Alone in the Dark--The Movie

[BerserkerTails]

Okay, here's a question... "House of the Dead" cost 12 million dollars to make, plsu 10 million for distribution and marketing. It's total income, worldwide, was 13 million dollars.

9 million dollars not repaid.

"Alone in the Dark", which had a 20 million dollar production budget (No announcement or estimate on the marketing figure yet) made LESS money in it's opening weekend than House of the Dead!

So if Uwe Boll's films are NOT making money, why do people keep hiring him?!?

[LGM]

His mommy must be screwing the executives.;.

Hell if I know...

[DGMacphee]

That's what makes me detest the guy so much.  Hannibal was watchable and I loved Wag the Dog.  So, seeing those titles in his filmography confounded me.  His other recent films, Heist and Lifeboat I've yet to see but don't particularly want to after Spartan.  The comedy I was referring to was State and Main.  I tried watching it but the dialogue twisted my intestines and I found myself unable to continue due to flashbacks from Spartan.  And the dialogue style is intentional! Val Kilmer's nothing great (minus Top Secret, of course) but he did a better job in Real Genius. 

Heist, I've heard, is really good. Haven't seen it, but want to. Glengarry has some killer lines, especially Alec Baldwin's monologue. But keep in mind that my original point is that you can not put Mamet and Boll in even the same league. Mamet is an accomplished playwright as well as an accomplished screenwriter. He's had a range of hits (as well as some misses) in a career that has earnt him the title of one of Hollywood's best screenwriters.

Boll, meanwhile, has directed two movies based on video games. Both panned and made very little money. He's neither original or as creative as Mamet. That's why putting them in the same category is IMO a little misguided.

As for Far Cry, I was very meh about it. I can think of better titles to claim Best of 2004.

[TheYak]

Alright, I'll agree that Mamet isn't nearly as horrid as Boll but he still gets the ultra-stinky award for not learning from his mistakes.  Spartan was his most recent (last I checked) and earns my pick for crappiest supposedly non-B-list movie of the past few years.

[DGMacphee]

True. I've heard a mixed reaction about Spartan. Some love it, and some really detest it.

[LGM]

Okay.. Maybe best wasn't the right word. Most popular game of 2004.

And Boll apparently has another film that is actually decent. It has a 6 on IMDB, anyways.

[Redwall]

I think Doom 3 or HL2 or Halo 2 or GTA:SA are one of the most popular (probably Halo 2).

I would say Far Cry is one of the most memorable FPSs of 2004.

[LGM]

Well if you want to get technical..

[DGMacphee]

We do.

[Haddas]

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2649

A "behind the scenes" "article" by somethingawful.com consering the movie in question

[Eggie]

I was just about the post the same link.
Unbelievable stuff in that article. I may have only heard of this Uew Boll guy yesterday but he is now my new idol!

Ed Wood with a massive budget and less talent. How can you not love 'im.

[Redwall]

Personally, I prefer Paul Anderson. But that's just me.

[c.leksutin]

See, in my view, Paul Anderson is a decent directer. He has a decent sense of visual style, he can convey a story sucessfully in a visual format and he can get a good perfomance from his cast and crew.  To top it off he's written/directed several movies I like quite a bit.

Uwe Boll, on the other hand, is a disgrace to the medium of film.  He's also somewhat of an insperation:  If he can get studio's to let him direct, then any number of the asipring filmmakers that hang out here should be able to as well.  The difference being that given our chance, we're more apt to accomplish something of merrit with the opertunety.  I know that if someone gave me 12 million to make my first film, I wouln't blow it all on worthless f/x shots ripped directly from the matrix to prop up a video game film who's plot was never fully translated into english in the first place (I'm speaking of course,  of Uwe Boll's disasterpiece: House of the Dead).

I'm genuniely curious as to how he's managed to get both the rights AND the funding for these gems and and where the logic to hand over a brand as well know as Alone in the Dark to a director who's work goes direct to video more often then most porn productions came from.  I understand that having the right firends in the entertainment industry can get you places, but these studios are ultimatly in business to make money, which flat out isn't happening with any project Uwe Boll is at the helm of.

I'd really like to see good directors taking on these game to movie projects, I think lots of games have interesting storylines that could spawn great movies given the proper vision.  On the flip side I'd also like to see good directors taking up game projects and possibly ushering in a new era of truly interactive fiction.

To sum up:  I  hate Uwe Boll, I think he's going to kill an entire genre before it ever has time to really develop.  At the same time he gives me hope that I can one day fulfill my dream of directing films.  After all, if he can do it anyone can do it and probably do it better.

And thats my rant.

C.

[DGMacphee]

That's the thing: I thought Alone In The Dark would have made a great movie IF (and a big IF) Boll had stuck to the original source. His whole Hollywood mentality (special effects, "name" stars) is what made the film fail (Granted, the same type of mentality turned that cinematic dungheap I, Robot into a box office hit, but keep in mind the film is still a piece of shit albeit a money-making piece of shit). But if he did away with the whole "I-need-special-effects-and-a-well-known-cast" and just stuck to unleashing his creativity (that is, if he has any), then AITD would have been better.

I'm not a huge fan of M. Night Shyamalan, but I reckon this is the sort of material that'd be right up his alley: a scary film where it's not what you see but what you don't see. Plus he'd stick to proper casting and give Carnby his big moustache back.

[Eggie]

I'm genuniely curious as to how he's managed to get both the rights AND the funding for these gems and and where the logic to hand over a brand as well know as Alone in the Dark to a director who's work goes direct to video more often then most porn productions came from.  I understand that having the right firends in the entertainment industry can get you places, but these studios are ultimatly in business to make money, which flat out isn't happening with any project Uwe Boll is at the helm of.

I read on IMDB that quite alot of the funding for these films comes out of Mr.Bolls own pocket.

[Bombadil]

I seems that the only thing that would be good on the AITD move will be the soundtrack [^^] though if the movie was [as it should be ] like the game, that soundtrack would fit in there...

[BerserkerTails]

I don't know. Personally, I'm not one for two disc soundtracks full of repeatitive metal. I mean, the soundtrack's probably longer than the movie!