70-80 minutes long, it was less than a problem. Now with "normal" being 90-120 minutes, that break midway is viewed by many, I suppose, as welcome.

Once upon a time,in very long movies (ie: TORA,TORA,TORA) they had an actual on screen INTERMISSION.Sometimes it would show little cartoon ads for soda and candy,or just play music. No need fror that now...with the pause button and TV commercials...