Kroze Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 I know its hard to comprehend but it could be true.... A friend of mine who is part of the sketch comedy group Loading Ready Run, who has through the years made many many videos poking fun at Uwe Boll and the horrible films he produces recently ran into the man himself while at a Starbucks and managed to score an interview with him. What comes next is something that no one could of ever expected, a highly intelligent and laid back conversation about what Uwe really feels about the film industry shedding the persona we all know him as and talk about his movies and why they fail so hard. You can view the 20 minute interview here. Granted this hasn't made me want to run out and go see Postal but it has made me respect the man a whole lot more than before and a lot of what he says does ring true. Not that I agree with everything he says but it is interesting. I still do think that with the right movie, Boll can make something really good. I always have thought that but with the way he has gone so far, he hasn't hit anything really solid yet and its really hard for me to randomly go see yet another one of his movies (Especially with the rising theater ticket prices) without tons of people telling me that Boll has managed to come up with something that finally works. But from what he said, it doesn't matter if we see it in theaters. He makes everything off the DVD sales and TV viewings so I don't feel too bad about not going to see it. Wondering what everyone else's opinions are here of this video showing a very different side to Boll is.... UPDATE: It just got Kotaku'd! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dennis Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 Guy always cracks me up, I LOVE the guy. Hate the films, sure. He took advantage of a tax loophole, sure. But he sure makes me laugh. He's got a point, too. Pearl Harbor was a joke. And Starbucks IS bullshit. iWTl6K_wPjc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Damned Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 No, you're supposed to NOT pay attention to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skummel Maske Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 I didn't feel like spending time watching the interview, so I just browsed quickly through the comments on Kotaku. Is he really saying that his movies would be better if he got more funds? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flik Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 Watch the interview. I actually enjoyed it, and he's got some decent stuff to say. The interview is really laid back and personal. You can spare 20 minutes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 Whoa. Pretty good interview. I'd like to see what he could do on Michael Bay's budget. I'm skeptical, but I'm almost tempted to encourage a movement to support Boll. Just to see what he could do if he had more cash coming in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nekofrog Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 People have made masterpieces on shoestring budgets. He chooses not to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 People have made masterpieces on shoestring budgets.He chooses not to. Thats true. Oh well. Anyway I might think about seeing Postal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darklink42 Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 You know, I was never one to bash Uwe Boll personally. There are plenty of people that make shitty movies that are still reasonably intelligent people. Hell, they don't bash Jerry Bruckheimer for having made two of the worst sequels I've ever seen. Pirates two and three are just written off as being a cash-in, but that's kind of unfair. On that same note, he's making "the" Prince of Persia movie as well, which looks like it won't be all that great. (Can't pass judgment until after the film, but based on what I've seen of it, I don't think it will succeed). Are Uwe Boll's movies bad? Hell yeah they are. I had the misfortune to watch the Dungeon Siege movie, and saw every plot twist coming at least five minutes before they did. I wasn't even trying. The acting wasn't horrible, given the number of big stars he managed to get in it, but it couldn't overcome the script and the crazy deviation from the source. In my opinion, if you're going to make a movie based on a videogame, and I mean really based, not just "this is a re-hash made with the disclaimer 'based' put in for safety sakes"; then it should avoid the hell out of using most of the established characters. Videogame universes are usually pretty fleshed out and leave a lot of room for individual stories to come out of them with out treading on the toes of the games already produced. You can do a lot with just the essential characters instead of trying to cram a bunch of in-references so people that played the games will get more from it. We get just as much from it without them. Look at Hitman, while not AAA, it hit a lot more good points overall in balancing source material and its being a movie. Another big problem is casting. That's sort of been reduced over the years, with directors no longer being in such a rush to get them out. Timothy Olyphant made a great Agent 47, though he did look a little young. I'll grudgingly admit that Angelina Jolie made a good Lara Croft. Legend of Zelda wold be a cinch to make if it weren't for the problem of casting. No one would ever be satisfied with a choice for Link, or Zelda. But I think now, if they tried a Mario movie again, you wouldn't get the same overall mistakes, including casting John Leguizamo as Luigi and then choosing to focus on him throughout the film. Bleck... It always seemed to me that the fundamental problem with videogame movies is twofold. The first is that some don't try to tell their own story, and the second is that when they do they don't stay within the universe that was established by the game. I cite several of Uwe Boll's movies on both accounts, but they aren't the only ones. The Mario movie failed because it disregarded the established universe completely (That's not the only reason, but that's not why we're here). It was an interesting alternate view, to be sure. But for one of the first movie adaptations of a videogame, it wasn't the right time for something like that. Anyways, Uwe boll strikes me as the kind of guy who is merely content to do his own thing with movies, and I say more power to him. I don't really support the hacking he does of videogames, but it's his right and if the studios and the creators want to to let him then that's their choice. I don't have to watch the movies, and neither does anyone else. People still do, and so he keeps making them. The interview brought an interesting point though, in that he is trying to go over the top with his films. I wish he would have explained why he chose video game adaptations as his medium to do this with. He catches insane amounts of flak for it, and he knows it. Maybe it was a way to get attention, one way or the other. Or maybe it was that it was an unfilled niche that he has been allowed to tap, unchallenged, for some time. At least until recently anyways. Whatever the case, it worked. I just wish he'd go off and do his own thing. He might have better success with his own creations, instead of someone else's. Summary: Wait until Sephfire does a short movie about this issue, he'll probably put it better and give greater insight. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Pezman Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 You know I have never actually seen any of his movies. But the reviews/crucifixtions I've heard don't fault his movies for not being Lord of the Rings, Terminator, and any other iconic blockbuster. From what I understand, it mostly comes from poor acting, writing and/or directing. He definitely has some points about the homogenization of films and the strangleholds of the major studios on the medium, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJMetal Posted May 27, 2008 Share Posted May 27, 2008 I haven't watched this interview yet (I'm kinda time crunched right now...why am I on OCR? I'm not THAT time crunched) but from the *surprisingly* positive comments, I will when I catch a spare moment. But for my two cents, I say simply this: Just about every video game-based movie I've seen has sucked, not just Mr. Boll's. I'm not trying to start a flame war here or anything, but I've only seen three video game based movies that I've liked so far: Mortal Kombat, Dead or Alive, and Silent Hill. I like the first two because they're basically terrible kung-fu movies "based" on video games, and I love kung fu movies. I like silent hill because I'm a fanboy, and because I actually thought the story was interesting, well acted, and by and large, a fun experience. But mostly, video game based movies *generally* kinda suck in my opinion. I don't know why. Bad acting, bad scripting, bad games, whatever, I just don't find many interesting or entertaining. Also Another big problem is casting. That's sort of been reduced over the years, with directors no longer being in such a rush to get them out. Timothy Olyphant made a great Agent 47, though he did look a little young. I'll grudgingly admit that Angelina Jolie made a good Lara Croft. Legend of Zelda wold be a cinch to make if it weren't for the problem of casting. No one would ever be satisfied with a choice for Link, or Zelda. I'm not sure if I agree with that. Comic-based movies have been having that problem for years, and I think they've gotten over the casting issue fairly well. Frank Miller stuff aside, most hollywood-comic films are pretty enjoyable to me. Anyways...I'll have to see that interview later. DJ Metal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 Uwe Boll as a human is an arragant push-off and more than a little thick, but other than that, I suppose he isn't that bad. It's his movies that suck, mostly due to poor acting, writing, etc., but that's a problem with most video game movies anyway. Then again, there are plenty of production problems with movies these days. Take Michael Bay films for instance. The effects can be great but the acting/writing quality are so blatantly and ridiculously poor that it's almost unbelievable. Coincidentally, it's kinda funny that such terrible movies actually have a tendency to force better ones out into the open. I must admit that Boll does make a few good points about movies in general, but that kinda stuff is already obvious. At least Boll's always been right about one thing though - Bay has no sense of humour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazygecko Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 Uwe Boll is the industry's most successful troll. I salute him and how he managed to get all these forum posters eating out of his hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AkumajoBelmont Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 I agree with the YamoriMan I like Uwe's movies They are cheesy and kinda bad, kinda kool, and exactly how I want them. I'm a movie buff, but I definitely think he has a place in the movie world... I wouldn't go out and, perhaps, BUY any of them (maybe BloodRayne... ), but I've enjoyed them. Uwe is way too much of an easy target... it's too easy to bash him and his flicks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.