Ok, Boll movies suck, we all know it. I have seen (survived through) 10 of his movies, so I KNOW, i'm not just assuming.(Darfur was pretty decent actually!)
But don't vote without even seeing it. You are giving him more credit than he deserves. You actually prove him right when he defends himself by saying that imdb votes are fake and ppl vote against his movies without seeing them.
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=2890049
Dont know what youre talking about... Darfur, Rampage, Tunnel Rats and Postal were all 6-7 point movies.
Why the fck are you on this page anyway? YOU are proving him right. You are consistently voting down everything he does yet you keep coming back again and again, what are you trying to prove?
I just vote AFTER i watch his movies. And Rampage, Tunnel Rats and Postal were awful. The only decent movies (that i've seen) are Darfur and Heart of America. I SAW all these movies, and THEN i voted. I didn't vote negative of positive just by seeing his name on the credits like others do.
That's my point, DON'T vote before you watch it. You prove him right when he says that imdb votes are fake.
And to answer your question, i'm a semi-professional reviewer and it's my job to watch everything. So that why i watch his movies, because i have to, because the first Boll movie i saw was Heart of America and it was pretty decent, because i'm a gamer and wanted to see how he adapted the games in movies (they were ALL awful), and maybe i'm a masochist and i want to see his movies. BUT I WATCH THEM, I NEVER VOTE BEFORE I WATCH THEM.
What are you Planning on doing about it. I Have voted on Hundreds of Movies Before they are even Made including movies coming in 2 or 3 years. I Give them a 10 & when they Come out & I see them I reduce My Vote accordingly. I Going to vote on Hundreds more & you can't stop Me!
shareAnd you're proud of it...nice!! You are not just an a-hole, you are a proud a-hole. Can't help you with that...
http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=2890049
Actually, I have to disagree Boll's movies don't suck when they aren't based on video games, when they are based on video games they do suck.
Michael
http://s1.sfgame.us/index.php?rec=58163
Actually i have a relation of love-hate with Boll. Some of his movies where entertainement pop corn "don't take them seriously" movies that i admit, with same, that i liked. Alone in the Dark for exemple, there is even a scene where a dead dude get up cause the scene is badly cut, basically scene was supose to cut with the dead dudes on the ground, we where never supose to see one starting to get up... But maybe its cause im not a huge fan of the game(so far did only the XBOX 360 Alone in the Dark) but i had fun watching it.
But Bloodrayne, it make me sad to see my beloved Favorite Character getting destroy this way in some low budget crappy stories, and on top of that the character is not even close looking to the game.
Personally i always pictured a Bloodrayne Movie as a modern sexy and vampirely kind of story. A little bit like Underworld, for the gun blazin but with more stealth assassination, more vampiric style(Rayne biting lots of guys) and of course the gore.
But even if the first movie had gore, it was so badly done, blood didnt even looked like blood, Rayne didn't look at all like she should have been. Is it that hard to have a red hair character be a red head character in a movie. Ayane's hair are still purple in the freakin movie even tought its a pop corn entertainement testosterone movie not to be take seriously(but still so enjoyable) so i think we could have a real Rayne.
And i wont even go too far on the second movie, wich is a total failure and made the first movie looks like a masterpiece... Nothing against Malthe, always enjoyed her in most of her role, but she is just NO RAYNE AT ALL on every side. So now we have a norvegian-chinese asian lookin black haired Rayne and she almost use her blade no more, just shotting damn revolver...
Natassia could have been Mynce for sure, but not Rayne. I picture Rayne as Ute Werner of the E3 2004 only with a little bit longer Hair. That would be the exact look of RAYNE.
Hey, I liked POSTAL, because Uwe decided he was able to poke fun at himself and the bloody lashings his films took from the society of film critics worldwide.
Any-hoo, I haven't seen Bloodrayne: The Third Reich yet, and don't intend on voting on the film until after seeing the film. And why is that, boys and girls?
Because I cannot give a fair and accurate opinion of the film if I don't. If I voted before seeing the film, any rating I give the film would be a lie.
Example: If you were in school and a teacher said asked you in front of the class to describe the taste of a strawberry. The only problem with this is that you have never tasted a strawberry. Would you reply to her that you couldn't answer properly that you had never tasted a strawberry, or would you make something up to tell the class?
Remember kids, if you see a film before voting, or reviewing it for that matter, you can better support and/or defend the film, because then you have reasons to do so, and it also give you bitching rights and bragging rights, according to your opinion of the film.
Users giving ratings to films before actually seeing them is one of the main reasons the IMDb Top 250 is so out of whack.
A few years back when "The Dark Knight" came out, a few days after the release of the film, it was number 3 on the top 250. I had not seen the film at that time (I actually got around to see it after it came out on Blu), and I was on the board for the film, asking questions like "How can a three day old film be more popular to users than "The Wizard of OZ"?"
The answer was that users were saying in posts "I'm going to give The Dark Knight a 10, even though I've hadn't seen the film".
Well, that's my opinion on the "voting before seeing" issue, and like always, others may vary.
Sticky Balls will provide hours of fun right out of the box.