did anyone else...

What did you think of Uwe Boll's interview?

  • I thought he didn't sound like a moron for once.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I thought he was as retarded as always.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I love Uwe Boll.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • There's a gaming news section on GR?

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

NickKmet

Regular
did anyone else watch that Uwe Boll video in the gaming news section? i was rather suprised with some of the stuff he said. He actually made some sense for once.
 
I can't fault him with his logic or his convictions...and his thoughts on censorship are spot on, basically.

I just don't know, to be honest. I think he's an interesting guy in my mind, hes obviously a smart guy, and he has a lot of passion, but his products are kind of.....crap.
 
to be honest i have never heard him or had quotes of him! i can only rely on linky's word as he does his course/job professionally!
 
i think its a fuckin bandwagon to hate on this guy. Only if 98% of the nerds bitching would get off there ass and make there own movies. then and only then, could they bitch.

I thought the guy spoke his mind, and i agree with alot of it. Give him a huge ass budget, guarenteed he will make a badass full of cgi movie. Then again would he want to. prob not, seems he likes real acting and stuff other than cgi.
 
Don't know too much about him, but what I hear is he's no Steven Speilberg. He seemed like a smart guy though.
 
Eyebrowsbv31 said:
I couldn't sit through it. the minute he said "A movie needs believable actors" I was done.

Yeah, I kinda winced when he said that. But he actually makes some good points later on in the interview.
 
downwitdaclown69 said:
i think its a fuckin bandwagon to hate on this guy. Only if 98% of the nerds bitching would get off there ass and make there own movies. then and only then, could they b****.

I thought the guy spoke his mind, and i agree with alot of it. Give him a huge ass budget, guarenteed he will make a badass full of cgi movie. Then again would he want to. prob not, seems he likes real acting and stuff other than cgi.

Well maybe if he made a good movie to start with he'd have gobs of money to spend on better films.

His films are horrible. He has no understanding of history, good angles, acting, nothing. It's not a bandwagon at all.
 
downwitdaclown69 said:
i think its a fuckin bandwagon to hate on this guy. Only if 98% of the nerds bitching would get off there ass and make there own movies. then and only then, could they b****.

I thought the guy spoke his mind, and i agree with alot of it. Give him a huge ass budget, guarenteed he will make a badass full of cgi movie. Then again would he want to. prob not, seems he likes real acting and stuff other than cgi.

I take it you've never actually seen a Uwe Boll film...
Really, if given a huge budget he would make a big budget unwatchably bad film. He truly is one of the worst film makers I have ever seen. House of the Dead was so imconprehensibly badly made that it boggles my mind (having the camera circle characters while they fire guns and then intercutting some shots of zombies being shot and *shudder* footage from teh arcade game does NOT make a good action scene). I mean I've sat through Ed Wood movies that had better senses then this.
The problem is, from what I can tell, Uwe Boll has the mindset of a 12 year old. He just throws boobs, explosions and guns loosely together and thinks that a movie will somehow emerge. The only people I've encountered that actually enjoy is films have been the very very stoned or the hipsters that enjoy anything bad because they think it makes them cooler somehow.
And I hate him for what I feel are legit reasons. He's incredibly cocky. He seems to think everyone that dislikes his movies is out to get him and he also beieives that no one has any right to criticize him at all and is often vulgar and childish when expressing these beliefs. He's a gamer and actually hates gamers but he insists on only making game based movies, thus ruining many beloved franchises even worse than they woudl have been ruined. He challenged Lowtax (founder of something awful) to a boxing match and kind of never mentioned that he was a former professional boxer. Lowtax thought this was just going to be a light publicity stunt and thought that Uwe Boll was actually taking this seriously because really no mature human would. He was proven wrong when Boll beat the crap out of him.
I also hate the argument that you and he uses of "you have no right to criticize if you don't make your own movies". You know what. I'm not sure if I could make a movie. So I don't. I wish Uwe Boll would do the same. Just because can't make a movie doesn't mean I can't tell if a movie is good or not and Uwe Bolls movies are not good at all. Actually, Uwe Boll is a pretty strong arguement that not just anyone should make a movie.
</rant>
 
Not being obnoxious for once doesn't make this a great revelation. However, what it did show me at least is that he knows very little about the art of film.
 
Something he said in the interview is something that I think a lot of people don't realize, in making movies based on games, he is doing just that. He's not trying to make groundbreaking films. If you look at the games he's based his movies on it's clear to see that they all have rubbish plots.
 
Maybe bloodrayne, but Alone in the dark on the Ps1 was certainly a lot stronger plot wise than uwe's mess. It was actually enjoyable, for a start.

Also, even if that point was 100% credible, if the plots are awful, why spend people's taxes (which is what he does) on making it at all?
 
I don't agree with his methods and I certainly don't like his films, I just thought it was a very good point.
 
Blame the lack of budget rather than his lack of talent is his only approach it seems. He even referenced Reservoir Dogs, a movie that was minimalist in set pieces and cash, but big on dialogue and presence, so it seems like he doesn't even think about anything that came before him. So, yeah, he doesn't understand much really, especially how to start making movies since getting rich and then making movies doesn't mean you'll know how to, just that you'll have the cash to waste when you could and probably should have been spending time researching, thinking about, and making your own movies, if not for sale, then for practice.
The being pissed off at studios taking over festivals is understandable, but honestly, I know plenty of people that don't know a thing about them and only hear about festivals at all because of the bigger movies going to them, so it could be said that they help attract new audiences to the movies that do make it.
Anyway, can't really solve anything by making ridiculous movies and then complaining that more popular movies beat you. Spend more time making good movies and then maybe people will give a shit and a half about your views.
Ugh, it's all been said, he's ridiculous, just not as flamboyantly so.
I wonder if he got another director to come aboard and work with him in making movies maybe they could wrangle in his silly impulses and he could succeed in making the kinds of movies that he saw as a kid that made him want to make movies himself. (The movie in question that he noted definetely didn't have boobs, buckets and buckets of blood, or any of his other tripe.)

(And did he pick his nose and wipe it on his shirt?)
 
downwitdaclown69 said:
i think its a fuckin bandwagon to hate on this guy. Only if 98% of the nerds bitching would get off there ass and make there own movies. then and only then, could they b****.

I've got to agree with axleblaze. Saying someone can only criticise once they have fulfilled a particular criteria is a petty defence at best, especially with a media so culturally penetrating as film. So the public at large are allowed to watch a film but not allowed to point out why it sucks? Or excels? Maybe censorship's ok with you, I don't know.

Sam
 
maca2kx said:
downwitdaclown69 said:
i think its a fuckin bandwagon to hate on this guy. Only if 98% of the nerds bitching would get off there ass and make there own movies. then and only then, could they b****.

I've got to agree with axleblaze. Saying someone can only criticise once they have fulfilled a particular criteria is a petty defence at best, especially with a media so culturally penetrating as film. So the public at large are allowed to watch a film but not allowed to point out why it sucks? Or excels? Maybe censorship's ok with you, I don't know.

Sam
Think of it this way, as mentioned in the interview, how many of the idiots who throw pathetic insults at Uwe have actually seen his movies? Very few I'd argue. It's fine to have an opinion on something, but only if you can back up that opinion with some form of substance.
 
Well his movies do suck, we all know that because we have seen most of them (hopefully)

And he is right, spending a 20 million dollar budget for a movie is very minimalist now a days, and most movies make that back in two weekends. In a business sense, he knows what he is doing in the long run.

A lot of you guys have discussed the "art" of filmaking. Just out of curiosity, are any of you guys directors or aspiring directors. Has anyone made a movie before? In college I did a 10 minute short about zombies and its pretty bad, but I love it because I created it, in part from a friends story, but also in part of my own camera angles and direction of the story. I know it's a bad movie by most standards, but at the same time I also enjoy watching it because of the memories it brings back.

Maybe that is part of the art of filmaking too. We can criticize how crappy his movies are, and they are crappy, and he fails as a director when it comes to that, but it's clear enough he has passion for it. It's like Rudy trying out for the football team, he is weak and gives it his all every time, but comes up short all the time in the end until the last minute.
 
JCD said:
maca2kx said:
downwitdaclown69 said:
i think its a fuckin bandwagon to hate on this guy. Only if 98% of the nerds bitching would get off there ass and make there own movies. then and only then, could they b****.

I've got to agree with axleblaze. Saying someone can only criticise once they have fulfilled a particular criteria is a petty defence at best, especially with a media so culturally penetrating as film. So the public at large are allowed to watch a film but not allowed to point out why it sucks? Or excels? Maybe censorship's ok with you, I don't know.

Sam
Think of it this way, as mentioned in the interview, how many of the idiots who throw pathetic insults at Uwe have actually seen his movies? Very few I'd argue. It's fine to have an opinion on something, but only if you can back up that opinion with some form of substance.

Clearly, but that's not what DWDC said and it's not what I was refuting.

Sam
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
16,689
Messages
270,785
Members
97,724
Latest member
Danywigle
Top