At last, a proper explanation of why Uwe Boll's films suck.

Neville · October 25, 2005, 05:10:06 AM

After the failure of all current western film criticism to grasp why exactly Uwe Boll's films suck, I managed to find a very revealing article from an insider, one of the writers of "Alone in the dark". Brace yourself for the truth:

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2649

trekgeezer · October 25, 2005, 07:27:06 AM

Man, that really kinda leaves you speechless. Who is givnig this dickhead the money to make these movies?

Mr_Vindictive · October 25, 2005, 07:41:58 AM

And yet, I'll go see them as he makes them.

I think I'm Uwe's only fan...but not because his films are good.....

odinn7 · October 25, 2005, 07:52:40 AM

Skaboi wrote:

> And yet, I'll go see them as he makes them.
>
> I think I'm Uwe's only fan...but not because his films are
> good.....
>

No, you're not his only fan. The man makes funny movies...I've got no problem saying that I enjoy his films. Unintentional comedy is the best comedy.

Mr. Hockstatter · October 25, 2005, 09:32:44 AM

I guess I don't understand the significance of the article. Couldn't you criticize 90% of hollywood directors for exactly the same things?

AndyC · October 25, 2005, 11:46:37 AM

There is nothing more painful than an incompetent boob lecturing you on how to do your job, especially when you're trying to help him.

Well, on the bright side, it's nice to know that our generation will continue to add to the ranks of film greats like Ed Wood, Larry Buchanan and the like. I had thought their kind was extinct, but Boll is as worthy as those who have gone before. I have no doubt that future generations of b-movie fans will have a special fondness for his films.

Neville · October 25, 2005, 11:56:43 AM

Mr. Hockstatter wrote: "I guess I don't understand the significance of the article. Couldn't you criticize 90% of hollywood directors for exactly the same things?"

I can't think of many directors I could criticise for using broken English in critical communications or placing islands in their movies at any cost.

Ash · October 25, 2005, 12:11:07 PM

HERE'S ANOTHER ARTICLE

After suffering through House of the Dead all by myself, I refuse to watch any more brain cell killing trash this guy puts out.

Fearless Freep · October 25, 2005, 12:14:46 PM

Over at Nathan's site I read a letter once from a writer of one of the films Nathan reviewed. The writer talked about the director and producer and how the film got changed and rearranged and such from script to final film and *why* some decisions were made.

This is not all that uncommon

Mr. Hockstatter · October 25, 2005, 01:59:22 PM

Familiar with the text of a large volume of email from foreign born directors to their staff, are we? :)

AndyC · October 25, 2005, 04:04:42 PM

Changes are one thing, but asking why the hero doesn't have any special monster-fighting powers, as though it's a given? Insisting that somebody knows nothing about storytelling because he has well-developed plots and characters, but ignores essentials, like having more people kidnapped and finding an excuse to put this 'climax' on an island? Lecturing about the basic principles of storytelling, but obviously not having a clue what he's talking about?

No, this is not ordinary stuff. There are directors who like to change things, and then there are idiots. Boll seems like the latter.

LH-C · October 25, 2005, 04:06:54 PM

You know what? I'm not at all familiar with Uwe Boll's movies. And I only found out who he was a few months ago. From everything I've heard, I gather that his movies suck.

Fearless Freep · October 25, 2005, 04:21:41 PM

The letter that Nathan had indicated that the director insisted a part being written for a particular actress because she had given him (the director) sexual favors. She couldnt act at all, but the director fored the writer to put a part in for her.

Mr. Hockstatter · October 25, 2005, 06:51:17 PM

I don't think Uwe is out of the ordinary.

Keep in mind, Hollywood put these movies out recently:

The Avengers
Dukes of Hazzard
The Honeymooners (#27 on IMDb bottom 100)
You Got Served (#33)
Battlefield Earth (#52)
Gigli (#47)
Rollerball (#69)
Spice World (#80)
Alexander
Pearl Harbor
Tomb Raider II: Cradle of Life

I mean, do you guys realize that Manos Hands of Fate is now #11 on the IMDb bottom 100, and of the movies displacing it from it's #1 spot are two made from 2003 - 2004 and three made in the '90s?

It's notable that Ewe has both of his recent movies in the bottom 100, but I don't see how it draws any extraordinary distinction between him and his contemporaries.

Scottie · October 26, 2005, 12:00:45 AM

I'm interested. This Uwe character makes his films sound like they'd be a hoot to watch. Gun battles, car chases, breasts, retarded rape scenes, who honestly can't say they've enjoyed all of these at least once? Uwe just wants to put them all together at once.