April 15, 2007
What was Uwe Boll thinking?The director of several bad films based on video games (Bloodrayne, House of the Dead) seems to have stepped over the line with a brief cinematic moment of 9/11 parody.
(GP: who ever thought 9/11 and parody would be used in the same sentence?)
As reported by today's NY Post, a trailer for Boll's film rendition of the ultra-violent Postal video game series includes a brief scene in which an airliner crashes into a skyscraper. Survivors of 9/11 victims are not amused:
"How can you parody an act of mass murder?" fumed Debra Burlingame, whose brother Charles was the pilot of American Airlines Flight 77, which was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11.
"Eleven-hundred families got no scrap of remains. Does that mean nothing to him? Is there any line this man wouldn't cross?"...
Boll, whom the Post terms a "pariah," was unrepentant:
"It's harsh, but in the context of the movie it definitely makes sense," Boll says of the scene showing a plane heading straight for what appears to be a World Trade Center tower...
Boll said the 9/11 crash clip was being viewed out of context, and the makers of the film discussed it at length before including it in the final cut.
"We did it to show the unbelievable stupidity of suicide bombers," he said.
You can see the controversial scene here.
Comments
Re: Postal Film's 9/11 Parody Scene Sparks Outrage
I dont know why americans complain... where a parody is about middle east, china, or latin america, its ok for them... but when it comes to a tragedy in US its not a good idea.... sorry, but its pure justice, and I like it !!!
That's because the Japanese deserved it.
"That’s because the Japanese deserved it."
...
The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were as barabaric as the Bombing of Coventry and Hamburg
The murdering of millions of people in German death camps. the Death of millions of Civilians in China and Russia.
The murder of people at the Conniston massacre.
The murder of the people of My Lai and the murder of people who were unfortunate enough to be in a few towers/buildings targeted by a psycotic group of nutjobs.
The Systematic murder of East Timorese people
Also Meggie,
I met someone who hid under his fathers body to escape the Coniston Massacre, I know people who lost their entire family in east timor. they didn't even get a landfill burial those bodies were just left there. congrats the world is a shitty place what makes your shit so special that it should never be commented on?
Hey, I'm down with some games being made into movies. I loved watching Mortal Kombat back in the day! And yeah, Resident Evil happened to be done pretty well.
I'm not saying game movies have to be Oscar winners. I'm just concerned when unnecessary negative attention is turned on us with a film like Postal. But yeah, if anything positive can come of this, it's that Uwe might finally find himself out of a job.
"Yeah, people who died in the Long bus bombings deserve just as much respect as anyone else who died: respect for the dead."
"When you’re dead, you don’t have to care about the living. And the living don’t really have to care about the dead because, guess what, the dead don’t really care since they’re well, dead."
Do you try to contradict yourself, or are you just being contrary for the sake of being provocative? I suspect the latter, which means that you and Boll appear to have something in common. Playing the enfant terrible may draw attention, but it does little for any underlying message one is trying to get out. Instead, it makes it seem like the goal is to shock rather than inform. If Boll actually did have anything to say with this movie (which, given the "leak" of this controversial scene, seemingly to draw attention under the premise that "any press is good press", seems unlikely), it will surely be lost in the signal to noise ratio of the schlock.
You should take note of that. Your responses are inconsistent, and appear to be made just for the sake of rebuttal. Your point (if you had any) is similarly lost in the antics of your arguing with anyone who doesn't have your sensibilities. It makes the argument less genuine.
I agree.
cars running over people
trains blowing up
shooting
drive by's
plane hi-jacks
rape
murder
I would consider this to be more extreme over the clip I just saw. I didnt see the guy die. There was no aftermath of people jumping to the ground. Who gives a rats ass that Uwe made it. Jaun Claud could of directed and we would be saying who is this guy. If anyone has played postal games you understand that its a political extreme game.
Dont misunderstand me I wont watch the movie but we have bigger issues in life. Im still upset over 9/11 as many companies were making American Flag Shirts and it seemed it was endless and many people made money off selling the shirts and called it being patriotic.
Yep, I'll agree with you there. Surely both publisher and developer alike must realise that letting Uwe get his greasy little fingers on their I.P. is going to result in both a tarnishing of the game franchise and a huge financial loss for whatever film company is stupid enough to sign it into contract. I also do believe that what Uwe is doing is wrong, Postal didn't contain any 9/11 scenes, and regardless of that fact Uwe's movies are just sh*t.
However, some game movie adaptations aren't too bad, for a couple of hours of mindless fun. Seeing Angelina as Lara Croft was good fun, ditto for Mila Jovovic in Resident Evil. I'll be interested to see what happens with the Warcraft and Hitman movies. Then again, I'm not expecting either of them to be a 300esque masterpiece.
I'm willing to bet they don't throw in parodies of tragedies which have nothing to do with the original I.P, just to generate some controversy. I hope this brings Uwe to bankruptcy. (Yay free speech!)
I think you misunderstood me. I'm not saying for developers of a particular IP to speak out against a movie being made based on it. I'm just saying for developers at large to speak out about it. A film that trivializes 9/11 based on a game IP, regardless of what we think about the content or whether we worked on that particular IP or not, makes everyone in the industry look bad as a whole. So it seems to me that it is incumbent upon developers to voice displeasure about this particular issue.
I'm not saying for developers to renounce their companies and the industry as a whole either a la Greg Costikyan or Chris Crawford. I'm just suggesting that people in the industry speak out against the practice of letting crummy GOTTA MAKE A BUCK ANY WAY I CAN filmmakers (and perhaps, the publishers who hire them) like Uwe Boll represent us as a whole.
see, universal goodness that is Mario Kart
people also have the right to not pay him any money to see his crap.
i bet if you watch the movie you'd be less offended about the parody and more offended that the movie is terrible.
Thefremen Says:
"If Guiliani runs for pres. his entire campaign will most likely consist of saying 9-11 over and over again while accompanied by an enterage of NYFD and NYPD."
Oh no they won't. My aunt wound up in a fucking LANDFILL.
Silver_Derstin Says:
"Really, I’d get over it. When you’re dead, you don’t have to care about the living. And the living don’t really have to care about the dead because, guess what, the dead don’t really care since they’re well, dead. So maybe you’re the one that needs to “get over it”."
Cry on Emo Kid, high school will be over soon.
life goes on believe it or not......
Uwe Boll should be allowed to mock 9/11. The familes of the dead should be allowed their public outrage. But neither should be allowed to silence the other.
I was more saying that all of the time and resources poured into the Postal film was a waste of time and that the studio, actors, and whatever could be given to a better director with a better script (aka Fallout, Homeworld, MGS, Neverwinter, etc) to make a better movie. I agree, if Boll was directing Fallout I'm pretty sure he would end up with every single pissed off Fallout fan outside his door wearing leather jackets and aiming pipe rifles at his house. Fallout fans have been through enough without watching a director like Boll take the franchise into the film industry. ;)
I just wanted to put in that I was actually playing Mario Kart 64 as I happened by your comment. =)
According to IMDB, he only has release dates secured in Canada and Germany so far. American distributors will be iffy on picking it up due to his track record of losing money on every single movie he's made, and Bloodrayne was an enormous financial disaster for its distributor. (They didn't make enough money back to pay for the FILM PRINTS.)
And most gamers realise that Uwe Boll is terrible and makes crap films. Aside from Alone in the Dark (oh, the lost potential) Uew Boll has made movies based on crap franchises, or games with terrible stories to begin with. No great loss, and Postal is no different. The games were crap, the movie will be worse.
There is no need to be hostile. I was trying to make a point. and no I don't think its JUST for America, but its for a game that was made in america. I'm not saying that all friggen movies that are made in america are for americans and I know full well he is German. and I never said it was being made JUST for America, I said it was being made for america, which Boll states very clearly in his email that was posted on joystiq and Kotaku.
someone can make a movie in a place and for a place all they want and put it in any damn country they choose. that still doesn't mean they didn't mean it for that said country. don't label me as a person who doesn't understand this. I have been in College for four years to learn exactly how the movie industry targets its consumers. you can't possibly ignore the fact it's by an American film company, with american actors, an english script, based on an american game (not a great game at that) and not say it isn't targeted at an american audience. he can send it to france or Russia for all everyone cares, but it's obvious he is targeting it for the american audience. will they like it? can't say, it's not out yet. but so far not many are happy about it. will it be successful in other countries? maybe.
ps. "it is being released all over the world" you could say that about any movie, all because it's marketed more towards someone doesn't mean it will stop it from being put everywhere and anywhere the Film company can. you don't catch one fish for a village, you need a net.
I work in the industry, and guess what? If you're developing for a major publisher, unless you're one of a VERY select few developers, it isn't your I.P. The publishers can do whatever the hell they want with the I.P, and what the publishers want is money. Why do you think Uwe Boll and so many crappy sequels are so prevalent in every facet of the industry? If you're lucky enough to still retain the I.P, sure it's up to the company CEO and board what they want to do with it.
Onto the political correctness of the subject, I think parody is fine as long as it is done in good humour and fits into the general context of the game/film. Being that Postal or Postal 2 doesn't have any direct 9/11 parodies, aside from some Bin-Ladenesque enemies, I am assuming that Uwe threw in this scene purely for controversy which he has obviously achieved.
Like many others have already said, I accept 9/11 as a tragedy, but realise that the American public are beating a dead horse. No-one else cares anymore bar people directly involved, which is understandable and acceptable. Using the tragic events as some form of argumentative weight or for purely greedy purposes (LOOKING AT YOU, UWE BOLL!) is infuriating. There have been plenty of worse tragedies since 9/11, more than 100,000 people died in mudslides in countries outside America (GASP!) near the end of last year and the number of dead civilians in the Middle East thanks to the "Alliance against Terror" outweighs most American tragedies, so why are we CONSTANTLY reminded of one comparatively minor tragedy (assuming you can measure the scale of tragedies).
@Wardo:
If Uwe Boll got the rights to produce a Fallout or Homeworld movie, there would be riots on the streets. Seriously. The world will realise what gamers have known for a looooong time. That Uwe is one of the worst directors in the history of film. Ever.
"I understand what you’re saying Solid, but we are talking about a movie made in america for america on a subject americans find touchie."
"Its one thing for another country to make pardy on another countries problems, because yes it doesn’t effect them like said country."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Uwe Boll is german, so to him America is "another country". Also, the movie is not being "made in america for america" it is being released all over the world, where most people don't find the subject as touchie.
The fact that you say the movie is just for America makes it sound like you think America is the most important place in the world, which is exactly what makes other people dislike America.
In the same vein, the Passion of the Christ follows the final few hours of the messiah's life, and the short time thereafter. IF such an event occurred, it's over 2000 years SINCE that period of time. Yet people did raise hell on it- to me, the only thing I disapproved of was parents taking their 5 year olds to go watch it. Other than that, it was an okay movie- not my kind of flick, but okay.
Now take 9/11, an event that, as we know, happened very recently- we're nto even a decade away from the day it occurred. And I can agree that there is a time frame when you can say "No... it's too soon." The only problem is that we can't really agree when it IS a good time to talk about it. I can't say I agree with people capitalizing on recent events, but people are perfectly welcome to say "I'm not watching this movie" instead of complaining and drawing attention to the said movie by protesting, and cutting costs for the movie-makers by using the publicity from the controversy as a form of advertisement. If I'm not for it, I'll simply not watch it- but you won't hear me standing on my soapbox to tell them to NOT make it. If they want to create something that touches on a recent topic too soon and drive consmers away, and thus waste money on said production, they're perfectly welcome to do so.
Now of course, there are exceptions to the rule. Take Mel Gibson. The idea behind the movies that touched on such subjects was so outrageous and hilarious that all hostilities against the USE of such material was abandoned and traded in for one hell of a laugh. You can make ANYBODY laugh at something if you know where the line is and how to hit it, and Mel is one of the few people capableof doing such a thing.
...
@ Wardo
At this point, I would like to say that a movie based on Fallout would freakin' ROCK.
@ Mike
If you want to talk about mass killings, we can look at Turkey, Cabanatuan, Germany, Iraq, Russia and who-the-hell-knows-how-many countries guilty of the same things. Essentially, by your reasoning and outlook, if you point at any nation, you could "laugh" at them.
Anyways, back to the topic.
Upon viewing the clip, I didn't laugh. I couldn't laugh. I didn't get sickened, either. I just kinda went "... huh. o.o *shrugs and goes to 2-Sense*" It didn't offend every sense of me. It was just a clip. And whether it was the trade towers, I couldn't tell, I really wasn't paying attention. I can say I know how people can be offended by such a thing, especially if they have some connection to what happened. And I won't tell them to "get over it." Whatever grief they're feeling, I can't feel, but acknowledging my lack of understanding means I can give them the space necessary for them to come around on their own. I can certainly understand that such a thing might bother them, and do nothing afterwards to bother them further.
But this, to me, is kind've like what Bush does- he ignores the focal point of what people are saying and reinforces his beliefs and resolution in what he's doing by changing the subject and addressing unrelated reasoning behind what he does, which may or may not be true. To me, Uwe Boll does the same thing when he makes a movie based on a game- he tries to say that the reason we don't like his movies is because we don't see the movies and instead put more stock in the game, the actual source material, than that of his films, which stray away from the source material in a manner similar to the Bush admin and war intelligence concerning Iraq- they're either lying through their teeth, or they don't have a f***ing clue. Worse, he tries to prove his point in the most unconvincing of ways, like challenging vocal opposition to boxing matches, or voicing his 'genius' in hiring prostitutes in a foreign screening rather than models, which isn't a form of artistic skill.
But for him to believe that a clip such as the one he showed would NOT be taken out of context is bull. We might be able to agree that his motives concerning the release of such a thing was for shock value. I don't think he's really concerning himself with the issue as seriously as others- he certainly doesn't seem to be doing much more than whining "they're taking my thing out of context" rather than discussing at length his motives behind it.
It's true that he can make this movie to his heart's content. He's welcome to. If he wishes to lose money doing so, that's his decision. Add controversy. Fine. Do it. He can risk losing his own money and credibility with this flick. He'll still make it, no matter what we say or scream. And we can either smolder and gripe about it perpeptually, or shake our heads, and watch The Simpsons Movie, in theater 19 on your left.
I understand what you're saying Solid, but we are talking about a movie made in america for america on a subject americans find touchie. I'm not saying it shouldn't be made or anyone should stop it. but you don't see the countries with the mud slids or earthquakes making parody movies on those subjects for their people do you? I doubt it. its one thing for another country to make pardy on another countries problems, because yes it doesn't effect them like said country. But I am sure it would hurt them if it was made for their country.
Again I'm not saying it shouldn't be made. I won't see it because I don't agree with it. which is how it should be with everything. if you don't like it (entertainment wise anyway) then change the channel or don't see it. its not all black and white. this movie falls well into the grey, like nearly everything else political. why can't everyone just get along and throw down some Mario Kart.
First off, I think we can all agree that Uwe Boll has the right to make this film. He has the right to put anything in it, provided no person (or animal) was harmed in making it, he doesn't defame or slander anyone, and he hasn't directly ripped off someone else's footage/material. He's protected by the First Amendment, as are we all.
So why am I upset about this, thus causing me to post a response to this particular blog article? I think it is because I have to ask the question, "Why is this acceptable to those of us who work in the game industry?" Now, before I continue I have to admit that I'm an industry n00b who is graduating from grad school in 3 weeks. As such, I am really concerned about going into an industry filled with people who aren't willing to speak up about this. After all, do we really want the filth that Uwe Boll makes to represent us and our hard work? Like it or not, that is exactly what is going on when movies like Postal are being made. It makes us all as an industry look like insensitive barbarians and purveyors of all things violent, sexual, and criminal.
Despite the fact that most gamers and developers know that this is not the case, Joe (and Jane) Q. Public are none the wiser. They will turn on CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, and Entertainment Tonight and see a report about a movie that makes a joke about 9/11. They will see that the movie is based on a video game. And then there will be one interview after another of 9/11 widows, ministers, New York firemen and policemen, etc all saying what terrible people game developers are.
Some developers will say, "Who cares about the general public. They're not gamers." To put it simply, the public votes. And votes sway politicians. And those politicians write bills. And those bills can contain language that makes it more difficult to sell the games that we make. Even if it is unconstitutional to make such laws, money and resources are spent by our industry to fight them. Additionally, wouldn't you want to make more money by trying to get more people from the general public to play our games? Maybe, you know, advance our medium for change?
Now, I'm not saying that developers have the power to stop companies from profiting on mediocre shock-value games like Postal and Postal 2. Companies can do whatever it is they like (provided it's legal). It's their money, their rules. But that doesn't mean developers have to be silent about it.
So what are you guys and gals waiting for? Speak up.
Really though, a Postal movie? I'd much rather see the resources and money going towards this go towards something with an interesting plot like say, Fallout, or Homeworld...
Just my 2cents.
Typical of Boll; I think the Bloodrayne movie still haunts my dreams.
Rich "Lowtax" Kyanka was involved in the Uwe Boll boxing thing last year, and he did a writeup on his experiences. This included time on set for Postal, wherein he learned about the comedy stylings of the good doctor. Yeah, the 9/11 thing is just the tip of the hilarity iceberg. Insert gag about the movie being the proverbial Titanic here.
If you want to read the story, check out the Something Awful news archives for September 27, 2006.
The thing is, the rest of the world kind of thinks that most of you are a bunch of self-important jerks. I'm not saying whether that is right or wrong, (I've met plenty of nice and not-so-nice Americans) simply that it's the impression a lot of other countries get.
To the guy that said people in other countries were petty if they only cared about how 9/11 affected them: Do most Americans seem to care about Tsunamis in Indonesia? Mudslides in India? The plight of poverty stricken African nations? All the civilians that Americans are killing in the middle east?
Some do, but most don't. The problem is that America is so insular- when I've been to America, some stuff that was huge news on TV all over the rest of the world barely got a passing mention on American TV, it was just America America America. To other, more globally aware countries, 9/11 was just another sad thing in the world, but we hear about plenty of those on the news so it wasn't anything super-special. To Americans, it was the first big tragedies in a long time that got your attention, simply because it actually happened to you.
So while many people may see the joke as being in bad taste, and I agree with them, it's no bigger deal to most of the world than it would be to you if he had made fun of a mudslide or car bombing or something- not funny, but not a big deal.
Silly, it's only a terrible act of mass murder when it happens to Americans!
Though seriously, I do understand the reason to treat the subject gently. A lot of people died in the attack and it upset a lot of people. However I think if you take Silver's comments in context, in that it highlights the concept of freedom of speech for ALL, he's not too off the mark. Yeah, it's pretty bad that Uwe Boll is parodying the September 11th attacks.
Just remember that the US response to the September 11th attacks, the war in Afghanistan, has resulted in a confirmed 7,200 civilian dead. That's not insurgents, or rebels, or anyone but random civilians who happened to be born in the wrong country. Calling Silver insane for recognizing that fact isn't just rude, it's ignorant.
You don't seem to understand how respect for the dead can and does equal respect for the living. Death does not end the relationships people have with the departed the attachment people make to the dead living on, love caring affection nourishment, hatred rage vile all of these continue on after the person’s death. For a select few in history the relationship becomes more then just a personal relationship but a symbolic relationship with the living (George Washington represent patriotism, the long list of catholic saint faith devotion obedience, charity etc.) There is reasons people have for as long as modern civilization existed have had means of honoring the dead.
To disrespect the dead is to disrespect the continuing relationship between the living and the departed “the phrases living on in ones heart” is extremely accurate to what occurs when a person or persons die. Relationship past, present, the ones we look forward to in the future, symbolic, the one with ourselves, the ones with ourselves and yes those with the dead. Thus to respect the dead is not nessarely to dwell on death but to honor life. I think respect for human life is not something one should simply “get over”.
Not that I honestly expect you to understand, here is a clue (and this applies to everyone else): if you think my post is intended to condemn this movie you don’t get it.
http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20060621
From back when Uwe Boll said he would box his most vocal critics.
But remember, it's an UWE BOLL movie...
@Silver:
I don't think I've ever heard of anyone being so nihilistic. *shrug* Well, whatever, I'm doing arguing about this. Enjoy your life -- oh wait, you can't, because in a few decades you're going to be dead and nothing you've done will matter anymore. lol
"Simple; World Trade Center and other movies like it attempted(to varying degrees of success) to explain and understand the horrors of 9-11."
thats the way you see it. i see it as making money off of 9-11. all of it is exploitation.
Silver. Maybe you are one of those people who never develops emotional attachment to anything.
Considering this is the internet, I'm inclined to believe that you are just one more person who creates a persona with that attitude to make them self seem cool. I could be wrong, but this is the internet.
While you may seem to have a more "rational" view of it, when it comes to those we love few people really have a very rational view of things.
So what it boils down to is that not everyone is like you. Most people are not like you. Maybe you need to "get over" the fact that you are in the minority. Then again why does this matter to you. Really why are you wasting time arguing with people who are not rational.
And I suppose WWII and Vietnam parodies were never "too soon".
By the way Dennis, maybe you'd find this quote (2006) from Boll relevant:
Referring to the non-stop television airing of the September 11, 2001 attacks: "This day showed us that we are all completely voyeurs greedy for thrilling entertainment no matter if this is real or not."
Despite Terminator44's attempt to explain the difference between (a) criticizing something someone says and (b) using the power of the government to stop someone from saying something, you still seem to be missing the distinction. The former is part of the free-market of ideas. The latter is an attempt to suppress the free market of ideas.
Anyway, please name a non-anonymous someone, someone with some power or influence, who has suggested this movie be banned. If you have no one, then the reference to Fahrenheit 451 rings pretty hollow.
Yes, I'd probably be a monster. A terrible, horrible monster. Then I'd get all the people who know me in a small town in Germany and have all of them kill each other in a orgy of blood. Fun times.
Really, I'd get over it. When you're dead, you don't have to care about the living. And the living don't really have to care about the dead because, guess what, the dead don't really care since they're well, dead. So maybe you're the one that needs to "get over it".
That's actually a great quote. I'm surprised it came from him.
There are some pretty obvious flaws in your logic. For one, you're comparing the number of deaths on one day in an act of terrorism in a relatively safe country in regards to terrorism, to the number of deaths in 365 days in unfortunate roadway accidents. That's absurd.
I also think it's laughable how all the "anti-PC" people think their opponents are all literally "screaming" about the subject. Talk about an overstatement!
Person 1: "I don't think Uwe Boll should put that in his movie."
Person 2: "I am soooo sick of all these politically correct crybabies screaming about how it's too soon! Get over it!"
I can't help but wonder how the anti-PC people would feel if it was their spouse or parent who was killed on 9/11. Would they be singing the same song? I know some people will say to that, "I would get over it," but, think about.... would you -really-? Don't lie. If you were cracking 9/11 jokes the day after your beloved wife was killed in an terrorist attack along with all of her coworkers, you would seem like, oh, what's the word... a monster. That's a good word for it.
All that being said, I'm not sure how I feel about the particular scene in Uwe's movie. All I'm certain of is that the movie itself is going to be utter crap.