Darfur

This is my review on Uwe Bolls movie Darfur. If you guys know anything about Uwe Boll he uses shock moments to make a movie. Let me say that this is the first thing wrong with Bolls movies. He fills the movie with blood and gore and 0 story line and 0 character development. The only reason I watched this was because i read many reviews on here that said it was good.

This movie is about American reporters who go to Darfur to document the atrocities being done to the people. They go to a small village and soon make friends with the towns people. As they are leaving they see a group of arabs who are going to the village (most likely to wipe it out) some try to play hero as others go back to camp.

This movie is just absolutely awful. There is zero character development and of course for Uwe Bolls common style of a shaking camera that is constantly moving around. You can never fully tell whats going on in the picture. It makes the movie unwatchable. The only reason for the 3 stars was because it did what it intended to do. It does shock and awe at some points but if your looking for gore skip this. 20 mins of gore 70 mins of bore. Skip this one folks

I'm 18 years old. And I'm the type of person who doesn't get emotional during a sad movie/tv/video game scene. I mean I did cry during Bambi and the lion king, but it was a short amount of time before I composed myself. This movie though. This movie was a challenge to compose myself while watching.

This movie is emotionally powerful. From the story, to the many scenes where I couldn't compose myself, and the fact that this is a story set around an actual genocide made me overwhelmed with emotion.

The only reason why I rated this an 8/10 is that while the film was good, it's very disturbing, given the subject matter. As well as the enemy soldiers kinda acting generic and a bit like stormtroopers.

Bash Uwe Boll all you want, but I think the man's starting to learn that when he uses his own material (or at least something that's not a video game) he can do great work. Rampage, Postal, Stoic, and now Darfur...all great movies. Sadly, a lot of people will probably overlook them just because Boll has directed some bad movies. OK...truly awful movies...but still.

The movie itself is pretty straight forward. It follows a group of international journalists into a small village in Darfur. The interview people, take pictures...you know, the stuff you'd expect journalists to do. When the village is attacked they have to decide how much of a difference they really want to make (especially given the impotent security detail they're given). Yes, the violence in this movie can be pretty brutal, but I've seen far worse and all Boll is really doing is telling the truth. As troubling as it is to watch, it really is worth it. I guess my question is where all the "A-list" celebrities like Clooney who won't shut up about Darfur...yet haven't made a movie about it. Seriously...it took Uwe Boll to do this? That's almost as depressing as the subject matter of the movie.

I would have never expected Uwe Boll to pull this off. This is an important movie that uses similar methods like Stoic to transport a dark subject into the viewers minds. I always considered Bolls takes on serious matters as a cash off (like the despicable PETA reference in Seed) but with Darfur I think the motivation came from the heart. I am all for showing things like they are and not sugarcoating reality... you really have to hit people with a sledgehammer to make them look at issues they'd rather not look at. Hats off to Uwe Boll for Darfur and the massively underrated Stoic. There is still too many haters around (and believe me I used to be one too) but with so many good movies lately (um... except the ridiculous Final Storm of course) I hope people start accepting Bolls output for what it is and not put a tag on it. This is a well done movie, so don't bitch about the shaky cam style... its in there for a reason and along with the improvised style adds to the realism of it. Both movies Darfur and Stoic managed taking extreme subjects and making people take decisions in these situations in a way that anyone can relate to, no matter how distant these situations are to his real life... and I think this is quite an achievement.

If a movie can raise awareness of any issue that should concern us, that is to be applauded. No matter who made the film and if you didn't like what he did previously (especially concerning the game to movie franchise overall). Familiar faces/actors who surely were driven to do this not just because of the money, but because they wanted to help in showing people what went on in Darfur.

The beginning makes you wonder though, because it could've been done as a documentary as well. You have survivors and real people being interviewed by our actors pretending to be journalists. But that question goes away once it goes into action territory, where it gets a bit fantastical. You may criticize that part, but that is what excuses this not being a documentary. So in trying to make people listen we go back to the action movie blueprint. I don't think it defies the purpose and all is shot well. You may argue about a couple of writing, editing and character decisions, but you could also say that it's nitpicking ... One of the better Boll movies, though still not the masterpiece he would like you to believe this is