Talk:Uwe Boll

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Uwe Boll article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

September 21 to 27, 2014 (7th)

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Mid-importance).

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

Neutrality Issues

I have added the box after reading through the article thoroughly. The words "Boll alleges" have been placed before anything favourable, as have unverified comments about the script for Alone In The Dark. Someone needs to go through the article and level the playing field - this page has been hijacked by Boll bashers. Jamezcd 19:40, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest making a fresh start by deleting everything in that article and re-type it so it gives a neutral point of view. For a start, the main article on him should consists of his early life, finance, writings and quotations ONLY. Critcisms about Boll can be a seperate article or be left out altogether.

That can be done, but carefully. What needs to be done is the page needs to be re-written from scratch on someone's subpage in their userspace, and when it's done, link to it here and we can discuss whether it should replace the current version. --InShaneee 15:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think starting from scratch is entirely necessary. The "Criticism" section needs work but I disagree that it should be removed entirely. These are some of my thoughts on possible improvements.

The IMDb subsection doesn't belong there. There's some informative stuff there that I'd be loathe to just throw away, but I wouldn't know where else to put it. I just know it doesn't belong in *this* article.
That said, instead of writing one's own op-ed in order to justify the statement "Detractors allege that, when adapting a video game into a movie, Boll will change the plot, setting, and anything else that he deems necessary" in Wikipedia, link to an op-ed that makes this allegation. Then instead of duplicating all the points the op-ed should be making (re: House of the Dead, Alone in the Dark, BloodRayne) people could just go and read the reference.
The "Critic boxing match" section also belongs in its own articles. I don't think an "Uwe Boll critic boxing match" article (or something similar) is out of place.
The "Response to Criticism" section also doesn't belong here. The well sourced stuff is valid and is another of those informative things I wouldn't like to throw away but don't know where to put.
I don't see a "Quotations" section under any other biographies. I do see links to WikiQuote in good 'ol George dubya's wiki page though and that might be a good example to follow.
Both Spielberg and Dubya's pages have a "Trivia" section. This could be a nice place to link to the boxing match and mention the awards that he's won. Awards presented to Alone in the Dark, Tara Reid and Nightwish belong on their respective pages (and can be cross-linked from there, i.e. Alone in the Dark to Nightwish and Tara Reid and vice versa).

On a personal note I'm a bit sad about Nightwish's Stinker Award. I'm quite a fan and "Wish I had an Angel" isn't that bad a song. I'm sure there must be worse stuff out there that's used in movies :-(

Also: Can I get an indication as to why my linking Brooke Burgess' blog post to the "Outcome" subsection of the "Critic boxing match" section was removed (besides the fact that the whole section doesn't belong in this article)? Was it not good, did I somehow write something POV? If I did please be specific about what I did wrong that I may not make the same mistake. This question is directed at InShaneee as she did the revert. The Extremist 11:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the vast majority of cases, blogs should not be linked to. --InShaneee 14:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can't be neutral when it comes to Boll, he's so mediocre. Klow (talk) 23:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed the article, and learned many things about Uwe Boll which I did not previously know. But being factual and informative is unwelcome on Wikipedia, so I guess this article will be gutted like so many others have been. A pity, really. 76.104.45.99 (talk) 03:50, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, it's kind of hard to remain neutral about someone who keeps insisting on being a complete and utter shithead. (161.29.246.205 (talk) 00:47, 17 March 2022 (UTC))[reply]

Box Office Results

Can we at least have some common sense and mention how poorly a number of his movies have done at the box office ? According to IMDB, Bloodrayne cost $25 million and made $2.5 back, and Alone in the Dark cost $20 million and made $5 million. Whilst im sure everyone has their own opinion on the man and also his movies, the facts are some of them have done very poorly. for example:

Movies directed by Boll have not achieved the kind of box office returns one expects from a typical Hollywood film.

this is completely incorrect. the movies have been financial falures.

and BloodRayne (budget $25 million[3] ) topped $2.42 million.

this movie made 1/10th of what it cost. It didnt 'top' anything. Can we stop the knee jerk wikipedia reaction of trying not to offend anyone even if we simply present facts.
--Dem 11:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Err..these are not hollywood films, boll used the german film investment system, which allows him to essentially not lose any money for anyone, and at the same time reap the real profits for his investors, when the films later reach the much more profitable dvd rental phase.If losses outweigh profits, then the investors get their money back by having their tax returns written off until the lost value in investment is reached, if they do profit, everybody wins.

In reality only the german government stands to lose money, and it's not a huge loss, for every 10 uwe bolls there is at least 1 aspiring german filmaker who gets the money to create something sweet. This stimulates the german film industry, which is kind of the idea behind the scheme.

Regardless, uwe boll has popularity (yes even bad popularity is good in the entertainment industry) so he will continue getting support from film investors, because he scores the more well known actors, despite his reputation, and actors contribute to a film's success, if not initially, then on the rental shelves.

95% of hollywood films also loose tens of millions initially, but it is made up later. Vlad Dracula (talk) 12:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How he makes his bad movies

Just FYI, part of his success is due to the fact he is a German film director who predominantly bases his work financially out of his home country. Germany for the longest time has had rather unique laws towards films as investments and tax write offs that have only recently even been readdressed by its legislature. Essentially it is possible to make a German movie that does terrible and still make money for the investors by careful accounting and tax practices, though the movie must to some extent be able to potentially be considered seriously (which by default all official movie adaptions of games pretty much are). This is why the man continues to recieve all the work he does in video game adaptations, he is famous (infamous?) for his ability to always find additional investors in any project no matter how risky a bomb. I'm putting this here so someone who understands it better can put it in the main article, while I know that it happens, I do not know enough about the laws to include it an an encyclopedic article proper. [Tuesday, 23 January 2007 16:33 GMT]

01/16/2008~ For a good example of what he was doing, check out the movie "The Producers". Under the concept, he can be richer from a flop of a film and in hot water if he makes a success of a film. So people who are absolutely dead set against seeing his movies only make him richer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.240.130.5 (talk) 20:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is not correct at all. In "The Producers," the characters defrauded their investors by selling more shares in the production than actually existed; they would lose money on the musical, not have to pay back investors, and pocket the difference. This is quite different---first of all, it's not only legal, but encouraged. The filmmaker and the investors take advantage of a peculiar quirk in the German tax system. Under this system it is better for the movie to do well, but the German tax code puts a lot of incentive into investing in movies---any movies, good movies, bad movies---and takes away a lot of the risk involved in making a flop. 76.255.69.9 (talk) 08:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy/Criticism

Uwe Boll has sparked plenty of criticism, so it seems like we should be able to get good sources for that criticism. Imdb forums do not fall into the category of good criticism. While the boxing fiasco clearly makes his internet detractors relevant, the article has been giving the forums far too much credit. Mention internet forums, but don't make them the basis of the article's criticism. --Beaker342 04:58, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find it funny that the creator of Metal Gear freaked out at the prospect of his movie being made by Uwe Boll. - Thekittenofterra 14:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://games.slashdot.org/games/08/04/22/1246254.shtml references a good article on Bolls rejection by Blizzard for a World of Warcraft movie. Their quote "We will not sell the movie rights, not to you...especially not to you." Considering the overall quality of the existing article, I'll let someone else add this that can articulate better than I can :) 199.80.142.174 (talk) 15:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work

When I looked at this page, I was half expecting a huge rant on why Boll is a bad director and how he utterly rapes his licenses, etc. But I was glad and somewhat pleased to see a well written article. Good work guys. Kirbysuperstar 12:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No one has added What Stuttering Craig and Handsome Tom of Screw attack.com did about the new Far cry film /unregistered user/fan of Screwattack.com

I know; it's pretty incredible. This page doesn't even need to be protected; that's how amazing it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MysticLyman (talk • contribs) 04:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Maligned"

I don't think the use of the word "maligned" is proper in this article, as it implies that the statements are made with malice and often untrue. Perhaps it should be replaced with "panned" or some similar word that lacks the connotations associated with "maligned". --64.218.89.101 17:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree actually, it isn't quite the right word. What would be better? I rather like "excoriated", or perhaps "berated"? Or even "lambasted"? :-) DWaterson 21:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why hasn't this article been flagged?

This article in no way upholds the neutrality any Wikipedia article should hold. Before almost any Boll statement is "claims" or "alleged." There are no quotes from Boll himself, only from reputed movie critics who participated in the boxing matches. It gives the clear impression that Boll only claims or alleges, and all others quoted (I know, even the one(s?) defending him) are giving statements of truth. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Budash2 (talk • contribs) 04:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I think it's as neutral as it can be considering the subject, Uwe Bowel Movement. Electricbassguy 11:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly does Hilter's page have so many questions over its neutrality? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.82.21 (talk) 22:41, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputing the neutrality of an article about the man that is considered the worst director ever is like trying to get the article on the Holocaust deleted. The article is as neutral as it can get. I've never watched a movie by Uwe Boll, or any of the pejorative names people have given him, but many people have criticized him. I assume you haven't seen a Loo Boll movie in your life either, but he's arrogant as hell. He says he has a doctorate in literature, but he uses bad grammar and r****d in his vocab. ----

The thing is that if most of the sources are negative about him, there isn't much you can do. Bad grammar I would attribute to English not being his first language. I have seen several of his films (for free thankfully) and I guess I am just one of the billions that cannot understand his "brilliance", whoa is me. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie Say Shalom! 06:04, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Doctorate in Literature"?

Forgive my bias, but I find it a little hard to believe someone as fundamentally inept at communicating a story as Uwe is has a doctorate in literature. Could we possibly get a source for this claim? -- Grandpafootsoldier 10:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't find that the least bit unbelievable. He's studied at two universaties and he's written two books. Mind you that though he's educated in literature it does not affect anything he does in the film industry. -TheHande 21:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even still, a source would be appreciated. -- Grandpafootsoldier 08:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On metafilter the link http://www.amazon.com/dp/3893992162/

is posted. This is claimed to be his doctoral thesis.

The German version of the article cofirms this and further links to a page of the German Nationalbibliothek. On this page we see that he has indeed published this book: http://dispatch.opac.d-nb.de/DB=4.1/LNG=DU/LRSET=1/SET=1/SID=72fe8cd5-3/TTL=1/SHW?FRST=4

It is listed as a doctoral dissertation ("Hochschulschrift: Zugl.: Siegen, Univ., Diss."). It is relatively clear that this claim is true. Of course you could insist on ringing the Uni Köln and asking them, but we have proof that he has published a dissertation, which is probably enough.

The criticts say what they want. It's their job. And I like it that way. --84.231.187.95 16:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He gets more than he deserves. He's said himself that the german government will pay most of your expenses when you make a film (or something to that effect), and he rakes in cash whether the movie does well or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.1.188.237 (talk) 05:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's not a humble person, that's for sure. 06:24, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

definitely not humble, but its his act. Seriously, he's not nearly as bad of a director as the internet geeks make him out to be.

He is. Believe me, he is. and anyways, you can get a doctorate in literature even though you are a terrible writer. Most papers you write for writing classes involve regurgitation and analyzing. You don't need to be extremely creative for that. Besides, it depends on the college you go to. Doctorates can involve much hard work and study, or they could be extremely easy to get. It really depends on the college. You could have a good writing style, but NO ability to write a good, entertaining story. Macbeth30 (talk) 22:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm late to this discussion, but there is no evidence I can find that Boll has completed a PhD. His dissertation is a "Hochschulschrift". A PhD thesis would be called a "Doktorarbeit" and would be published on the Siegen University website (Note: NOT Uni Koeln). But it is not on the university website. Hochschulschrift usually means a dissertation for a diploma or master's degree. The link above is broken, so here is the link to the catalogue entry for the work: http://www.digibib.net/permalink/467/UBSI-x/HBZ:HT006349576

I'm therefore removing this claim from the article. Feel free to reinstate it when you can find actual evidence for his degree being a PhD.

Marchino61 (talk) 00:58, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Financing section

Why the whole "Financing" section has been removed the 23rd of March 2007 at 23:41? It was quite an interesting paragraph.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gynsu2000 (talk • contribs) 2007-06-08

Looks like it was deleted by an IP which had performed vandalism immediately prior, at any rate, it was deleted without explanation. I'll add it back. 71.116.89.88 02:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, this doesn't make sense to me:

Because of this, in January 2006, as had been expected for several months, the German legislature changed the country's tax laws to eliminate the tax shelter. It is not known if this will have any effect on Boll's funding as the new laws only seek to punish investors who are abusing the law for tax purposes...

Well, what is it? Do the new laws eliminate the tax shelter or just punish investors abusing it? They sound like completely different things. Razordu30 (talk) 18:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like this section has been deleted again. There's a source over here, if that would help. If true, and especially if there are actually efforts in Germany to close this tax loophole inspired by Uwe Boll, this would be a good thing to add to the article. Esn (talk) 16:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, never mind. I'm blind. For some reason, I expected this to be in the "Controversy" section. Esn (talk) 16:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The shelter is closed. His last movie with the money was the 2007 one. You have to pre-invest money in first place, which closes the double benefit of a) taking a lawn -> reducing the success of a company --> less taxes and b) there is no return for unsuccesfull movies --> no security for investor. Furthermore, any money has to be spent in Germany. See German wiki http://dasmagazin.ch/index.php/meister-des-grauenhaften/ http://board.gulli.com/thread/482019-stoppt-uwe-boll-/19/ The Germany papoers do not care about him. The shelter was also used for Tomb Raider.

"Raging Boll" section/essay

Not sure about the entire section, but this section head seems very biased, by using a witticism to mark it. I think it needs a rewrite, perhaps trimming, as the article needs to be a summary of the director, not a "scandal sheet." - David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 01:36, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Raging Boll" comes from Boll himself. It was the nickname he chose for his in-ring persona as part of the whole "box the critics" stunt. It is therefore not unfair to use it as a heading for a section on this promotional stunt since it was in fact a large part of the stunt itself. Alcohol paul 20:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Alcohol paul" is right. Will be removing the neutrality tag as stale clutter. Cosh (talk) 05:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the line stating that it was "the fact" Boll wouldn't fight amateur boxer to say "a claim" since the fact was Boll did fight the amateur boxer. "...including the fact that Boll refused to fight against Chance Minter..." to instead say "...including a claim that Boll refused to fight against Chance Minter..." Here's the original text, plus the follow up line showing that whoever wrote the original doesn't quite grasp what makes something a "fact". "After Kyanka lost his match, he would go on to make several allegations against Boll, including the fact that Boll refused to fight against Chance Minter who was an experienced amateur boxer. However, Boll fought Minter as his fourth opponent." -original line "After Kyanka lost his match, he would go on to make several allegations against Boll, including a claim that Boll refused to fight against Chance Minter who was an experienced amateur boxer. However, Boll fought Minter as his fourth opponent." -new edited line Now whether Uwe Boll initially didn't want to fight an under-aged 17 year-old who isn't a critic and hadn't written anything critical of his films at all, and instead just volunteered, still wouldn't make the original line make much sense. It might of just been someone rewriting Kyanka's original post, since he used the "the fact" wording; even though it isn't actually quoting Kyanka. Plus youtube videos and news outlets all mention/show the match between Boll and Minter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.138.23 (talk) 03:26, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uwe's Hate Mail to Wired

Uwe Boll gave a statement about the hate mail he sent to the guys at wired.com in german game review magazine "GameStar": http://www.gamestar.de/magazin/special/kino/postal_der_film/1473883/postal_der_film_p4.html

It translates to about this: "I guess this [email to wired.com] was a mistake. On the other side, he [the wired.com review writer] really didn't need to publish that email. I still stand up on what I said, because, after the San-Francisco screening, he walked right up to me, said "great movie!", seemed deeply impressed and made an interview with me which he recorded on tape. The next day, he published a slating review. I think that's a very impudent behavior. He could just have come to me, told me that he didn't like the film and asked if we couldn't have done the interview anyway. That would have been different. But lying to me and mocking me like that really pissed me off. Before going, he told me to visit the website [wired.com] the next day, he'd do a great review. When I read the review, I kept asking myself whether this was the same guy. And so I wrote this email saying: "Hey you son of a bitch you. Man, you can't be serious!". There has to be some fairness."

91.34.57.48 14:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC) i feel sorry for the guy now69.220.1.137 (talk) 20:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah the guy may not be great but really be honest, was postal any worse than speed racer? no. I actually enjoyed it and still watch it. But since the popular gaming mags and everything say he sucks people say they hate his movies before even seeing them. Its actually pretty pathetic. Yes he can get full of himself but not nearly as much as Kojima but people still make excuses for him. Derelix (talk) 05:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of films needs updating?

The article states that "He has announced plans to produce adaptations of Postal, Legacy of Kain, and Far Cry". Hasn't at least "Postal" been made by now? 62.181.255.64 (talk) 10:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That and I can't find any information anywhere about this "planned Legacy of Kain" movie. It's not listed on IMDB, Boll's website, nor do I see mention of it in any of the links used as citations. Where then, does this rumour come from? RazerWolf (talk) 07:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

theres his new film postal http://www.movieset.com/postal that needs to go up, hope we can get it up there. Blue.alphabet (talk) 18:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That might fit into the Postal article somehow but does not belong in this one. Wryspy (talk) 21:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the rumour of there being a Uwe Boll adaptation of Eternity's Child for the Wii should be included also. I can't edit the page myself, but I think an uncited entry would make it feel more modern. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt.bateman (talk • contribs) 14:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think there needs to be more- such as "blubberella" and even his "german fried movie" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deadagain33 (talk • contribs) 21:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uwe Boll Will Quit Making Movies with One Million Signatures

http://www.petition online.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?RRH53888&1

http://www.fearnet.com/MCNewsDetailPage.aspx?catid=30&mid=13788 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.26.122.12 (talk) 05:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This above Fearnet article is the original source for Boll's quote, not the Guardian as the Wiki page says. I know because I did the interview!Batgrrlnyc (talk) 05:09, 19 April 2008

perhaps this should be added to the criticisms section? -121.217.10.254 (talk) 07:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Better link? - http://www.petition online.com/RRH53888/petition.html

That's exactly what I was thinking. I think I hit the wrong button somewhere, oops. Evilsmoo (talk) 04:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't quite know what would need to be done to whitelist that link, as wikipedia seems to like ipetition, yet not like petitiononline. Evilsmoo (talk) 04:30, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Editprotected}} I don't really know why this article is even protected, as the protection was requested by a user who's been banned for spoof accounts and abuse, but under the "Retort" section, it should cite this video: [[1]]. Gilamobster42 (talk) 15:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not done In four days (or whenever someone autoconfirmed comes along) you'll be able to do it yourself. If you think the page should be unprotected, try WP:RFP. Happy‑melon 10:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least two persons have already counter-protested the present petition thus far, signing with such statements as "please keep making cool videogame movies" and "I LOVE YOU UWE BOLL YOU ARE TEH BEST," however these have remained isolated cases

As funny as this is, does this really belong in a wiki article? Feudonym (talk) 08:18, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It most certainly does not 86.60.129.173 (talk) 04:43, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Bay challenge

Since it hasn't been added, and the article is locked, i figured i'd post here.

Boll issued a boxing challenge to Michael Bay today http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlJ3VLGDOVE

Everyone who reads CAD is going to suggest this, so i hope someone'll get it done.

K!netic (talk) 05:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a challenge as to who makes the worst movies?

Damn if thats true they must be in a dead heat, Joel Shuemaker's in the fray for this one too right? Batman and Robin alone is worth a few points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.82.21 (talk) 22:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

I believe that this section is too long. It must have been edited by people who doesn't enjoy his great work on videogames movies. -- 200.100.16.135 (talk) 02:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People who doesn't enjoy his great work. I don't know which is more sad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.148.73.149 (talk) 02:15, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoy his great work on tax loopholes and circumventing deuschmarks to his own pocket, i'm an avid fan! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.82.21 (talk) 22:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If anything the criticism section seems too short. Let's not kid ourselves; there is much to criticize. Eddy1701 (talk) 22:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Works by Dr. Uwe Boll

i have changed the template title from "Movies directed by Uwe Boll" to "Works directed by Dr. Uwe Boll" just for a little humor, please let me know what you think, i say it looks and sounds much better. FloydNIN (talk) 01:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted. We're trying to build an actual encyclopedia, even about people that make really, really crappy movies; if you want to write humor, try Uncyclopedia. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:10, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And these are undoubtly movies, as in moving pictures, the work part is what I doubt. 81.182.236.100 (talk) 02:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uwe Boll Filmography

Can someone please put the complete Filmography chart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.8.116 (talk) 18:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Escapist Magazine Interview

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_171/5366-Boll-Versus-the-World ... parking this reference here in case it is helpful to this article. thanks, --guyzero | talk 17:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bollfighting

The last paragraph about the "Raging Boll" sounds a bit like a rant by some Attack of the Show fanboy. Can this information regarding Boll fighting former AotS host "Seanbaby" be flagged for a citation or removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.230.219.58 (talk) 00:54, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Believe it or not, I don't know the first thing about Uwe Boll or video games - which is exactly the reason I came to wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.115.22 (talk) 16:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Begs for vandalisation

I'm so tempted to replace his picture with that of a pile of cow dung..this guy is a waste of genetic material...(just watched postal...I know..I know..) 118.95.6.205 (talk) 11:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, tell me about it... 65.80.232.203 (talk) 05:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you wouldnt need to change anything, BTW, I changed the image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathbal101 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure he's getting fed up with the criticisms as he's actually stopped (at least for now) making movies based on video games. Pyromania153 (talk) 23:08, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use a picture of a big block of cheese? :P. One of the film channels here showed "Alone In The Dark" a month or so ago, and while I wasn't paying too much attention to it, it looked to be a fairly good film. Good enough that I went to locate a copy the day after to watch properly. All I can say is Christian Slater and Stephen Dorff must have been really desperate for the pay-cheque. I wouldn't say it was the worst film I've ever seen, but it has to be in my "top" 20 to never watch again. Characterless characters; bad script; "interesting" choices for camera work; horror-less horror; gaping plot holes; and I don't want to continue with the rest of it's high points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.152.250.254 (talk) 00:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: petition to retire bit

Didn't he say that if it reached 1 million signatures he'd just retire from adapting videogames? As in, not retiring from filmmaking altogether... which seemed to be the implication from the text. That whole bit's pretty sparse on information anyway, I guess. I just heard the creative screenwriting magazine interview with him, he says it on there. 82.38.61.12 (talk) 13:37, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well the Guardian reference certainly does seems to imply retiring from film making in general, so that's what the text in the article is going to go on. If you find a different reference stating retiring from video-game films only we can most certainly take that into account and integrate it into the article. Freikorp (talk) 22:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality, part 2

Much as I agree with nearly all of what's said in the article, much of the wording is decidedly unprofessional, and smacks of bias. Words like "sucky" - no matter how accurate - shouldn't be used outside of direct quotations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.180.114.26 (talk) 23:32, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. His movies are absolute pieces of trash, but that doesn't mean the article should be about that. The critics take the position that his films are trash - Wikipedia shouldn't. 98.198.83.12 (talk) 02:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No Blubberella article yet?

Ever since I read about it in EW, I've been dying to read more about Blubberella on wikipedia, but thus far, nothing. Any takers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.254.86.140 (talk) 01:04, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That requires watching the film, no thank you. Has any RS commented about his recent foray into the Nazi period? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie Say Shalom! 06:06, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rampage

New wikipedia editor here, doubt I'll make many changes at all but this error popped out at me: Rampage was listed as a video game title, and having seen his movie and played the rampage series, I can assure you all that they aren't related, so I deleted that. -jrh 72.48.189.210 (talk) 07:09, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Allow me to elaborate, since lots of his video game movies bear only a slight resemblance to the games themselves. His movie is about a guy who suits up in some combat armor and roams around town killing folks, the games are about giant monster mutants that climb buildings and punch holes in them to get good goodies until the buildings fall down. Though I did find both kinda tedious, I still don't think they are related. -jrh 72.48.189.210 (talk) 07:16, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed the film 80.193.196.212 (talk) 11:39, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

German/Canadian dual citizen?

If you are born in Germany and become a Canadian citizen, you automatically lose German citizenship. The exception to this is if one of your parents is a Canadian citizen and the other is a German national, then you are a dual citizen, you don't have to choose one and lose the other at a certain age. Unless one of his parents was a Canadian citizen, he is probably not a dual citizen of Germany and Canada. http://www.canada.diplo.de/Vertretung/kanada/en/02/citizenship/dual__citizenship.html -- Hyacinth45

As of April 2015, he is not a Canadian citizen. You can get an Access to Information/Privacy request that proves it.

Assault on Wall Street

In the Wikipedia article text it lists Boll only as Director of "Assault on Wall Street". I have just watched the movie and he is credited as writer, producer and director. I have no axe to grind here. As a matter of fact, I don't know anything further about Uwe Boll other than the above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.250.197.184 (talk) 22:08, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Uwe Boll. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:35, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Uwe Boll. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:38, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Uwe Boll. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:02, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Uwe Boll. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:38, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Uwe Boll. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20120707030357/http://au.eonline.com/uberblog/movie_reviews/b95666_alone_in_dark.html to http://au.eonline.com/uberblog/movie_reviews/b95666_alone_in_dark.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=%2Fwww%2Fstory%2F05-07-2008%2F0004808311

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Uwe Boll. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121022181532/http://www.1up.com/news/uwe-boll-talks-bloodrayne to http://www.1up.com/news/uwe-boll-talks-bloodrayne
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.1up.com/do/feature?cId=3154304

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:51, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated

His Bauhaus restaurant in Vancouver, BC, he gave up quite at the beginning of Corona pandemic (spring 2020) und Boll has returned to Germany, Mainz, since. --213.172.123.242 (talk) 19:21, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

Be careful how your words can destroy someones career. Look, Mr boll may be bad but one bad review calls many. I don't think anyone deserves that. Ok, what I think is that he serves as an example to many foreigners that want to make a film outside their country (with people that don't understand them). Even though the damage can't stop him from making a beautiful film, the damage was already done. Best wishes Uwe Boll. 41.114.125.117 (talk) 11:24, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]