llperks 1 Posted January 6, 2012 How is it possible that, to this date, not one Uwe Boll film been examined? I think every single one of his movies have caused a tremendous amount of controversy based solely on how bad they are. My personal favorite is "Alone in the Dark" featuring the "clawing for career resurrection" Christian Slater, and the beautiful yet "hasn't fallen off the rocker yet" Tara Reid. Please, for the love of god, tell me how this movie was allowed to happen! Share this post Link to post
Nasher 29 Posted January 11, 2012 The truth of it is that Mr Boll gets Eu & German funding for his films to help with the profile of German film making... which gives him budgets he blows on conning Mr Statham, Slater, etc into being a big name in his bad film and obtains a video game tie in to get the kids interested and makes back enough not to lose investors money.. the cultural cash doesn't require repaying so as long as the investors get some cash back and the fun of being attached to movie making he is quids in.. and if you disagree with his version of 'art' he will punch you... true story.. read his wiki page.. its rather amusing. Share this post Link to post
sillstaw 414 Posted January 12, 2012 Well, part of the deal Boll used is that it's a tax shelter. The investors could borrow money to invest in his films, then if it flops (which, given that it's Boll, is a guarantee), they could write it off on their taxes. That loophole was closed in 2005, so how he still gets financing is beyond me. Share this post Link to post
OlYeller21 0 Posted December 9, 2012 Title says it all. I don't know of a director/produce/screenwriter that so consistently gets decent actors and still makes such terrible movies. They all have huge what-the-hell moments and the movies themselves are a how-did-this-get-made moment. Â He may even come on the show if invited (I love when people from the film are on HDTGM). He's not one to shy away from critics ( ). Just watch out for the left hook. Share this post Link to post
jimkiler 84 Posted December 12, 2012 I don't know if the gang can get through his movies. I attempted to watch House of the dead and even the topless women in the beginning were not attractive, that is how bad this movie is. Share this post Link to post
RafiBomb! 0 Posted December 28, 2012 Uwe Boll is the epitome of why there are so many movies available for this podcast. When asked why his movies were so shitty he did two things: he first stated that it's a business and he's simply there to make money (he does this through dvd sales and foreign box office by buying well known comic rights and raping them) and also by inviting anyone to box him if they have a problem with his movies. Of course a bunch of retards showed up to get their ass whooped because he trains all the time, making him look like even more of an asshole. Sorry for the length I just hope no Uwe Boll movie is done on the podcast because they aren't worth even mentioning. Share this post Link to post
Johnny Unusual 525 Posted March 17, 2013 And now they are finally doing one of his movies. Hurrah. Share this post Link to post
BagguhMcGuirk 104 Posted March 17, 2013 He doesn't make movies just for the money, he truly believes his movies are good. That's part of the reason In The Name Of The King is so "great", if he didn't give a shit about it I don't think it would've been nearly as fun to watch. Share this post Link to post