AndrewTS Posted October 25, 2005 Report Posted October 25, 2005 Sanderson: "In that scene with Meat Loaf...those are whores. [audience laughs] No...I mean actual Romanian mafia-owned whores." Uwe, about the Romanian whores: "They were better than actors. We looked for local Romanian actresses, but there they are all from the theater and act very broadly. For 150 euros apiece the whores would be naked and do as they were told. It was better." I wish I could say I'm shocked.
Ced Posted October 26, 2005 Report Posted October 26, 2005 At this point, I don't know whether I want to shoot Uwe Boll in the head or let him continue his Hollywood trainwreck magic.
2GOLD Posted October 26, 2005 Report Posted October 26, 2005 Just don't let him near "God of War" or anything like that.
Placebo Effect Posted October 26, 2005 Report Posted October 26, 2005 As I've said many times before, I hope Uwe Boll makes forty more of these video game adaptations. This generation needs a bonafide Ed Wood.
Darthtiki Posted October 26, 2005 Report Posted October 26, 2005 At this point, I don't know whether I want to shoot Uwe Boll in the head or let him continue his Hollywood trainwreck magic. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> As a fan of the series, I have to agree with Ced on his former point.
2GOLD Posted October 26, 2005 Report Posted October 26, 2005 Ed Wood gets a bad wrap. His stories probably would have been good, they had potential. He just had zero money and usually ended up hacking his scripts to hell to make a movie. If you had given Ed Wood the money Uwe Boll gets, I think you would have gotten a decent movie that at the very least might have been hilariously bad. Unlike Boll's film, which make me question if God exists.
cabbageboy Posted October 26, 2005 Report Posted October 26, 2005 Uwe Boll is much, much worse than Ed Wood. Wood movies at least make sense from scene to scene, unlike most of Alone in the Dark.
Downhome Posted October 27, 2005 Report Posted October 27, 2005 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uwe_Boll Essentially, Boll is a modern-day director. He's able to secure the investors (mostly German, in Hollywood often derisively referred to as "stupid German money"), secure the rights for cheap, picking games with only moderate brand recognition, does all of the actual production himself, and swiftly cranks out a movie. While under normal circumstances a director's movies could gross so little he's eventually shut out from every operating studio, Boll is exempt because he funds them under a loophole in German tax law that is supported by contributors and actually rewards movies that perform badly, via a writeoff at the end of the year. It has been recently reported that the loophole in German tax law has been revised. Starting January 2006, contributors to failed films will no longer be able to profit from failed films through a tax writeoff at the end of the year. This may well result in an end to Boll's film career, as it would make it impossible for him to capitalize on films that fail at the box office, resulting in a loss of investors.
Anakin Flair Posted October 28, 2005 Report Posted October 28, 2005 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uwe_Boll Essentially, Boll is a modern-day director. He's able to secure the investors (mostly German, in Hollywood often derisively referred to as "stupid German money"), secure the rights for cheap, picking games with only moderate brand recognition, does all of the actual production himself, and swiftly cranks out a movie. While under normal circumstances a director's movies could gross so little he's eventually shut out from every operating studio, Boll is exempt because he funds them under a loophole in German tax law that is supported by contributors and actually rewards movies that perform badly, via a writeoff at the end of the year. It has been recently reported that the loophole in German tax law has been revised. Starting January 2006, contributors to failed films will no longer be able to profit from failed films through a tax writeoff at the end of the year. This may well result in an end to Boll's film career, as it would make it impossible for him to capitalize on films that fail at the box office, resulting in a loss of investors. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Deuschland Uber Alles!
Downhome Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 Well, it's at 7% at RottenTomatoes now. Will any of you actually go see this? http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/bloodrayne/
spman Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 Alas, this film had no press screenings for critics, but if it's any indication, at work we were informed that beside the attached trailer for Uwe Bolls next film, Dungeon Siege, that no other trailers should be played along with BLoodrayne, because no other studios want their films trailer to be shown with this piece of crap.
Placebo Effect Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 Alas, this film had no press screenings for critics, but if it's any indication, at work we were informed that beside the attached trailer for Uwe Bolls next film, Dungeon Siege, that no other trailers should be played along with BLoodrayne, because no other studios want their films trailer to be shown with this piece of crap. Hahahah. Awesome. I'll be seeing it in the next couple days.
2GOLD Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 Why does Ben Kingsley pick a great potential Oscar film SURROUNDED by pure shit that makes you go, "What the FUCK are you doing in this?!?!" when you see the trailer. It can't be the money cause I doubt there was much of a paycheck for being in this film.
Downhome Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 Sure it was for the money. I guess he just needed to build a room or two onto his home or something. He sure as hell didn't do it because of the movie itself.
2GOLD Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 Sure it was for the money. I guess he just needed to build a room or two onto his home or something. He sure as hell didn't do it because of the movie itself. So Ben Kingsley and Michael Caine are like the same? You know, part of me can respect that. But part of me still gets very confused when I see them in certain films.
AndrewTS Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 (edited) Well, it's at 7% at RottenTomatoes now. Will any of you actually go see this? http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/bloodrayne/ Since I was the first (and I think the only) TSMer to see Alone in the Dark, I can only imagine how awful this is, and I can't wait to see it. I may need to take a sketchpad, so I can diagram the plot plots and keep track of what the hell is going on, though. Edited January 7, 2006 by AndrewTS
Anakin Flair Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 I saw the trailers for this movie, and at first thought it was going to be for a new National Lampoons movie. When the PREVIEWS are corny as hell, you know the movie is goign to suck hard.
cabbageboy Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 Actually I did see Alone in the Dark AND also House of the Dead via rentals. I think both were at least free rentals though, so no money was wasted on Uwe Boll. AitD is WAY worse than HotD. House of the Dead is a goofy shoot up zombie movie, but it wasn't like "OMG Worst Movie Ever" level bad. Alone in the Dark however? That was fucking horrible. It really is one of the worst movies ever. Hell, I'll probably check out Bloodrayne at some point as a rental too. It's likely god awful bad but the cast is kinda interesting.
Ravenbomb Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 I want Boll to make Zoop. Shitty director making a movie out of the worst fucking game ever If my Angry Beavers logic (Smelly thing + Smelly thing = not stinky) holds true, that movie would kick ass
2GOLD Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 Uwe Boll should direct Q-Bert. Then the movie doesn't NEED to make fucking sense! It's PERFECT for him! Or Pac-Man! Or Perfection, the movie!
Placebo Effect Posted January 7, 2006 Report Posted January 7, 2006 Why does Ben Kingsley pick a great potential Oscar film SURROUNDED by pure shit that makes you go, "What the FUCK are you doing in this?!?!" when you see the trailer. It can't be the money cause I doubt there was much of a paycheck for being in this film. Long story short. The budgets for Uwe Boll movies are like $20, $25 million. Uwe Boll can afford to cast a lot of not-so-A-list actors because of this. He does not, however, believe a cast is all that important to his stories. As a result, he'll send out notices to all the big agents in Hollywood about three weeks before the shoot's going to begin. Essentially, the enticement is that if the actor has nothing in their schedule for March 1st - March 30th on February 7th (three weeks before), chances are he or she is going to be sitting at home anyway. So instead of doing nothing, they take a six or seven figure check from Uwe Boll and sleepwalk their way through his movie for a couple weeks. I'm really depressed that Germany is closing that tax loophole. Uwe's got his next five films financed, but what about after that? Uwe Boll needs to make no less than twenty video game adaptations for me to be happy. This, by the way, shows the awesomeness of Uwe Boll - http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2649
AndrewTS Posted January 9, 2006 Report Posted January 9, 2006 Actually I did see Alone in the Dark AND also House of the Dead via rentals. I think both were at least free rentals though, so no money was wasted on Uwe Boll. Don't worry, I used free passes. However...Bloodrayne is not playing in my area. In fact, if yahoo is to be believed, it's not playing in the state of PA. Even some theaters near me near the border of WV aren't showing it, either. I have to wait...um... what, a month for it to come out on DVD?
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now