Ok so after seeing Heckler, there have been a few things nagging at my mind and among them is Uwe Boll bashing the brains of a few guys that were only too happy to get some cam time... until they realized Dr. Uwe is just a terrible as his movies, giving them a good shelacking for their trouble.
Ok, the other day I decided to watch yet another disaster directed by Dr. Uwe Boll..... Doctor.... right... That's like when a librarian insists they are doctors. Nothing against librarians, but fetishes aside, I don't think you're curing cancer, but I might be wrong.
Back to Dr. Suck My Bolls. If you haven't watched an Uwe Boll flick, then consider yourself lucky. It's like that video with the slaying of dolphins or when the US reporter unfortunately got decapitated. Most people wish they hadn't seen it in the first place, and though it might seem like hyperbole, a Boll flick is just about that. Something you wish you hadn't seen or to be fair, at least two of his movies are. Alone in the Dark and In the name of the king or something like that. I really can't even remember the name but it had Ray Liotta, the Transporter guy, Lili Soblieski and probably a few other people who you would think know how to act and are able to save a train wreck, but alas, it is proven that no direction or poor direction shall ALWAYS show.
Just in case, NO Í'm not a film major or a professional film critic, but I do have likes and dislikes and both flicks aimed straight for the second line and pooped pure pandemonium. Trust me, I loves me some tack B Flicks and this is like a grade below that. Imagine that ratty ass chinese deli that serves four day old chicken? Well what grade chicken is that? Ok. Then a grade lower. Honestly. Especially since some of the movies had some sort of a budget. The trick is that Dr. Boll Sacks doesn't earn money from theater revenue. He makes money and funds his would be projects via a little interesting scheme. From wikipedia here is a quote from a commentary on one of his films:
"Maybe you know it but it's not so easy to finance movies in total. And the reason I am able to do these kind of movies is I have a tax shelter fund in Germany, and if you invest in a movie in Germany you get basically fifty percent back from the Government."
So if you invest 20 million in a movie... well ... you see the math and you understand how he can make a movie. But seriously, don't take my word for it. Watch one of his movies, by all means rip it from somewhere. but if you want real crap by all means check out bloodrayne's 1 or 2, in the name of the king, alone in the dark or house of the dead and when you think of wanting to slap me for even writing down those names which I purposely put in lower case because I don't want to even recognize them as films, then you tell me if he doesn't suck herniated, musky, and flea bitten donkey balls.
You tell me you don't want to train for two years and take him on to kick the shit out of him. You tell me you don't get angry that he is a pure detriment to any videogame adaptation movie and that he makes things pretty much impossible to even pitch a videogame movie. Hell he makes Resident Evil look solid... how's that for bad?
So if by any chance Dr. Bolls has a problem with ANYONE writing anything against his movies, by all means he can either retire or finally decide to not be a Kopi Luwak... because no matter how much money he spends, his skills will still have been passed through the lower intestinal track of a a freaky monkey.
4 comments:
In the name of the king (2007) - My language skills are inadequate so I can accurately put into words how bad this film is.
www.stopuweboll.org
http://www.uwebollisantichrist.com/
I think you should check out his movie "Seed."
I'm not a fan of Boll either, in fact, Suck My Bolls basically summed it up for me. But for only $10 million, Seed was a very watchable flick. Much better than some of the horror movies out there. But be prepared. There are a few scenes where you can tell he did the CGI in a video game. They're that bad.
Post a Comment