QuoteReplyTopic: Funny...He Still Can’t Direct Worth Sh*t! Posted: May 16 2008 at 4:45am
WITH a LOCK on a WORST DIRECTOR NOMINATION for JANUARY's IN THE NAME OF THE KING, UWE BOLL GOES TWO-for-TWO in 2008 with HIS BERRY FIRST "INTENTIONAL" COMEDY. AND SINCE HE's AS GIFTED WHEN TRYING for a LAUGH AS HE IS INCOMPETENT WHEN GOING for DRAMA, THIS FILM COULD SERIOUSLY BOLSTER BOLL's LONG-SHOT CHANCE at DETHRONING STALLONE for OUR 2009 WORST CAREER ACHIEVEMENT RAZZIE®.
FEATURING "LOOK-ALIKES" for OSSAMA BIN-LADEN (WHO LOOKS MORE LIKE JOSE' JEMENEZ) GEORGE W. BUSH (SADLY, the ONLY ONE FAIRLY WELL-CAST) and with a "PLOT" DESCRIBED as "a COMIC TWIST on ARMAGEDDON," POSTAL IS ABOUT as AMUSING as a ANAL PROBE PERFORMED with a RUSTY SCREW-DRIVER.
BUT WHY LET US DO ALL the BOLL-BASHING? NOW IT's YOUR TURN!!
UWE: "Look out, Intianna Chones -- Vee shtoal 00000.127% uff your tunder!"
I hear The Sound of Thunder. . . and it sounds better than this!. . .
This should haul in a Worst Picture nomination if not a win, as well as assure Boll of a worst director nomination. This movie should land him in infamy.
I've only seen the beginning, which I hear from both the haters and the fanboys (and there's a lot of people praising this film), is the best part of the film. Hearing two of the 9/11 hijackers go back and forth about how many virgins they'll get, only to find out after calling bin Laden that since there's so many martyrs, there's not enough virgins to go around. . . . it should have been offensively funny, but it's not. And you can blame the director for that.
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Loathe though I am to give even two-cents to Uwe Boll, I feel oblogated to see this pile o' crap. On the face of it, though, I've gotta say, unless this actualy sux worst than NAME OF THE KING (which would be quite an achievement) in the interest of giving other Rotten Movie-Makers a fair shot at RAZZIE Glory, maybe we should limit Boll to just oneWorst Picture nomination for 2008. For Worst Director, of course, we can list his name followed by however many titles he miscarries into release this year...
Yeah, I don't think this guy has the panache to pull off any kind of humorous commentary on current events. Not to mention the whole potentially offensive Muslim gag thing has already been exercised to the point of exhaustion, as are George Bush jokes.
But hey, it can't be any worse than his last four efforts...r-right?
I really really really really want to watch this movie....on DVD. ANYWAY, I really need to get going to see the first 3 Indiana Jones before the new one comes out...and I think I'm not going to watch Indiana Jones 4 in theaters either...
Not only has the Rotten Tomatoes meter count improved (33% as of this writing), but also the theater count: It was down from 1,500 to four a few days ago, but now it's up to 12 -- two of which are midnight screenings, though...
I'm all for that (see below) especially if Freestyle Releasing is able to follow through on its commitment and place Seed in the theatres this year. I wouldn't want to see three Boll films vying for Worst Picture--it'd split the vote!
Originally posted by cvcjr13
RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Loathe though I am to give even two-cents to Uwe Boll, I feel oblogated to see this pile o' crap. On the face of it, though, I've gotta say, unless this actualy sux worst than NAME OF THE KING (which would be quite an acievement) in the interest of giving other Rotten Movie-Makers a fair shot at RAZZIE Glory, maybe we should limit Boll to just oneWorst Picture nomination for 2008. For Worst Director, of course, we can list his name followed by however many titles he miscarries into release this year...
You'll find plenty of great scenes to love in Uwe Boll's Postal.
I mean, how can you not love seeing:
Zack Ward repeatedly fall over in a broken chair during an interview, despite there being other chairs nearby.
A van plow into a baby in a stroller.
A bunch of kids being shot up, often in slow motion, while they wait for dolls shaped like crotches.
A broadcast journalist arrange the dead bodies of the very same kids into a photo op.
Four cute babes sporting Hitler mustaches so they can blend into a German themed amusement park.
A black policeman shoot an elderly Asian woman because she speaks with a thick accent and can't get her car through the light.
The same black policeman scold his neurologically challenged ward because the guy only pulled in $13 at the spot where he was left in his electric wheelchair to panhandle.
A group of paused rampagers discover the only thing they have in common is that they hate Jews.
Verne Troyer fulfill prophecy by being raped by a 1000 monkeys.
Uwe Boll explain his movies are financed by Nazi gold.
Dave Foley display his full monty and then avail the toilet while Chris Coppola blushes at the view and grimaces at the fumes.
What? You don't think these scenes are great?
Neither did I.
There were a few scenes I laughed at, but were okay at best.
The opening sequence with the hijackers debating how many virgins they will receive remains the best scene in the movie.
The shootout at the welfare office, as well as the recorder's triple WHAM!my comeuppance later in the movie.
Zack Ward's reaction to the interview question "What is the difference between a duck?"
A promotional speaker getting flattened by a falling, flaming car while cussing out his publisher on the cel phone.
George Bush and Osama bin Laden holding hands and skipping into the sunset dotted with nuclear explosions.
There were other times where things worked. Accordingly, this movie should settle the question whether Uwe Boll is a better filmmaker than Edward G. Wood, Jr. Such a contest!
However, considering the amount of heart and effort Boll put into filming and promoting this $15 million diarrhea, the few good chunks in the offal do not distract from his delusions of grandeur.
Dennis Harvey of Variety said that Boll and his co-writer Bryan C. Knight do not have the wit to pull off this satire, and he is right. Perhaps the time will come where someone intelligent and funny could take all that is sacrosanct, offensive, sensitive, feared and taboo and lampoon them with brilliant entertainment. Boll, on the other hand, can only, even at his best, throw the badly mixed tempura of his ideas on the screen, thinking he is Pollock but merely outdoing bug splatter on the windshield.
I gave this four out of ten stars, partly to show that Postal is at least twice as good as his other films...but mostly because I'm feeling generous tonight!
"Due to the film's controversial subject nature regarding 9/11, Uwe Boll has claimed that the movie was banned in all but 4 theaters in the United States.
Theatrical distributors are boycotting Postal because of its political content. We were prepared to open on 1500 screens all across America on May 23rd. Any multiplex in the U.S. should have space for us, but they're afraid... We have even tried to buy a few screens in New York and Los Angeles, and they won't let us even rent the theaters! I urge independent exhibitors to contact us and book 'Postal'! Audiences have been expecting the film and I don't think exhibitors should censor what gets played in U.S. theaters.
why its banned
September 11, 2001. Terrorists are about to fly a plane into the World Trade Center when they realize that there can't possibly be enough virgins left in the afterlife, given the recent rash of suicide bombings. After a quick phone call to their leader confirms that they may only get twenty, they decide to call off the attack and fly to The Bahamas. Just then, the cockpit door is kicked open and the passengers struggle to take control of the plane. Veering out of control, it smashes into the Twin Towers - the fiery explosion revealing the film's title card."
Come on people, why are we debating over if Uwe Boll should get a Razzie Award over the Sly Guy? Sly has already "won" 10 times; you can't dishonor the man any more! Boll is just begging, begging us to give him a razzie. He's releasing FOUR or more crappy movies in one year compared to Sly's one Rambo movie. He's doing everything short of writing in his own voting ballot to get himself a "win". He slipped through our fingers twice before. Letting him get away a third time is just a crime against the reasons for these awards in the first place. I mean if there was ever someone tailored made for the Razzies Awards other than Edward D. Wood Jr., it's this man, Uwe "The Only True F'n Genuis In This Industry" Boll.
I've seen the movie. Yes, it's offensive, but I don't feel that's why the theatre owners bailed on it. I'm not sure you could call it either a ban or a boycott. My guess would be that they felt it was so bad, it would tank. If that's true, then they called it right: There were only about a dozen people in the theatre during the showing I attended...
Could you point out where we can find this man that calls himself Uwe Boll? We would like to hang him from the tallest tree, ...er..., we mean we would like to have a word with him.
It could be worse -- Boll asked Blizzard Software to let him make a film based on World of Warcraft. They told him to get lost. Good for Blizzard Software!
Blizzard CEO Paul Sams said to Uwe: "We will not sell the movie rights, not to you...especially not to you."
I'm all for that (see below) especially if Freestyle Releasing is able to follow through on its commitment and place Seed in the theatres this year. I wouldn't want to see three Boll films vying for Worst Picture--it'd split the vote!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum