Uwe Boll killing his own career
Uwe Boll is in effect killing any chance he has of a career, and he's doing it without the aide of an online petition. You see to be someone successful you need to be liked to some degree and your work enjoyed, you even need to win over critics and become friends with key people in the industry. It's just like any job in any business.
However Uwe Boll is not doing that. He's verbally attacking people who are critical about his films, he's physically fighting actual critics in the ring, and above all he's attacking other people in the film business, people who are hugely above his station and can be rather effective in killing his career.
I didn't hope on board the petition to stop Uwe Boll making films for a number of reasons, none of them are Uwe Boll himself, I think in public he's demonstrating an aggressive and rather dangerous side to his personality – when someone disagrees with him he becomes verbally aggressive and attacks publicly, he does not listen to consensus and criticism, instead he lashes out and attacks.
No, I avoided the petition because I believe that no one should be forced to stop what they love doing, or doing the job they have found for themselves in life. Let him continue making films, there is obviously an audience for them somewhere out there, and if he can continue to do it, find funding, and employ people then go ahead.
It is unfair and wrong to force him to stop unless he's doing something illegal or immoral, and joking aside, he isn't doing that in his films. Sure he's taken a few unnecessary and over the top jabs at America and decency (particularly with the Twin Towers jokes) but overall he's not breaking any laws. So let him work and let him film I say.
However, his explosive rants and attacks continue, and he's in danger of turning the tide of people who may very well feel like me.
He released a video statement that starts off really well and it sounds like he could start winning some serious ground. He starts off saying that he expects there to be a pro-Boll petition set-up to come out in support of his work, and I expect there will be, but then he once again descends into his attacking and verbally abusive behaviour.
“Look, I'm not a [expletive] retard like Michael Bay or other people running around in that business or Eli Roth making the same [expletive] movies over and over again. If you really look at my movies you will see my real genius, you know?
And if you go on May 23 and see Postal you will see that I deliver a movie what nobody else delivered in the last ten years. What is way better than all that social critic George Clooney [expletive] what you get every [expletive] weekend.
So you have to really wake up and you have to see me what I am. I'm the only genius in the whole [expletive] business. Goodbye”
Wow. Insult some of the biggest names in your business, insult the work that George Clooney has been doing in his films to try and bring some serious social statements into mainstream films and back away from that romantic comedy road he was on in his early career, and then there's the work he's doing outside film to back that up. Now that man is winning people over and can make a really bad film and get away with it.
Michael Bay remains one of the biggest directors of action there is, no matter what problems the films carry he does not verbally attack critics like myself who say negative things about his films, he keeps going and delivering what the audience want, because they my friend, are going to see his films and paying money to do so.
Strike that up for Eli Roth too who brought a new edge to horror with Hostel. Sure he made one sequel which didn't do so well and now he's moving onwards. Again he doesn't behave like a petulant child.
Following this both Michael Bay and Eli Roth responded. Roth took the easiest option, and actually the more insulting to Boll, and dismissed him with a joke:
“...the greatest compliment ever...”
“I find people who rant like that - calling [expletive] about both me, and George Clooney - comes from someone screaming because he is not being heard. He is obviously a sad being. When you ask ‘do I care?’ Not in the slightest.”
Sad and angry. Although I don't think his response is as good as Roth's, it gets the message across very clearly.
Then there's the response to a negative review of Postal over at Wired, where he goes pretty insane with some of his comments. It does give the impression of someone rather unhinged and unbalanced, the kind of person who you could be talking to one minute and who would flip out the next.
“your review shows me only that you dont understand anything about movies and that you are a untalented wanna bee filmmaker with no balls and no understanding what POSTAL is. you dont see courage because you are nothing. and no go to your mum and [expletive] her ...because she cooks for you now since 30 years ..so she deserves it. people like you are the reason that independent movies have no chance anymore. uwe boll PS: POSTAL is R RATED . The MPAA understood the satire -- you not -- you dumb [expletive]”
What call was there to start insulting the man's mother or his personal life, whatever that may be? The guy's doing a job, and he's doing it right. The review is his view of a film, not what the director wants him to say in order to make sure more people go and see it and make him more money.
He doesn't stop there though. After the reviewer responds politely a few times he gains comments such as:
“Chris wrote that article in bad faith to damage me. His whole goal is to destroy my business. If he cannot see that scenes (for example WELFARE OFFICE, Job Interview) are genius in that movie - then there are 2 possibilities: he is dump and has no idea what movies are or he hates me and is dissappointed about his own shitty career.
He ignored also that the audience enjoyed the movie and tons of other critics LOVED it.”
It is his job to ignore such things, it's his opinion, his review. People tend to read critics who they find they share similar feelings with in order to find out if there are films out there they might like. There is a third option here too, he didn't like the film and did his job.
His publicist had the right idea though, and does suggest that maybe Boll's tactics are slightly over the top:
“We can afford to by-pass these guys. We only want press that is fair in their reporting. They will take your earlier reply and work it against you.
Uwe let me reply with a nice thank you but I will inform that your schedule won’t allow any more interviews for the time being.
This is a trap and it won’t help you with some of the theatre owners if this continues on as a pissing war”
While he does sound a little paranoid, although not as much as Boll does, he is trying to push Boll to do the right thing.
I can't help but think that if he just stayed quiet, played the political (I use that term in the sense of work politics) and press game, then perhaps he would find a niche for himself and start gaining ground with some critics and audience.
He could have started gaining some positivity and sympathy if he'd just kept his cool and let some of these reviews ride. With every passing attack he builds negativity and resentment.
So which side of the Uwe Boll fence do you lie on? Would you wish him to continue film-making and just not watch his films, or would you want him to stop altogether? Or frankly do you care about him or his films?