Rated: 2.5 / 5

Well now… Uwe Boll, after all this time, has somehow gotten widespread attention again. This time by taking on controversial subject matter, deemed as such by those who have dictated the current standards and course of society; to the point where this film got banned in Germany (that was enough to catch my interest). Is this the film that has redeemed him for all the terribly made films he’s done in the past? Has this rectified the disgraceful entries of Alone in the Dark (2005), In the Name of the King (2007), and House of the Dead (2003)? Is this a good movie?

Fuck no.

He’s still a terrible director who has only managed to making a couple of worthwhile films in the past, Rampage (2009) being one of them. He’s still incapable of utilizing talent at a high enough level to make something at the level of a B movie. And this film is no exception.

The biggest problem with this film is that it’s not told in chronological order. Boll is trying to be fancy with how he’s telling his story, and he still thinks he’s better than he is at crafting a tale. If this had been done in chronological order, it would’ve worked better. Because in hindsight, there is some potential, especially when you get a hold of an actor who can not only act, but is willing to act with what he’s got (as opposed to something like Bloodrayne where the major actors just didn’t give a shit, not that I blame them). The story of a man who owns and rents out multiple properties to people, tries to keep things maintained to an efficient and acceptable level. And overtime begins to witness things from his tenants that drive him into being a radical. Seeing how some become victims of the acts of illegal migrants. Seeing how some are those illegal migrants. Noting that migrants can choose not to pay the rent yet still stay within the property without being forcefully evicted (lawfully) for at least 7 months, which causes his rental business to take a hit. It wouldn’t be too difficult to showcase his arc, evolving into someone who decides to become a vigilante who is wealthy enough to afford the drastic measures he would take. And the film fucks that all up by not going the chronological route, and not really allowing the viewer to see any change in the character’s demeanor and psychopathic personality. He seems like the same guy at the end of the film as he was at the beginning.

That, and how unbelievable things get. How he does his shootout with the police (as if they would use tactics like that in this situation). That he could get away with as much as he does without surveillance of some kind catching onto him quickly (the film still thinks we’re living in a non-surveillance state time period). I was willing to go along with this just for the sake of things, but that former chronological issue makes this bloody difficult.

Finally, this film doesn’t go very far into the vigilante side of things. It’s miniscule in that department, with only 2 real instances of his doing some form of vigilante justice, making this viewing all the more frustrating. Which would be less of an issue if, again, this was done in chronological order so that it’s more natural that there’s only 2 real instances of vigilantism, particularly during the last act.

That all said, this was still a worthwhile viewing for the reason everyone knows about, even if they haven’t seen it. Catharsis. That this film comes out that is finally willing to tackle this subject matter from this position. That migrants can be destructive. That they do have a tendency of raping and/or killing citizens. That the law (judges, police, politicians) does favor and protect them. That society is suffering because of it. That something should be done about it. And that the film does show someone doing something about it, particularly with that finale scene of him confronting a Middle Eastern family, hearing what they have to say for justification, and then killing them off along with the friends of their son. Much of the dialogue and events are lifted straight out of incidents that have occurred over the past 5 years, from the subway incident with Iryna Zarutska (somewhat referenced at the very beginning of the film, albeit not on a subway and with a mother instead of a single girl), to just generalities of these occurrences which happen more frequently these days which the public learns about in spite of the news clamping down on these stories (particularly in the UK, which turns out banned this film too).

Which reminds me… one of the most far-fetched things about this film is that the news media would report on the vigilante the way it does. As if it would even mention him at all until he gets caught or killed. Especially after going after a judge, like what happened at the end of that film Vigilante (1982). Would’ve been more realistic if it went the Death Wish (2018) route of keeping his promotion and mentions strictly on social media. But then again, this is an Uwe Boll film.

Anyway, this film threatened to go deep enough to where it would actually start mentioning the cause of the migrant crisis rather than the symptoms. Bringing up the symptoms is easy (even if that in of itself is controversial these days, as the truth tends to be in a society run by lies), but digging into the cause would take some serious balls. The closest this film gets to that is, when interrogating the Arab family, they mention the wars going on in their country and their desire to escape from it. If the film would’ve expanded on that, digging into why those wars are happening, and how that’s causing the migrants to come to the more civilized societies, and ultimately show who is actually bringing them over with their funds and connections and resources, then I would’ve easily bumped this up a full star. But we’ll just have to contend ourselves with just surface level catharsis; the fact that this is a rare thing these days says a lot.

But there are warning signs that this film is just a glorified pressure relief valve on aspects of society like myself. Not addressing the root cause of these problems aside, it’s that the film’s finale highlight deals with a Middle Eastern family. Making me think that the JICs allowed for this film’s wide release for the sake of stoking anti-Palestinian/Iranian sentiment (under the guise of Pakistani refugees; you know, like how Bush used the Afghan war as an excuse to invade Iran back in the war on terror days of the 2000s). Or that this may dampen the flames that have been burning in people just ready to go off like Luigi Mangione (allegedly) did. Or, more recently, the incident where Seth Hatfield traveled from Alberta to Montreal Canada with the intention of shooting up either cops and/or jewish people at Pornhub HQ at Trans Island Avenue, where he killed a Middle Eastern officer, and a panicked female officer accidentally shot and killed a rabbi who had exited the HQ prior to fleeing the scene (look into this, I promise I’m not making this up). Not to mention other (alleged) assassination attempts that have been going on on a U.S. president (which, funnily enough, is something Uwe Boll made as a premise in his 3rd Rampage film). That the film may exist just to act as a catharsis to mellow people out so they stop going wacko in those situations crossed my mind. So that they won’t get pissed off and riot when another Lola and Ruby Dundee incident occurs, or anything similar. On the other hand, the demographics largely responsible for those incidents tend to be more on the radical left side of the field, while this film caters to those on the opposite side of the spectrum. So my thinking may be flawed on this.

Oh, right, and there’s an overlong sex scene. To top that one scene in Bloodrayne (2005), which I’ll admit is a guilty pleasure film for me, this movie decides to showcase a sequence where the protagonist has sex with a prostitute at this prostitution ring located on one of his properties. His ulterior motive is to check on the property’s status, but having gratuitous sex is the primary reason for it. And also to show that he’s not a rapist who threatens to do some cannibalism. Best I can figure, Boll is trying to showcase a contrast between consensual sex with a prostitute (in a context where, hopefully, sex trafficking isn’t a thing and this is just with women who chose this profession voluntarily; did I mention this takes place in Europe in no specified country?), as opposed to non-consensual sex via migrant rape gangs (which thankfully isn’t ever shown in an explicit manner). But it just comes off as an excuse to have a (overlong) sex scene in the film to add titillation. Or maybe it’s Boll’s way of saying this is going to be right-wing porn (which I’ll take over left-wing porn, which the mainstream film market is oversaturated with). Whatever, I’m probably giving this guy too much credit.

Regardless of the film’s intention, in spite of it not being well made (and some scenes dragging on too long, which is strange considering the movie is less than 90 minutes long), I can recommend giving it a one-time viewing. You’re going to suffer through a lot of boring bullshit during the first half until you get to the (very preachy) second half where the gratifying anti-migrant killing starts happening (mainly in just one sequence, this isn’t Death Wish where he’s going to go off and kill multiple perpetrators at different locations on different days). And while it is overly preachy, it’s just nice to have one, just one, film come out that has this perspective and promotes this message. And who knows? Maybe Boll will push the envelope in a sequel and actually start focusing on (((those people))) and not make them the victims as their film portrayals tend to me. It’s really the only other step to take to push the envelope even further than what this film did, while keeping an honest grounded message that’s in-tune with the current reality of things. But on the other hand, there is a sequence where a semi-migrant gang (1 of the 3 is a white girl) is beating up on a jewish kid, and they suffer for this very quickly as a result. Either Boll is never going to get that smart, or he’s just another puppet sucker who has been given permission to push things this far. Either way, I’ll take it until something better comes along (which probably won’t happen anytime soon).