Slashdot Mirror
Uwe Boll Smash!
Eurogamer has an interview with opportunistic license-killer Uwe Boll. In the interview, which is dominated by Boll's anger with game fans, he states that he's unlikely to see new game licenses for movies after he butchers Far Cry. From the interview: "In fact, it's not just confusing Boll - it's putting him off the whole thing all together. 'I won't say that I won't acquire another videogame licence in the future. But I'm not so eager to do it any more, to be honest. After Far Cry, maybe I'll go away from videogame-based movies. And everybody can be really happy about it.'"
The amazing thing about Boll is that he doesn't realize that his movies would still suck even if they weren't based on videogames. It's not the subject matter that kills them, it's his directing abilities.
This guy's the limit!
Might this be because he isn't bothering acquiring any new licenses since the German tax loophole is finally closed? (I believe that he had FarCry before the tax laws were changed)
..there's at least one person in the world who thinks he makes awesome movies: Uwe Boll
Hexy - a strategy game for iPhone/iPod Touch
My BS detector goes off whenever there are excuses for everything, and the excuses are always someone else's fault. "People don't understand my movies, game studios didn't back me up, game journalists slant everything, the haters are out to get me...." It reminds me of a saying: Just because no one understands you, it doesn't mean you're a genius.
While denying it at the same time. I'm a little tired of only getting questions from journalists like, 'Your movies were so badly received, blah blah blah.' I know tons of movies that were way worse than Alone in the Dark and House of the Dead." He doesn't actually say it's good. He just says "There sure are a lot of worse movies." Someone should tell him that being the best of the losers isn't anything to take pride in.
Let me get this straight.
We develop a fondness for a particular game. He gets the license then creates a movie that can only be described as a poorly-done "B" movie (yes, there are plenty of well-done "B" movies). Fans are greatly disappointed in what he did to the movie and by association the game. The fans voice their displeasure. Then he gets angry that fans are disappointed? What's wrong with this picture?!!!
What does he expect fans to do? Just say, "Oh, thank you! Thank you for converting a game to a movie that I was hoping more than anything to end right after the beginning credits started! We are so grateful!"
His views of the modern gamer and modern movie-goer is clearly so low as to be insulting. I've seen productions from amateur (read: still-in-film-school) movie makers that were wonderfully written with really impressive cinematogrphy and editing; I've also been on the crew of indepenent films that were fun to film and fun to watch because the director had a solid vision of what the scripts were trying to project. (No, not porn. Seriously!) If film students and amateur film makers can make entertaining movies on showstring budgets, there really is not much of an excuse for Boll (or any director) who has lots of funding behind him not to create a movie that's at least watchable.
Unfortunately, there seems to be this distorted view within a lot of directorial circles that (HIGH PROFILE STORY or STORY WITH STRONG FAN BASE) + ACKNOWLEDGED STARS = GUARANTEED SUCCESS. I present as proof of this misguided belief Gigli, Bloodrayne, and Battlefield: Earth to name a few.
Hey, Boll, don't let the gamepad hit you in the ass on the way out.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
Has anyone else seen the trailer for Dungeon Seige? Words cannot convey the levels of suckage this movie appears to achieve. It's got zombie NINJAS!
The source material and its "shallowness" are irrelevant. There are writers who could take a very basic story and with enough creativity to create an entire arc that is still relevant to the core story.
There is a lot that could have done with, for example, Bloodrayne. The background on her character - half-human, half-vampire - is great fodder for some interesting character development. Note that in most sci-fi shows, characters of mixed races are the ones that often get the most intersting character arcs. Look at Spock, Troi, and Seven of Nine in the "Star Trek" series and how they often ran into problems with being a mixed race, whether that's from biological issues, prejudice, or something else. (Okay, Seven wasn't quite a mixed race, but you get the idea.) Rayne could have had a very interesting character arc in the hands of a good writer, which Bloodrayne: The Movie did not have.
Her vengeance against those who murdered her mother certainly could have been expanded to involve some interesting twists and turns, particularly with the Nazi-era background of the original Bloodrayne. Exactly how did her mother die? Murder? Consequence of being raped by a vampire? How did Rayne find out who was responsible? Was her mother's murder really what triggered her rage against fellow dhampirs or is there some long-forgotten memory that is subconsciously driving her? Add a bit of "Indiana Jones"-style action and the Bloodrayne movie could have been very well done.
Instead, we get a piece of schlock that was nothing more than the Bloodrayne name and blades with some blood and guts. Oh, and a very-easy-on-the-eyes babe. Hey, is that Ben Kingsley? That Ghandi guy? Well, that certainly gives the movie credibility! (Not.) It was poorly written, poorly directed, and poorly thought out.
The fact that its source was a video game cannot be more irrelevant.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
At least Doom made an EFFORT to replicate the game on film. Yes, they changed the thing about hell to something about zombies. Yes, they forgot to put in a Cyberdemon.
But it still took place on Phobos, still got in shots of all the required guns and enemies STRAIGHT FROM THE GAME, and even had an ENTIRE SUBPLOT revolve around Sarge's search for the BFG-9000. There were plenty of in-jokes for fans, like Karl Urban's character being named John, a dead scientist named Carmack, and Rock's utterance of the three words we were all waiting to hear once he found the BFG - the computer monitor might call it the Bio Force Gun, but we at least got to HEAR it get called the Big Fucking Gun.
On top of that, I remember reading in an interview with someone from ID that the producers actually used art design from Doom 3 as a basis for the set design. You know what? It shows. The overhead lighting above doors, the fonts, everything seems ripped out of the game and come to life on screen - which is the WAY IT SHOULD BE.
Was Doom high art? No. But it was awesome, awesome Nerd Porn, which is exactly what a good video game movie SHOULD be, and my friends and I had a great time sitting in the theater picking out all the references to the game we know and love. Boll has yet to accomplish this.
The problem is that none of the movie makers seem capable of respecting the source material. Doom is of course the worst offender. Doom the game had three elements and the movie had none of them. It has already been discussed enough but it is true for EVERY game movie.
It reminds me of the horror stories that happen when americans get their paws on british comedy. Hitchhikers guide anyone? Read up on Terry Pratchet with both his discworld series and Good Omens. Red Dwarf? The american pilot can be found if you got a strong stomach. It is not new either. Check the old british comedy Porridge. Oh and the americans ain't the only one to blame. There was a dutch version of it too. Truly horrible.
Nor is it just the americans doing it. There are foreign 'remakes' of "Who's the boss" that should have their producers shot for wasting good film.
Why does it happen? I don't know. What exactly makes you pick a very popular property and then take out those elements that make it what it is? Red Dwarf is 4 male losers in space. So why did the americans make one female? Discworld/Omen has Death. So why do you tell the writers to loose the skeleton?
Frankly I am not suprised that movie makers don't get games because they haven't been doing to well with anything else either. I am pretty sure that if a movie maker would get his hands on the game chess we would loose the black and white sides and instead it would be a small multi-colored rebel army vs zombies from mars because that is what the focus group told them sells.
Frankly Uwe Boll has a point, he may be bad but there a lot worse out there. Popular property == butchery in the hand of a filmmaker.
Perhaps he is right about game studios not doing enough. Would a modern Marvel allow Spiderman to be butchered like this? Probably not but none of the game studios seem upset with Uwe Boll. Rather then interviewing him interview the person reponsible for selling the license and ask them why they did not protect their title.
We had some interviews with the people from Doom but the only thing I got out of it was that they were happy to take the cash. They didn't seem to care one shit about what the movie would be like.
Perhaps it is a vicious downward spiral. Game movies are 'flops' so if you can sell the license you take whatever you can get rather then risk loosing essentially free income. BEcause the game studios don't bother to protect their property (how many property owners do? I think Pratchett and the Red Dwarf guys are among the exceptions for having turned down movie makers) then the movie makers feels compelled to 'change' the property to better fit focus groups.
If you want to understand why game movies suck study Doom. It is the simplest property requiring no quality actors to tell a complex backstory. You only have to put a guy in marine uniform on mars slaughtering demons. That is it. When you figured out why they could not do that then you have figured out why game movies suck.
Movie makers just can't seem to learn that when you take a popular property you do not get a 'free' audience. You get a whole lot of 'free' critics who will be checking up on every factoid. When George Lucas made Star Wars A New Hope he was free. Yet if you make a "star wars' game you do not get a free audience unless you manage to get everything right that makes star wars star wars. Say you made an MMORPG and suddenly decided that Jedi are not the asskickers of the universe but can be owned by a medic. Do you think that would still get you the millions of star wars fans as free customers? Ask SOE.
Same is true the other way around. You can use a popular property in a different media but you got to respect the source.
Back to Doom the feeling I get is that the makers should just have made a non doom movie. Everything said in every interview gave me the impression they didn't want to make Doom the Movie but that just someone thought using its name would help sell it.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.