Regarding The Hobbit and The Avengers, I like The Avengers but we were with you on The Hobbit. It seemed lazy, like he’s trying to do Lord of the Rings over again but with less behind it.
No, I agree. I didn’t read so many reviews of The Hobbit but from the poster that was hanging in movie theaters, there were tons of reviews like “5 stars, the best movie of the year, Oscar contender,” whatever. So some people definitely wrote very good reviews about The Hobbit. For me it was just dragged out endlessly and absolutely boring. It’s actually fascinating to see that the people always still go for the big CGI shows. For me, I know now what movies can do. I saw it all and for me it’s zero kicker anymore to see robots fighting robots or spaceships or monsters, whatever. Without a good story where I really care about the people, I don’t give a sh*t about how the CGI is made. It’s unbelievable that the people still go for it.
Did you see it in 48 frames per second?
No, I saw it in a normal theater. Maybe it was like the Avatar effect. You watch something, you think wow.
No, it was even worse.
It looked worse? I didn’t see it like this. Even worse, so it’s crazy.
What do you think are the worst movies ever made?
Oh, there are too many. I mean, I watch a lot of movies and I get a lot of DVDs from distribution companies sent to my house, so when people say House of the Dead or Alone in the Dark are the worst movies ever made, I always say, “No, believe me. I saw way too many movies so I really know that they’re not the worst movies ever made.” I think to judge really bad movies, you always have to keep in mind how that movie was made, for how much money. That’s why I’m so harsh on Michael Bay movies a lot of times. They’re made with so much money and they’re so bad.
I cannot really say to somebody who made a $50,000 movie, “It is a piece of sh*t.” It’s kind of unfair. People like this never had a chance to do something good because you basically cannot really do it with that amount of money. So I think there are thousands and thousands of really bad movies made. I’m more harsh to the movies made with a lot of money and they are totally sh*t. There are a lot of A-list studio movies I will totally put in that category. The Transformers, I just hated that movie. It’s like brainwashing stupid stuff.
The other thing I have a problem with is very patriotic movies, with movies that are like “support the troops” or something. I’m anti-war. I think the Iraq war was sh*t. The Afghanistan war was bullsh*t. I’m just not this kind of political thinker that I’m pro-Bush or pro-War or pro-troops or whatever per se. All that stuff, it’s like basically a bad feeling comes up in me. If I see a movie like Zero Dark Thirty, I know it is a good movie, well made, but I don’t like the content. It’s an advertising movie for the CIA. It comes across like a critical movie but it’s not. It’s an absolutely patriotic, justifying movie for the CIA who committed so many crimes and did so many things wrong and the whole misery of America[‘s status in the world] is the result of CIA action in the last 30 years in different countries. That’s the reason everybody hates America in India and Pakistan, wherever.
I would support movies that are critical and they say, “No, the f***ing fish stinks and we have to change it and not support it. That’s the thing. No wonder that Argo gets the Oscar, another pro-CIA movie. It’s not a bad movie and I like Ben Affleck but still, what is that content? What is the real message of an Argo movie? Let’s spend another $250 billion on CIA actions because from time to time they do things right. I’m standing on the other side of the political spectrum and this side is definitely not supported by the studios.
The connection broke up a tiny bit [where I used brackets] and I want to make sure I quote you right. You said the CIA is the cause of American what?
No, I think a lot of CIA actions are the reason that America is hated. People hate America. This is the thing I hope from Obama also. How do they react to North Korea? How do they react to Iran? With ultimatums, with threatening war. They didn’t learn from history. Iraq was f***ed up. Afghanistan is f***ed up. They’re basically in Afghanistan losing that war and moving away, and that happened in Vietnam and everywhere. So it’s the wrong answer.
America is always the answer to other territories. If you do this, we do that. I was hoping that at one point they were getting a little more intelligent. The best thing the American president could do is travel to Iran and go meet the crazy president and take the wind out of him. I did two movies with Iran when I worked for German TV. The Iranians are, out of all the middle east, the most liberal people, the most intelligent people. Okay, they have the crazy guy, but the true people in Iran are very intelligent and absolutely way ahead of the Saudis, the Kuwaitis, all those people who get pampered because they have the oil. They are radicals. They are *ssholes. They support Al Qaeda. The Iranians from the culture, from 100s of years, are always the most intelligent and most open and liberal in the middle east.
I did two movies with them, co-productions with Germany, we shot the movies together. Very nice people, they’re totally not against America. What I hope from an Obama is not to do what a Bush did, but he’s doing exactly the same sh*t. Of course he’s not opening another war because there’s also no money anymore for a war, but I think it’s time for a different kind of foreign policy. This is my personal opinion about what America should do.
I agree about Iraq but you thought going after bin Laden was bullsh*t?
No, but look, we had a Pakistani guy from Islamabad working as a CGI supervisor for us. He said in Pakistan, in the compounds where they said they killed bin Laden, I asked him, “Why is there not a photo of bin Laden out there? We saw everybody getting killed, we saw so many people getting destroyed, like Gaddafi, we saw footage. Why don’t they have a photo of bin Laden for proof?” To be honest, a lot of people think he died, not there, but he died years ago with a drone or with kidney failure. The whole story to kill bin Laden and throw him in the ocean and nobody, all the Navy SEALs had phones, iPhones, everything. I mean, if you had a photo of the dead bin Laden, you could cash that in, you would make millions with that photo. And not one of these guys, nobody showed a photo. It’s kind of strange.
So maybe this was a whole PR action to say, “Good, we know he’s dead but we don’t have him.” He’s basically pulverized by a drone or something five years ago, so now we do something for PR reasons and we act like we just got him. The whole thing is kind of fishy. I’m not totally convinced that it actually happened. The guy [on my crew] also said, “No, in Pakistan everybody knows five years ago he died of kidney failure.” Could you imagine if this is the truth, what a disaster? What a PR disaster.
Well, lastly, what can we expect from In the Name of the King III?
This comes out New Year’s Eve on DVD and VOD. We’re still not finished. For one year we’re working on the CGI. It’s a lot of work. I think this is way better than In the Name of the King II but also based on we had a better story and we had Dominic Purcell instead of Dolph Lundgren and he is a way better actor. So it will be entertaining.
Fred Topel is a staff writer at CraveOnline and the man behind Shelf Space Weekly. Follow him on Twitter at @FredTopel.
