User reviews

Back in the day I had a discussion with a few collegues of mine about Boll's movies and we all agreed that he is a terrible director, but a really great producer who raked in those millions and millions of dollars as if it was nothing. He essentially used a loophole in German law so any potential losses of his investors were covered by the German tax payer. This documentary doesn't even mention this, just "German film funds". I would have been interested to know how exactly his financing looked like. But that's the only really negative point about this documentation tbh. In addition to Boll, many former colleagues and friends have their say, drawing a truly three-dimensional picture of the "worst director ever". Boll is a thoroughly interesting guy, who doesn't seem to apologize for anything and at the same time seems sincere. I am glad to have seen this film because I could see behind his label and realized: the person Uwe Boll has so much more depth than his films. Although I still hope that Postal will become cult one day. Because "What's the difference between a duck?" is still the best question I've ever heard in a job interview scene.

What to say about Uwe Boll that hasn't been said? what about who he is as a person?

Upon watching this documentary I have no doubt Uwe Boll is a nice guy and can easily get along with those wanting to be reasonable to him, even when this film begins; all his close friends and colleagues have expressed he has a great personality being very direct and charismatic; albeit, coming along with being very opinionated, yells quite a lot and says whatever he wants without apologies. If the latter doesn't show a slip end to the divide in how he conducts himself both personally and professionally? than that's where the need to dive deep into where this film goes becomes vital.

Professionally speaking Uwe Boll is passionate about what he made as a filmmaker. he has a cinematic vision about where he wants to go with the story, it's just his process is unique. Hows so? first up Boll was never one to care about quality or self improvement to his craft or practices. Even for the most part he didn't care about making trash (due to how easy it was to sell), he even enacted on his instincts with little accountability or had the self awareness that he could take his time with writing, directing and hiring others to ensure a sense of quality to his films. However, he was good at at financing, getting the money he needed from investors and ensuring he filmed what he needed in a fixed amount of time. Boll even admits he lacks respect for others but doesn't personally show a great sense of disrespect, this part of his character and work would really take a toll in how the public saw him, his colleagues would be in a love/hate relationship with the guy, while the public would see him as "A New Ed Wood"/"Worst Director of the 21st Century." While it's easy to admit Boll was likable because he was so blunt, he was insufferable in how he conducted himself as both a writer and director, even when he wasn't making trash based off properties, he was prone to making loud and offensive jokes without a sense of what's funny. His Incompetence combined with belligerence would contribute to his very well deserved Golden Raspberry Award for Lifetime Achievement.

Worst of all was how he presented himself to the public, largely reacting to how critics saw him, he soon became a tainted name, that anything he made was to be seen as trash, regardless of whatever he made a film about (loved how it was easy to sell video game films despite not being a gamer). Rather than taking care of what actors could do (hence his lack of true collaboration), he acted impulsively in what he shot and seemed to make whatever he saw fit rather than following scripts or stories. Even for real professionals, 'Not Reading Reviews' is a healthy way in how you would conduct yourself, unless you knew how to take criticism, sadly Boll didn't. Neither did an amateur boxing match with critics help his reputation but only boost his ego of a showman he could be.

Overall, it's sad to see Boll was never a great filmmaker, while I don't deny the fact if he were passionate about something and did do the right things to make a film stand out as well as he could, maybe it could be good. But his willingness to be controversial didn't help as much as it's barely inspirational, even as he was willing to risk things, he was prone to pissing off a lot of people too. Now middle aged, Boll is content to reflect on his mistakes or even admit what he could've done better. Sad to think Boll was largely polarizing as a person but was never a great at things he said he loved to do. While he seems to be doing great as a restaurant owner, maybe he'll come out of retirement and prove the world wrong in finally making a 'skilled film' that could be admired rather than ridiculed.

I had no idea who Uwe Boll was before watching and I'm now so intrigued. Uwe carries such strength in personality and enigmatic energy throughout the film, you must be delighted with your choice of subject. There are instances in life when one can appreciate the philosophy behind someone's actions and be inspired by them as a personality or artist, and yet despise the manifestation and outcome of those ideas. It's a tough dichotomy to reconcile and one that I think gives your film a deeper, contemplative meaning. He's obviously a brilliant man, full of revolutionary spirit, social insight and poetry, but something in his application and interaction with people and the world doesn't work. I wonder how many great thinkers are trapped with poor apparatus, and what would happen if Uwe had applied all this energy to a different art-form or academia. Despite all the out-takes from what are often considered laughably terrible films, I enjoyed how well your documentary balances these failures with unanimous admiration for Uwe, often from his worst critics. Congratulations to you all.