criterionforum.org

Uwe Boll wrote:POSTAL makes some very important points

the AP Review wrote:Also making a cameo as himself is Verne Troyer, Mini-Me from the "Austin Powers" movies, who gets locked in his own suitcase with a bunch of sex toys and is later raped by 1,000 monkeys.

domino harvey wrote:Guys, you have to realize by now that Boll is expertly cultivating his image as the crazy German director of bad movies, right? He knows exactly what to do and say to generate the publicity he wants. I am convinced that he's a lot smarter than he lets on, and that his films are supposed to serve as muddled performance art against mainstream cinema.

I think he's a fine bussinessman (and promoter) but still a mediocre film-maker... I'd compare him in some ways to the stereotypical Producer (who genuinely knows his (business) craft) wanting to have artistic input on the movie (with all the cinematic craft of a teenager who watches too much TV and thinks anyone could write/make one of them feature films)

I should be clear that I don't think he's very good at whatever it is he's doing, I just suspect Boll believes he's using his films as some sort of grand performance art against the masses.

I've heard about dozen times now (sadly, from my friends) that "Uwe Böll is a lousy film maker, but HAVE YOU SEEN THE POSTAL! It's a whole different thing, because it's so rough and tough and dangerous and hardcore and most of all SATIRICAL! Those 9/11 jokes are SO innovative and funny."

He makes those youtube statements and writes those "angry" letters so that people who hate him would give him more publicity by getting angry and easily fooled people who are fascinated over the wittiness of every episode of South Park - even the first season's episodes - would be impressed. He has always been a lousy director (even the master of shittiness Albert Pyun has one at least decent film, Böll has none) and always will be.

Boll's films are pretty bad for sure, but I find watching them strangely interesting nonetheless, and often even moderately entertaining. Boll strikes me as a director who perhaps could do a decent film if he wanted to, but won't because he just doesn't care to as he's only interested in making money and perhaps enjoys the publicity as well. Because of this he just films huge amounts of rubbish as fast as he can and calls the end product a movie. After this he intentionally provokes people to get publicity. I find his tactics and the fact that people actually get mad at him fascinating as a cultural phenomenon.

As for Postal, the opening of the film actually looked fairly promising (definitely not funny or good in any sense, but amazing in a "WTF, can there actually be a movie like this" kind of way) but everything else I've heard or seen about the rest of the movie sounds painfully bad and trite.

Great profile on Boll from February's GQ

My favorite bit:

The actor Michael Paré, who has appeared in no fewer than ten Boll movies, is standing by the bar, singing the director’s praises. “I think people misunderstand him because English isn’t his first language. In German, he’s a poet,” he says.

Do you think he'd post here if we invited him?

Uwe Boll wrote:My cameo in POSTAL as a Nazi Theme Park Owner easily outdoes Ben Kingsley performance in SCHINDLER’S LIST!

domino harvey wrote:Guys, you have to realize by now that Boll is expertly cultivating his image as the crazy German director of bad movies, right? He knows exactly what to do and say to generate the publicity he wants. I am convinced that he's a lot smarter than he lets on, and that his films are supposed to serve as muddled performance art against mainstream cinema.

He is very smart. He holds a PhD in literature, actually. He makes his money with a German tax shelter that all but precludes his taking a loss, even if the film flops. Hell, "Raging Boll" should've been a clear sign to -everybody- that he's a genius at self-promotion.

I think the guy's hilarious. I've never seen one of his movies, but he's a very interesting character, particularly in the rare instances when he seems to be genuine. The one that I can think of is when he showed clips of a god-awful Youtube movie, and said that as terrible as it was, the people who made it were out there filming, and that that makes them better than most of the people that bash him.

I can't say I agree that making bad movies, whether on purpose or not, automatically makes you better than people not making movies at all.

kaujot wrote:I can't say I agree that making bad movies, whether on purpose or not, automatically makes you better than people not making movies at all.

Unless the people who use the argument Serris relates are happy and willing to swallow the most awful slop at a restaurant without complaint because they themselves cannot cook, their point is useless. In fact, if you bother to think about it, the whole argument (which many besides Boll use liberally) is essentially to tell people they have no business cultivating any sort of critical faculty or ability for independant thought--since, of course, one cannot do everything, or even any more than a small percentage of things.

I think that Nazi-Gold (German Tax Bridge) will keep Boll alive longer than the majority of anti-Boll supporters would like. He seems to be offended by the recent poll asking him to remove himself from filmmaking. I even think "Stride" the gum company, has decided to give a free pack of gum to everyone who signs the petition. As he says "I am the only genius in the whole fucking business. Thank You."

Uwe Boll Petition Response

At least he gives us something to hate in the world of the film, with the exception of George "The Fridge" Lucas.

that clip is quite old news... but it definitely does come off as something else when he compared his latest film to one by Michael Bay (whom he calls a retard in that clip). Yeah, he's not a retard, he just makes films like one.

I saw the clip a bit ago, but I had to post it to knock some sense into the people looking forward to this film because of the controversy. It is easy to slam a bunch of controversy into a film, especially if you are a stupid man like Uwe Boll.

Mr_sausage wrote:

kaujot wrote:I can't say I agree that making bad movies, whether on purpose or not, automatically makes you better than people not making movies at all.

Unless the people who use the argument Serris relates are happy and willing to swallow the most awful slop at a restaurant without complaint because they themselves cannot cook, their point is useless. In fact, if you bother to think about it, the whole argument (which many besides Boll use liberally) is essentially to tell people they have no business cultivating any sort of critical faculty or ability for independant thought--since, of course, one cannot do everything, or even any more than a small percentage of things.

Quick cover-my-ass here: I wasn't trying to endorse Boll's claim, merely to state that I felt he was being honest when he made it, as opposed to his claims that his films are genius, which I seriously doubt he believes.

Serris wrote:Quick cover-my-ass here: I wasn't trying to endorse Boll's claim..

Never thought you were. I don't usually take reporting as endorsement.

Just watched 2/3rds of Alone in the Dark today. I think that the fact that I could only watch 2/3rds speaks for itself. Almost as bad as "One Missed Call", ALMOST.

"Verne Troyer as Indiana Jones"

The Soup Nazi gets higher billing than Verne Troyer. And he doesn't even have a sex tape.

He was also Saddam Hussein on Arrested Development

I like how the packaging lists the fiscal gross of the other Boll titles... as if anybody cares other than Boll.

Shouldn't "Stupid" have a period after it as well, as in "Disgusting. Offensive. Stupid." ?

That's the only thing wrong with this I can see...

Goddamn, this might be worth a rental just to hear the commentary.