As everyone who knows such things knows, Uwe Boll is a less-than-talented film maker who makes pseudo-blockbuster horror flicks based on computer games. So far he’s produced a trashy zombie gutchewer (House of the Dead) and a trashy scifi-horror opus (Alone in the Dark). Given how bad these films are, I was bemused to discover that another one has appeared on the local DVD rental shelves, by all appearances a trashy vampire action thriller called BloodRayne. Apparently BloodRayne has Ben Kingsley and Michael Madsen in it. Not only that, Boll is currently busy making another film even as we speak! What gives?

Out of curiosity (and because I — atypically — find myself agreeing with… well, everyone … that Uwe Boll’s films are awful), I went to Box Office Mojo to look up the figures (they’re all in US$, of course). Here they are:

2003: House of the Dead — budget: $12 million; worldwide gross take: $13,818,181 for a total theatrical run of 6 weeks.

2005: Alone in the Dark — budget: $20 million; worldwide gross take: $8,170,602 for a total theatrical run of 3 weeks.

2006: BloodRayne — budget: $25 million; worldwide gross take: $3,591,980 for a total theatrical run of 17 days.

Now is it just me or do these figures indicate that there is no way Boll should be getting funding for yet another film? After the first they might have thought “Hey, it’s a profit and he’ll get better.” But the next film’s box office was pitiful and nowhere near a profit and BloodRayne even worse, thus confirming the trend.

So what astute businessman would give Boll even more money to make another disaster? And how does he get decent actors to go in them?

Now admittedly these figures don’t allow for DVD sales. But I can’t imagine that such sales were much to write home about. Alone in the Dark went from full price to bargain bin in a matter of weeks — they’re practically giving them away around here.

Meanwhile gamers seem to hate Boll’s films and are going to them (even out of loyalty) less and less each time. And everyone else hates them, too. No one’s paying money to see these films.

So how come, in an industry where the director of a good film that does mediocre business gets severely caned, Boll can still get bigger and bigger budgets?

Meanwhile, Boll is planning to take on five of his most vocal critics in a boxing match, including Jeff Sneider of Ain’t It Cool News. The bout is scheduled for 23 September in Vancouver and footage of it will be included in his new film Postal.

One of the critics, Chris Alexander, a Toronto journalist with Rue Morgue radio and magazine, commented:

I saw this as probably the most perverse and outlandish PR stunt in the history of film. Uwe Boll is in line with Ed Wood as far as being one of the most inept filmmakers ever…. If I can get at least three hits in — one for each lousy video game horror movie that Uwe Boll has made — then I’ll be happy.

Now, to my mind comparing Boll to Ed Wood is an insult to Ed. Boll’s stuff isn’t quite as naively inept as Ed Wood’s, and they do have some sort of budget behind them. Ed Wood’s films gain cult status from the director’s endearingly profound self-delusion. But forget that! What I really want to know is: what does any of this tell us about the nature of reality?