Timstuff
Avenger
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2004
- Messages
- 19,914
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 31
Alright, the internet has known for years that Uwe Boll is a terrible director. He is pretty much always the whipping boy whenever someone needs to bring up an awful director who's sole mission in life is to flood theaters with crap. I whole heartedly agree that he is one of the worst directors of our time, however as of late I've begun to question whether or not he is the worst director of our time, because now he has competition who I believe may be even more incompetent.
Uwe Boll is well known for being an internet troll. If you bash his movies on your website, it's not uncommon to receive a heated e-mail response from him. He also reads the feedback his films get on IMDB and complains about it in his interviews, openly mocking his detractors as "living in a basement where mommy pays for everything." He also challenged his critics to a boxing match in order to take his frustrations out physically. He knows people hate his movies, and he hates them right back because he thinks he's misunderstood.
However, with Friedberg and Seltzer, they are such incompetent hacks that they don't even realize that people hate their movies. I have yet to come across one instance of them acknowledging that there is any kind of dislike towards there films, so either they do not care, or they are ignorant. Ed Wood, who is claimed by many to be the worst director ever born, was the exact same way. He loved his movies, and was so naively optimistic that he never even realized that he was a complete hack.
However, unlike both Boll and Wood, the films that Friedberg and Seltzer make are actually very difficult to classify as films. They simply re-create footage from trailers for other movies, and then throw in a shot of someone getting kicked in the balls or flattened by a cow. That really begs the question-- are their films so awful that they can be considered worse directors than Uwe Boll, or are they technically not film makers, and therefore ineligible? Uwe Boll makes very bad movies, but there is no doubt that they are movies. They have actual stories with beginnings, middles, and ends, even if they are terrible. However, Date Movie, Epic Movie, Meet the Spartans, and Disaster Movie are simply commandeered moments from other movies thrown into a blender and splattered onto a film reel. Uwe Boll does the same thing to a certain extent, but he at least gives it context and tries to hide the fact that he's not being terribly original.
So that really brings me to the question... Is Uwe Boll still the biggest hack on the block, or has his throne been taken by Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer (who would sit on each other's laps to fit into the same throne)?
Uwe Boll is well known for being an internet troll. If you bash his movies on your website, it's not uncommon to receive a heated e-mail response from him. He also reads the feedback his films get on IMDB and complains about it in his interviews, openly mocking his detractors as "living in a basement where mommy pays for everything." He also challenged his critics to a boxing match in order to take his frustrations out physically. He knows people hate his movies, and he hates them right back because he thinks he's misunderstood.
However, with Friedberg and Seltzer, they are such incompetent hacks that they don't even realize that people hate their movies. I have yet to come across one instance of them acknowledging that there is any kind of dislike towards there films, so either they do not care, or they are ignorant. Ed Wood, who is claimed by many to be the worst director ever born, was the exact same way. He loved his movies, and was so naively optimistic that he never even realized that he was a complete hack.
However, unlike both Boll and Wood, the films that Friedberg and Seltzer make are actually very difficult to classify as films. They simply re-create footage from trailers for other movies, and then throw in a shot of someone getting kicked in the balls or flattened by a cow. That really begs the question-- are their films so awful that they can be considered worse directors than Uwe Boll, or are they technically not film makers, and therefore ineligible? Uwe Boll makes very bad movies, but there is no doubt that they are movies. They have actual stories with beginnings, middles, and ends, even if they are terrible. However, Date Movie, Epic Movie, Meet the Spartans, and Disaster Movie are simply commandeered moments from other movies thrown into a blender and splattered onto a film reel. Uwe Boll does the same thing to a certain extent, but he at least gives it context and tries to hide the fact that he's not being terribly original.
So that really brings me to the question... Is Uwe Boll still the biggest hack on the block, or has his throne been taken by Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer (who would sit on each other's laps to fit into the same throne)?
now that would be better then any "movie" either of these braintrusts could ever come up with.
