Postal Movie Release Cut To Four Screens

The cancellation of its U.S. distribution deal means that Postal, the latest addition to the Uwe Boll hit parade, will open on only four screens across the country.

In a statement released this morning, Boll claimed the cancellation was a politically-motivated boycott of his film over its controversial material. He had originally planned for a head-to-head confrontation with Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, which he claimed he would "destroy," on 1500 screens beginning next weekend. "Theatrical distributors are boycotting Postal because of its political content," Boll said in a press release. "We were prepared to open on 1500 screens all across America on May 23rd. Any multiplex in the U.S. should have space for us, but they're afraid."

Even when Boll went so far as to attempt to rent screen space for his movie, he was denied. "We have even tried to buy a few screens in New York and Los Angeles, and they won't let us even rent the theaters!" he claimed. "I urge independent exhibitors to contact us and book Postal! Audiences have been expecting the film and I don't think exhibitors should censor what gets played in U.S. theaters."

The sad irony for Boll is that the patience of the mainstream movie industry appears to have run out just as he's made his least-bad movie ever. Its 29% score on Rotten Tomatoes makes it far and away his best-rated movie on the site, and a Film.com review said, "Postal is not a good film. It's not even close to a good film. But oddly enough it is catching a lot of people by surprise. Boll has actually set the bar so low that when he makes something that elicits at least one intentional laugh, people take notice."

Boll did not reveal which four (yes, four) theaters would be showing the movie.

Permalink

Jesus be praised for smiting down such a cute man.

I wonder if many people will make a special trip to one of those four cinemas? Are there any Hardcore Boll enthusiasts planning a road trip?

So...what? Four people lost a bet or somethng?

HalfShadow:
So...what? Four people lost a bet or somethng?

probably drew the short straws

someone's making a postal movie?

pasquinelli:
someone's making a postal movie?

No.

Just Uwe Boll.

Shame, I actually wanted to see that because I enjoyed the games, though I guess i'm being naieve once again, it is Uwe Boll after all, and good on those people who refused to show this film, he doesnt deserve it.

Can only fuel his inflated ego though, he'll probably think these people saw it as a threat to the new Indiana Jones.

Four? Hahhahhah.

I'm sure it'll be another blockbuster...in Uwe Boll's own mind.

richasr:

Can only fuel his inflated ego though, he'll probably think these people saw it as a threat to the new Indiana Jones.

If Uwe reads Escapists forums he probably just said to himself, "You know? That person has a good point."

Milions of viewers can't be wrong..., can they?

I just saw the trailer (here: http://www.postal-themovie.com/trailer_pg.html) and lol'd at the beggining with Tom Cruise.

Ok, it was funny.

I want to make a Postal film, just to see if I can show up Boll. Actually, rethinking that, I need a challenge.

hmm... are Uwe films so bad that pirates won't even touch his films? [/betting]

I need to find out where the film is playing, so that i could boycott the theatre and the state that its playing in...

I would actually see this if it played somewhere nearby me. Boll's movies may mock the games they intend to portray, but it's Postal, come on. I'd pay just to see what he did to it.

And I don't think his movie adaptations are ever as bad as the Doom movie adaptation.

silly Uwe Boll...

although i do love how the trailer says "getting banned from a cinema near you"

Uwe boll got something right!

You know what's funny about all this? Nothing; and that's funny in a way.

Four!

Thats a bit much don't you think.

So none of you is worried about the fact that a film like is just censored away? I expected more the Escapists readers. It is a very strong measure, which in my opinion is very dangerous if applied thies eaily without any consequences.

I don't see any censorship, the government isn't preventing the release. Movie theaters and distributors just don't want to waste screen space on a director with a lousy track record. Boll is the biggest joke in movie making, and the theaters aren't laughing any more. No censorship, just reasonable business decisions. I'd make the same decision in their place.

Boll calls it censorship but it would be far more accurate to refer to it as "market forces at work." Being denied permission to make the movie because of objectionable content is censorship; being unable to secure a distribution deal because you have a long history of producing worthless steaming turds is more just a matter of good taste.

Sibren:
So none of you is worried about the fact that a film like is just censored away? I expected more the Escapists readers. It is a very strong measure, which in my opinion is very dangerous if applied thies eaily without any consequences.

If the word came from the government to reduce the number of screens, I would cry foul play but if the cinemas dont want to play it because its rubbish thats a different matter. Uwe Boll doesnt have an automatic right for his fims to be seen in theatres nationwide

The theatres have the right to choose what films they want to, and not want to show.

Ah, head-to-head with Indiana Jones? Yeah, we know that George Lucas has gone ill with the galloping loonies and ubersuck, but more than likely the first weekend alone will pay for the film.

But, seriously? Four? Wow, seems like people are getting smarter.

Four? My goodness, it's a sign. A sign that better times are coming.

Gildedtongue:
The theatres have the right to choose what films they want to, and not want to show.

Ah, head-to-head with Indiana Jones? Yeah, we know that George Lucas has gone ill with the galloping loonies and ubersuck, but more than likely the first weekend alone will pay for the film.

But, seriously? Four? Wow, seems like people are getting smarter.

Yeah, what he said. To be honest I quoted you because of your sweet Suikoden 2 avatar but while I'm here I agree, I find it so amusing that Boll thinks hes being boycotted because the theatres are refusing to show a film that has gotten nothing but terrible reviews and contains highly offensive material, all they would be doing would be charging people to watch a film that is not only bad but will most likely piss them off to no end and stop them from coming back that cinema ever again.

I know I wouldn't have gone back to Odeon if they had charged me to watch Alone in the Dark.

Maybe the demi-urge feels we have suffered enough and is recalling his angel of pain ^^

Can someone explain how he got to where he is and, perhaps even more importantly, how the hell he stayed there. The only explanation I have is that people are dumber than you think. I'm off to make a movie about throwing a rubber duck repeatedly towards a birch tree. Surely at least five people in all the world will think it's the best movie ever made ~~

It's supposed to be much better than all of his other movies. Maybe he's improving. If so, we might see a decent video game adaptation in twenty years. Sooner, if Kojima would enter the business already.

Theaters stopping a movie from playing, okay (questionable, but okay). But Boll is not able to rent! spaces to play his movie. That is censorship and nothing else. It just seems so drastic to me and unfair. There are so many crap movies coming out all the time (often even worse), but those are not barred.

Anyway I don't agree with this whole mass rant on Boll all the time. He's making movies, of which some (not all) are really bad. But he is doing this with little to no budget. Furthermore, what I really hate is that his films already get grounded into dust, before they even come out. A bad review is fine, but not if given beforehand, without seeing the movie. So many people have an opinion on his films, but I wonder how many actually saw some of his films.

Sibren:
Theaters stopping a movie from playing, okay (questionable, but okay). But Boll is not able to rent! spaces to play his movie. That is censorship and nothing else. It just seems so drastic to me and unfair. There are so many crap movies coming out all the time (often even worse), but those are not barred.

Its not censorship, these are private businesses and they have the right to decide what does and does not show in their cinemas, why bother showing a movie that not only has terrible review, but also comes from a director that has failed to turn a profit from a theatrical release in years and contains footage that makes tasteless and shitty jokes about 9/11.

Sorry but this isn't as much about profit for the cinemas, its about reputation and this is the sort of film that will not only offend ticket-buyers but may possibly piss them off enough to make them never come to that theatre again, THAT'S HOW BAD UWE BOLL MOVIES ARE!

I just dont understand why hes even trying to screen in theaters. Aint most of his movies (read Shit) just straight to dvd releases anyway. Plus for christsake im not an american so dont feel the utter rage about 11/9 as they do but even I thought he was going a little too far when I heard about the terrorist plane scene.

Well, the world can sleep easy tonight.

There's only four people in the United States who are dumber than Uwe Boll.

Sibren:
Theaters stopping a movie from playing, okay (questionable, but okay). But Boll is not able to rent! spaces to play his movie. That is censorship and nothing else. It just seems so drastic to me and unfair. There are so many crap movies coming out all the time (often even worse), but those are not barred.

Anyway I don't agree with this whole mass rant on Boll all the time. He's making movies, of which some (not all) are really bad. But he is doing this with little to no budget. Furthermore, what I really hate is that his films already get grounded into dust, before they even come out. A bad review is fine, but not if given beforehand, without seeing the movie. So many people have an opinion on his films, but I wonder how many actually saw some of his films.

small budget? Last I heard he's handed almost $200 million for a movie and barely makes 1/100 of that back. Wise business decision to not screen it to be honest, it's not censorship, just business, it's the reason youtube clips don't make it into cinemas, because no reasonable person would pay to see them.

And the movie theater would make more money by screening a different movie to Postal, even if they had to pay for the rights to show it. That's how bad Boll's films are.

Sibren:
Anyway I don't agree with this whole mass rant on Boll all the time. He's making movies, of which some (not all) are really bad. But he is doing this with little to no budget. Furthermore, what I really hate is that his films already get grounded into dust, before they even come out. A bad review is fine, but not if given beforehand, without seeing the movie. So many people have an opinion on his films, but I wonder how many actually saw some of his films.

Its called "learning from the past" I have not seen a single one of his movies that I would even describe as decent. He has put out nothing but shit non stop for how long so its kind of obvious he will never do anything right. He has no credibility left. I dont need to open up the rubbish bin and dive inside to know theres trash inside.