Don't get me wrong, I dislike his movies like every normal thinking person. But at one point he said that IMDB is unfair regarding his movie and now I see he's right. Why is this movie open for votes???? It's not even completed. That's a dick move by IMDB. Honestly.
shareUSA 11 November 2008 (American Film Market)
I guess someone watched it there.
*KNEgg*
That's a load of *beep* and you know it. 51 people did not see this film and vote on it here. It's possible, but it's so far from plausible that I can't even believe you're trying to suggest it.
sharewho cares if anyone has seen it, do you honestly think its going to be a halfway decent film?
shareIt's not about the quality of the movie, it's about the quality of IMDB. Unless you had the honest chance to watch it, you shouldn't be allowed to vote it. And if I'd be in charge of IMDB, I'd fire the people responsible. Not because I like Boll and such, but because I won't tolerate that my employees lower the quality of my business.
sharei was talking to my sister about this i didnt think it was fair that people voted befor it came out fully and all most all of them gave it a 1 but she said its expected these days for his films
"can you tell me the way to shell beach"
people voting 1/10 or something for movies they haven't seen are retards. Worse actually. Because a lot of retards actually know better.
shareActually I've seen it.
Its the first of his films aside from Heart of America (Which is currently considered his best released work) and its a very good social commentary on a true story.
Also Tunnel Rats is good also. Its an awesome take on war movies. Most war movies always just show the one side of war (Usually the American) but this film actually shows how terrible any war is for either side. Both people think they're fighting for the right thing, serving a country who could really care less about them.
His upcoming films Rampage is also turning out really good. I saw a rough edit while working on The Storm and although the editor seems to have an agenda of his own, he's definitely on the right path. Its a really good film also and Brendan Fletcher really knocked it out of the park.
So yeah, to the point, its entirely unfair for people to be able to rank movies that haven't even been released and unfortunately because of his bad films his new ones that actually have a point and a damn good message will go unseen by the judgmental.
Hell people, everyones had bad flicks, James Cameron - Piranhas 2: The Spawning, c'mon. Spielberg - Indy 4. Give his new flicks a shot, you'll be pleasantly surprised.
/agree with chanceminter 100%. Good post, couldn't have worded it better. Go see Tunnel Rats especially and then say he deserves to have x amount of morons destroy his IMDB rating without having seen the damn movie. And Stoic is a very well made movie as well...
shareI and my friends enjoyed postal :D It was a pretty good comedy.
shareThis will always be a problem in a world of free speech. I dare suggest that the majority of IMDB users, don't offer up a realistic vote even when they've seen a film. People come out of the movie theater, having just seen a big budget blockbuster, in a total adrenaline rush, thinking: WOW!!! This was wicked. This will often be due to massive special effects, and not mainly due to the quality of the film as a whole. But they go home, log onto IMDB and give the film a 10. A week later, they think "hmmm, you know what, it wasn't REALLY a 10, more like a 8, but hey, it's okay, the average score the film got is a bit low anyway, so it'll help boost it. And that's what I imagine most people do. They give a very high or very low score, to boost or lower the average score of a film, in hopes that the average will hit the rating they personally feel the film should have. People see that a film they like has got a rating of 7.6, so they give it a 10 in hopes it'll eventually climb to a solid 8 average or such.
However, this problem becomes less and less noticable as more people vote. By the time a film has into the tens of thousands of votes, it will start to even out, and all of a sudden, you got a more realistic representation of how the general public feel about a film.
Yes, I'm convinced that this whole thing hurts directors like Uwe Boll. But then again, when you're somebody who claims you can prove the quality of your films by challenging your critics to a boxing fight, then does it really matter?
For the record (even though it's a 4 year later reply), Stoic most definitely IS at least a half decent film. I'd go as far to say it's pretty good film actualy. I know the huge pile of crap films Boll has made as well, and I dislike them just as much as most people do... but that doesn't take away that Stoic (and Rampage as well, for that matter) aren't at all bad.
It's just Boll's fault for making so many utter *beep* films that people don't take him seriously anymore as a filmmaker.
I did not say 51 people saw the movie and voted it.
I was just stating the fact that people had already officially seen the movie, and i guess that's why IMDB had it open for voting.
*KNEgg*
The Voting should be opened the same day of the first date it showed anywhere (11-NOV in this case) otherwise you'd be givin the people who actually saw it, no chance to vote..
Now.. if ppl are dickheads that vote without having seen the movie, that's not IMDB problem.. how in the world could they know if a person saw the movie or not?
I agree.
"If you don't like my movies, don't watch them" - Dario Argento
[deleted]
It was yesterday 12 april 2009 in worldpremiere in belgium BIFFF festival, and have to say it is sick but pretty good movie, I rate it about 6, but sure is worth 4-7.
Those 1 raters should be deleted.
We don't live. We survive
"by pistonsew (Sun Jan 25 2009 15:58:10)
who cares if anyone has seen it, do you honestly think its going to be a halfway decent film?"
thx for this highly qualified post.. /irony off ..(just in case you don't get it)
[deleted]
Let's put it this way:
Those people that vote and give Boll movies a 1/10 before they have even seen the movie ... do you really think they will see the movie and vote something better if voting isn't allowed until release!?
ok i can calm you all down. it's been released by now, i saw it, and it sucks. 1/10
shareDo you vote 1/10 for all movies you don't like?
I suggest IMDB allowing only special people to vote to avoid retards like this one.
For example you need to describe in many words acting, script, effects etc..
Actually they do calculate a "weighted average" where votes from typical 1-10 voters count less.
shareI think it was released in 22/06/09 on DVD in some European countries. use google and find out. Uwe Boll has destroyed a lot of "games to movies". he deserves all the "BEEP" he gets.
shareI think I'm not the only one saying this, Boll making a few good movies doesn't make up for all the horrible films hes made. I think hes in the right direction with the films hes doing now. He has a long way to go to try and gain respect from all the movie fans. When you suck at something for so long, it stays with that director for the rest of his career. There are those that think Lucas sucks as a director, but all the Star Wars films are among the top grossing films of all time. I like Star Wars, they are flawed, I'm not a geek about, but I like them.
"Fast Zombies Suck!" Lady Elix
[deleted]
[deleted]