DISQUS

Sebastian Z · 1 year ago

Looked pretty cool... until the actors started talking. Really, even if the director is as talented as Uwe Boll, any decent actor would be capable of giving a somehow convincing performance, right? I guess Boll doesn't work with decent actors...

Like you said, it looks bloody and it looks intense, but it also looks cheap... don't think I'll ever see it.

Matador · 1 year ago

looks aweful. he wont ever do anything worth watching. thats his lot in life. too bad for him.

Cole Abaius · 1 year ago

Lost me at "Sufferton, USA." Really? The town's name is Sufferton? As in Suffer Town? Thanks, Boll.

Second the dialog remark. Quick check...and...yup, Boll wrote it. Has he tried making German films?

@ Sebastian: "even if the director is as talented as Uwe Boll..." What are you talking about? You mean, when the direct is a talentless hack like Uwe Boll right? Thought so.

Sebastian Z · 1 year ago

yeah, sorry, I meant "untalented". (or you could consider it as a crappy sarcastic remark, heh.)

Robert Fure · 1 year ago

Taking easy pot shots again. This movie actually looks good from the trailer. If it was from anyone else, no one would be ragging on it for anything other than being seemingly low budget. The only problem was the Final Cut Pro text inserts that were static.

@Cole
Sufferton? You're picking on that? Some real town names: Hell, Paradise, Bird in Hand, Blue Balls, Truth Or Consequences, Last Chance, Bacon, Waterproof, California (as in California, Maryland). And it was Sufferton County.

Give Bole a break, this movie looks fine so far.

Rob Hunter · 1 year ago

@ Fure, we get it. You're today's FSR contrarian, a position usually held by Abaius. All well and good except for the fact that you're also full of shit. If this trailer didn't have Uwe Boll's stamp on it we wouldn't even be watching it. But we do watch because we want to see if this monkey on a typewriter can eventually churn out some Shakespeare.

And as far as easy pot shots go... how about a Boiling Point on cell phones in movie theaters. Oooh! Zing! Zap! Kapow!

Cole Abaius · 1 year ago

I owned a monkey who typed about 3/4ths of Twelfth Night before tacking on the ending to Mom and Dad Save the World right when Malvolio starts treating the other servants really rudely. It actually, sort of, made sense, and I could see John Lovitz in both roles.

Senseless Babble · 1 year ago

If Boll is so horrible (and I'm not saying he isnt) then why does FSR give him so much coverage? Running Gag? Easy Target? So Bad He Can't Be Ignored? A Cultural Force To Be Reckoned With? - Just interested in your opinions, thanks. - Senseless Babble

Robert Fure · 1 year ago

@Hunter
Actually, I'm just a horror fan and as a horror fan, I see low budget movies all the time and this trailer honestly looks better than nearly all of the After Dark HorrorFest entries. Boll is a technically proficient director, if not someone overly concerned with the acting part of the movie, and he works on little money. I don't have a problem with Boll. Alone in the Dark wasn't bad, House of the Dead is watchable (remove the video game footage and it might even be cool). The BloodRayne's sucked hard. You don't put in Uwe Boll and expect Schindler's List. He can make enjoyable crap.

Enjoy riding your high horses up in your towers.

Rob Hunter · 1 year ago

@ Senseless Babble, FSR gives him attention because we secretly want Boll to show up on Neil's doorstep in Ohio and challenge him to a fight. Boll's movies suck, but the man himself is entertaining.

@ Fure, Your "I'm just a caveman" argument is weak for several reasons, most notably the fact that you're flat out wrong. The After Dark films may suck, but they often had somewhat interesting premises. Seed is not interesting as we've seen it all before in better (and to be fair, equally bad-looking) films. No one's expecting Spielberg quality from Boll, but low budget doesn't have to equal shit acting, writing, and action set-pieces. Look at The Machine Girl... most likely cost a lot less than Boll's had to play with but it was a hell of a lot more entertaining than any of his movies.

Robert Fure · 1 year ago

@Rob
You are an excellent debater. "Your argument is weak because you're wrong on something that is based on your opinion." Bravo, sir! You've bested me!

Shall we run down the After Dark films and see how interesting their premises were? Ancient monster disturbed. Masked killer at theme park. Ghosts in psychiatric ward. Zombies/Rats (both have been done). Tourists caught up in Cult. Inbred cannibals attack tourists. So you're going to hold those above "Masked killer who survived electrocution?" At best, they're on par.

Seed looks like a cross between Shocker and Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Original? No. (But most mildly budgeted horror films aren't) Worth watching? So far, I don't see why not.

And just because you get a chubby over foreign horror films doesn't mean they're superior or they use a budget better - the cost of production in most Asian countries pales to Western counterparts.

big K · 1 year ago

Here are the choices Mr. Boll had before "Sufferton, USA":

"Painsville"

"Port Scabies"

"Incestburg"

"Rape Springs"

"Boise"

The Batman vs. Alien & Predator trailer was WAAY better, and that was made off somebody's lunch money.

You'd think Boll could do more with the cash he gets from ze Germans.

Rob Hunter · 1 year ago

@ Fure, Please leave my chubby out of it.

Cole Abaius · 1 year ago

I think I had an Aunt that lived in Rape Springs. Oddly enough, it was voted one of the Top Ten American Cities of 2002. However, its neighbor to the west, Blissful Pines, missed the cut due to a frighteningly high rate of sexual assault.

Mister Hand · 1 year ago

I must admit, I expected to see a series of comments all trashing Boll, who is well worthy of being trashed. It's almost refreshing to see someone take his side.

This guy's made a lot of movies. You'd think that just by accident he'd have made at least one by now that didn't suck.

Vincent Colombo · 1 year ago

@Fure
I agree, as a fan of horror films I have watched a lot of low budget crap. However some of it has been low budget crap that I have truly enjoyed, either because the acting was good, the special effects impressive, the story interesting, or it had decent direction. I have also watched a lot of crap that I have not enjoyed, usually because it is lacking all of the aforementioned possible strong points, a perfect example would be Creepshow 3, which would be perhaps the worst movie I have ever sat through.

From the trailer this movie looks interesting enough for me to watch. I won't run out and see it the day it's released, but I'll watch it eventually, and I'm guessing I'll enjoy it. Is it original? No, not really. Is the acting stellar? Doesn't appear so, but it appears to be better than the worst of the worst. I'd say the same about the director. So, overall it appears to be worth the price of the rental in my opinion.

I'd also like to point out that it would be hard for a director to continue to find financing if their movies did not make some amount of money. Obviously enough people see Uwe Boll movies that someone feels justified in continuing to write him checks. That may not be the mark of a great director but at least he's successful in what he is doing, and for that I say more power to him!

Cody · 1 year ago

Well it defiantly doesn't look like anything that "retard like Michael Bay" would make.

He really does deliver "a movie like nobody else has delivered in the last ten years."



quotes taken from: "http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/uwe-boll-is-a-james-bond-villain.php"