Uwe Boll Says ScreenAnarchy (Among Others) Needs To Grow Up And Stop Being Mean To Him.

Founder and Editor; Toronto, Canada (@AnarchistTodd)
to Vote
Uwe Boll Says ScreenAnarchy (Among Others) Needs To Grow Up And Stop Being Mean To Him.
Quoth Uwe Boll:

talks about that AUSCHWITZ teaser and the interesting point is that 90% of that "JOURNALIST" still judge me based on HOUSE OF THE DEAD and ALONE IN THE DARK they totally ignore that I made MORE MOVIES about REAL WORLDWIDE PROBLEMS and good movies as everybody else ...from HEART OF AMERICA , SEED, POSTAL, RAMPAGE, STOIC , MAX SCHMELING and DARFUR

If a journalist calls himself JOURNALIST then they should do their job properly and do their research.... why RAMPAGE and DARFUR and STOIC getting great reviews from the people they saw them ..why a RON HOWARD and AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL think that DARFUR is nothing less as a masterpiece ...why over 30 festivals world...wide invited the movies...why they are sold in 100 countries IF I'M SO BAD ...blablabla...

its time for all the joblos, twitch, dreadcentral , aicn ...etc.. to GROW up and recognize that they have no clue what they are talking about when they talk about me because they didnt paid attention to my movies ..they just enjoy bashing me.... they pay attention to laughable , unknowledged , unpolitical directors and hype them up

they think because my english is not perfect that I'm stupid ....but what other language they know? they think because I'm not promoted by big agents and studios that they have an easy target - but the movies speak and more and more people emailing me daily , buying my movies daily and SEE that they are way more int...eresting as the brainwashing hollywood bullshit what they promote

your readers are not so stupid to just agree to your 10 years anniversary of boll bashing ....some of you readers actually watched my movies and some of your readers will see that a AUSCHWITZ movie is not an insult to jews...its the opposide. in a world where 50% of the people have no education about the holocaust and even say the holocaust never happened

is it time to show that the holocaust existed and what the holocaust was. on all of my movies are working a lot of jewish crewmembers and nobody feels offended ....instead they are happy that a movie like this gets made.
For the record, Uwe, I personally wrote the first positive review of Postal that appeared anywhere - and took a lot of heat for doing it - while ScreenAnarchy's Swarez listed Rampage as one of his Top Ten Films Of 2009 and Niels Mathijs also gave it a positive review. I've also said positive things about the look and feel of Max Schmeling. So the suggestion that we bash for the sake of bashing is clearly not correct, nor is the statement that we don't do our research or haven't seen your films. The job of a journalist, Uwe, is to report things as they see them and the fact that I do think you've made some decent films among your recent output does nothing at all to counterbalance the fact that I think your Auschwitz project - or at least how you've chosen to present it in the trailer - is in phenomenally bad taste, to such a degree that if the film matches what you've presented in the teaser I believe it could be a career ender. I don't take any particular pleasure in saying that but it's the truth.
to Vote
Screen Anarchy logo
Do you feel this content is inappropriate or infringes upon your rights? Click here to report it, or see our DMCA policy.

More about Auschwitz

Greg ChristieSeptember 10, 2010 3:26 AM

ok. ok. ok. I'm gonna be a total dick here.... I love Uwe, only because I met him.He made a great debate about indie film being dead, and I agree. There's still indie film, but it's a rich kids' game for people who don't have to worry about losing their investment. But I also think Rampage is terrible as well as EVERY OTHER UWE BOLL film. And yes, I've seen em' all. And I think the Auschwitz trailer is disgusting and horribly exploitative too.UNDENIABLY SO. Want a horrific and truthful account of nazism that educates. Watch Come and See. And.... I only wish Tim let me box Uwe last year at Fantastic Feud because I am a trained boxer and I think it's time for Uwe to stop picking fights and starting grudge matches with random people. He knows he still owes me a match in the ring. .

Niels MatthijsSeptember 10, 2010 3:43 AM

Who are we to contradict him when he says we can't judge his films appropriately. Especially when we do give out positive reviews from time to time :p

All joking aside, looking back at the original Twitch post on his new film I can see where he's coming from. His reputation is mostly based on negative hype and crowd behavior, which isn't exactly fair. On the other hand, the man made some seriously bad films too so people who've only seen those should feel little incentive to check out his other films.

Still looking forward to his new film though. Just look at this message as another one of his stunts that will make him famous in years to come, though not necessarily for the quality of his films.

JahsoldierSeptember 10, 2010 4:25 AM

"Just look at this message as another one of his stunts that will make him famous in years to come, though not necessarily for the quality of his films."

And this is all the man amounts to. He should have perhaps done a bit more reading and research before lambasting all journalists equally, thereby showing journalists the same courtesy he expects from them.

It is always amusing to see individuals who use the media to provoke and elicit reactions in order to promote their films, and then turn around and point fingers at the same media because they don't always appreciate his work or his attempts at controversy.

koay.allanSeptember 10, 2010 4:36 AM

so now he's going to challenge Todd to a karate match?
he wants people to take him seriously? the guy who can't counter criticisms with intelligent arguments but instead resort to violence and threats like challenging his critics to a boxing match? this Neanderthal filmmaker really doesn't deserve our time and effort. it is an insult to the subject anytime he makes a "serious" film about a serious subject.

Sean "The Butcher" SmithsonSeptember 10, 2010 5:30 AM

I interviewed Uwe on video in a dirty mens room in San Francisco (as well as Zack Ward) It was a good interview. He was a cool guy. Whining doesn't become him though.

can-DSeptember 10, 2010 5:47 AM

Whining like that will only make his reputation worse...

Andrew MackSeptember 10, 2010 8:56 AM

I was at the Postal screening here in Toronto. Uwe and Zack were both here at the time and stayed for a very entertaining and thought provoking Q&A, I thought. By the end of it I thought I had a better understanding of where Uwe comes from and why he does the films he wants to. I was almost appreciative of him as a filmmaker. On the other side, my review of In The Name of the King was to the negative. Any press is good press for Uwe. As long as there are people to keep talking about him he will never fade into a distant memory. And he will dodge the bullet of a potential career killer like Auschwitz.

cinesimonjSeptember 10, 2010 9:15 AM

There can be no doubt why it is that Uwe Bol is laughed at not only because of his films - it's childish, narcissistic nonsense like the above which justifies all the pointing and laughing directed at that fool.
Take your own advice, Uwe - grow up, and maybe concentrate on your film making instead of that which you have no control over. Psychotherapy 101...
And you're simply engaging in more childish projection when you ignorantly accuse others of not doing proper research - criticizing Twitch for something they simply haven't is such classic 'I, victim' behavior - you obviously need to work on that self esteem, kiddo!
No wonder the bulk of your films are so lacking in pretty much everything that makes a good film: you're more than likely fretting over how much of the crew like you as a person, instead of concentrating on your work!
Regarding the Auschwitz film, I totally agree with Todd: if it's going to be anything like how it's presented in the trailer, you'll have made your last film financed by those other than yourself.

ZOMBOID79September 10, 2010 11:37 AM

If it's one thing people on the internet,and sites hate is when is one of there subjects actually addresses them back. Then suddenly the subject needs to shut up,is out of line,generalizing and egotistical.

Boy if only people online held their fellow posters and favourite sites to those high standards-The internet would explode.

Uwe Boll may bring the cheese but the online community will always bring the "Whine"...and guess what-It's old, musty and the same brand they brought last time.

EndeneuSeptember 10, 2010 12:56 PM

Hasn't anyone taught Uwe the phrase, "Do not feed the trolls"? If his film is actually good, it'll speak for itself. Writing inflammatory letters to the online community only makes it worse.

Ard VijnSeptember 10, 2010 1:08 PM

Oh, he knows.
I'm guessing even the spelling errors are on purpose.

ChevalierAguilaSeptember 10, 2010 1:19 PM

Cool story boll.

Brain FartSeptember 10, 2010 1:42 PM

I thought Tunnel Rats was surprisingly watchable. Don't know most of the other films he mentions.
Clearly, the Auschwitz teaser sends a wrong message, no matter what he intended.

MattSeptember 10, 2010 2:52 PM

Thanks Olaf

ChevalierAguilaSeptember 10, 2010 10:02 PM

Boll is sort of a troll himself, so is beyond the point to tell him this crap makes him look like a fool.

cinesimonjSeptember 10, 2010 10:56 PM

...he whines

amrafilms1September 11, 2010 5:59 PM

I've read many reviews of the works of various filmmakers and the one thing I realized is that most reviewers see themselves as Gods. Able to make or break films with a single review. Sometimes the reviews are right on the money. Sometimes the reviews are skewed and lean towards just being mean spirited and not very constructive.

Anyone can criticize, but not everyone can make movies that get released much less make money.

And I have yet to see a critic that was a filmmaker, or at least one who made movies that get released either theatrically, or even to video. If I'm wrong please enlighten me. Makes me think that most critics, though not all, are envious little people. Little Napoleons, making big noises and always ready to destroy another's lively hood with their blogs.

Criticism is a tool to be used by those worthy of wielding it's power justly and constructively. Destructive criticism serves no purpose other than to fuel the critic's own ego, making them feel like they are better than the person they are criticizing. When in actuality they prove themselves the opposite.

The challenge for all would be critics then is to be impartial and if you must stand in judgement of others, then be willing to be judged. And if you so desperately feel the need to judge another, then judge them not by past efforts but on their most recent and relevant work.
And for God's sake be constructive and not destructive.

For everyone can grow, and improve. Everyone can change and become better for as it's said, practice makes perfect.

And like my mom to used to always say, "Play nice."

Todd BrownSeptember 11, 2010 9:07 PM

There are lots and lots and lots of critics that have made the successful transition to being directors, in lots and lots of countries. It's not rare at all.

ChevalierAguilaSeptember 11, 2010 10:42 PM

No offense but the "you can criticize something if you don't work in it" is a lame and absurd knee-jerk reaction from people who can't take any criticism whatsoever. I don't have to be a musician to criticize bad music, or a movie maker to criticize bad movies. Of course, if you are going to evaluate something means that you have a proper knowledge of the subject, but at the end of the day if you are an artist/author/creator and don't want to hear "bad" opinions from other people the solution is simple: never release your material to the public.

amrafilms1September 13, 2010 12:25 PM

There are lots and lots and lots of critics that have made the successful transition to being directors, in lots and lots of countries. It's not rare at all.

Todd your statement that there are lot of critics that have made the successful transition to being directors in lots of countries is very ambiguous. Which critics in which countries? As I don't know any of any mention and I'm sure most average movie goers don't either. Hence it still stands that very few, if any -PROFESSIONAL- critics HAVE made movies -THAT GET RELEASED- either theatrically, or even to video OF ANY MENTION. And once again if I am wrong, please enlighten me with names and which great films they have made that we would all be aware of.

To ChevalierAguila,

My statement was to make constructive criticism not destructive criticism. Which means if you're so smart about how a movie is bad then say how it could have been made better. Help the filmmaker to make better movies for your enjoyment. That's not a knee jerk reaction as you stated of someone who can't take criticism. Just someone who wants informed and creative criticism. Mean spirited criticism serves no purpose other than to fuel the spirit of the bullies who considers themselves critics.

And if an artist makes something that gets a critique he doesn't like I suppose he should just shut up and take it up the ass like a man, right? He has no right to defend his work. If he does, he's a cry baby. That's the kind of thinking that keeps filmmakers from getting better or trying to improve for an appreciative and supportive audience.

Also just because you have a computer and an internet connection doesn't make you an informed and trained critic. The internet has created way too many people who fancy themselves Gene Siskels and Roger Eberts. That doesn't make them professionals. It would be nice to see some legitimate, professional credentials posted from some of these self professed critics.

But who am I kidding? That will never happen.

dcmedias92September 13, 2010 1:16 PM

Dear Amrafilms,
some sample of movie critics who successfully turned movie director (THEATRICAL MOVIE DIRECTORS)
Christophe Gans (Brotherhood of the wolfes,Silent hill)
Before him Jean luc godard et lots lots of french directors began as movie critics it's not rare at all.

Todd BrownSeptember 13, 2010 3:23 PM

Off the top of my head, Joko Anwar in Indonesia, Pawel Pawlikowski (My Summer of Love) in the UK. There are examples in Japan, Canada, Hong Kong, all over the place ... they're not hard to find.

amrafilms1September 13, 2010 3:32 PM

To dcmedias92,

Thanks for the enlightenment, I appreciate it. I didn't know that.

But for the record I never said it was rare. I said "I have yet to see a critic that was a filmmaker, or at least one who made movies that get released either theatrically, or even to video." Meaning "I personally." I never said it was rare. I simply made a statement concerning my personal knowledge or lack of such.

Still there's no denying that anyone with an internet connect and a blog can call themselves a critic without having to provide accredited credentials. True or not true? And is it not true that creative criticism is always better serving than mean spirited, destructive criticism?

The way some people critique some these filmmakers' films or the filmmakers themselves, you'd think they had a personal grudge against them for some undisclosed reason. No one says you have to like their films but many other people do. I guess it all boils down to one person's likes or tastes may be different than another's.

Some people like escargot, and I personally hate it. But that doesn't mean that it's not good to some people. I love sushi but there are lots of people who don't. Does that mean sushi is bad? That's not to say that there aren't people who make sushi that's not very good but my denigrating them serves no purpose.

Get the point?

Todd BrownSeptember 13, 2010 4:00 PM

I totally get where you're coming from but, honestly, who do you think 'credentials' traditional press critics? There really isn't any such body. There are local critics circles that you can be part of once you've been writing for a while - some Twitch writers are part of them, some are not - but there really isn't any sort of standard for criticism beyond an editor or someone able to sign a check saying they like your writing and your opinion. The key, from a reader standpoint, is to find a critic with tastes similar to your own.

As for Boll, part of the point of this article was to say that we actually HAVE been quite constructive with him over the span of many films. I have personally invited a few of his films to multiple film festivals. I was the first person anywhere in the world to review Postal and my review of it was very positive. Swarez named Rampage one of the ten best films of 2009. I've met Boll and talked with him in person and I actually quite like the guy. But, that said, it's NOT a critic's job to cosy up and tell someone everything is wonderful when it's not and a director who has made repeated jokes about funding his films with Nazi gold - both in press and in a cameo within Postal - then casting himself as a Nazi SS agent guarding a room full of jews being gassed is in horrifically bad taste. And if, as he says, this trailer represents only a very small part of the film then simply choosing the most exploitative element of the film to try and sell it is also in horrifically bad taste and is very indicative of what sort of audience he's looking for with it. The whole thing was very, very poorly considered and it's not a journalist's job to ignore that. He doesn't get to dictate what sort of coverage he gets and he doesn't get to accept it when he receives praise while crying unfair when he is criticized.

ChevalierAguilaSeptember 14, 2010 3:52 AM

Boll has the right to defend his work, yes, but what he's doing is just acting like a baby. Movie directors everywhere get awful reviews and they don't behave like spoiled kids. The real nasty and offensive reviews are the first ones that they should be able to tolerate, or simple just ignore. Reacting like a diva, throwing childish remarks against critics, both good or bad critics, is just pathetic. Boll's attitude is pathetic, and there's nothing to defend about that.

BenoitMarch 19, 2012 6:00 AM

I love how in his quote he states that people judge him on "house of the dead" And "alone in the dark"!!!!!!! NO NO NO NO....we judge him on those AND....far cry....and in the name of the king 1 and 2...bloodrayne 1,2 and 3?..alone in the dark 2...and postal...man that is a lot of crap!!!!! BUT HERE IS MY QUESTION...despite all the German tax breaks and financial loopholes....how can somebody loose that much money and still be able to make movies?????? To quote Wikipedia...Boll's movies have often performed poorly at the box office in the United States. House of the Dead, which was budgeted at $12 million, made $5.73 million in its opening weekend,[8] Alone in the Dark, which was budgeted at $20 million, made $5.1 million,[9] and BloodRayne, which was made for $25 million, made $2.42 million.[10] The least profitable commercial performance of his career was In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale, which made barely $10 million worldwide at the box office on a $60 million budget. WTF!!!!!!!!!