The German FSK, the German age ratings body (private, self-regulated by the film industry, not related to the government) has been denying age ratings to films of extreme violence for decades. This time a controversial decision with the latest film by one of the most disastrous directors of all time has ended up resulting in the richest man in the world publishing it on his social network as an act of resistance against state censorship. Let’s see who is right in all this hubbub.
But who…? Uwe Boll is a German director and producer known primarily for his film adaptations of video games. Terrible adaptations: ‘BloodRayne’, ‘Alone in the Dark’, ‘In the name of the king’ (based on ‘Dungeon Siege’) or ‘Postal’ are some of them. Despite some occasional successes (‘House of the Dead’ has a very nice trotting edge), Boll has deservedly earned the fame of being one of the worst directors in history, a fame only surpassed by his ingenuity when it comes to organizing publicity stunts, such as sketching evenings against his critics.
What is it about? A former American military man based in Europe inherits his father’s real estate business. After witnessing the murder of a mother at the hands of migrant criminals, he decides to take justice into his own hands and begins a violent campaign against criminals and corrupt judges that turns him into a viral phenomenon: celebrated by many, and also persecuted by law enforcement and powerful enemies.
Citizen Vigilante. His new film, written, produced and directed by Boll himself, was released on June 19 in a few theaters in the United States and on digital through Quiver Distribution. The protagonist is Armie Hammer, a detail of the casting that adds murky layers to the film: it is Hammer’s most relevant role since his career sank following allegations of sexual assault and emotional abuse in 2021 (with unspeakable overtones of cannibalism), although the investigation concluded without charges. Hammer recognized that ‘Citizen Vigilante’ was his first job offer in five years, and that when Boll called him, he burst into tears.
Boll, very cunning, chose Hammer deliberately. As explained“I hired him because he is a great actor and also because he had been canceled and wanted to work. They didn’t accuse him of anything, there was no lawsuit. He was just a famous guy who had behaved badly.” It is an important detail: the casting is already a political statement, as it could not be otherwise, anti-woke.
The role of the FSK. The FSK denied the film an age rating in two successive rounds. And although Boll calls it state censorship, it is not. The FSK is an entity serving the film industry itself, not a government body. The State only intervenes when a work violates current criminal laws, so Boll could have released his film without going through the FSK. Of course, there are commercial consequences: without the rating, the film cannot be shown in multiplexes or sold on DVD in large stores, and platforms such as Netflix in Germany do not include it in their catalog.
But of course: Boll himself welcomes this decision by the FSK: without this extra publicity, ‘Citizen Vigilante’ would have gone unnoticed. The scandal is part of the film’s dissemination campaign.
Enter Musk. Since December 2025, X has been in open conflict with the European institutions. That month the European Commission imposed a fine of 140 million dollars to X for failure to comply with the Digital Services Act, the law that forces platforms to combat misinformation and illegal content. In February 2026, X filed an appeal with the General Court of the European Union, alleging serious procedural errors and bias in the investigation. The publication of ‘Citizen Vigilante’ in Musk’s TL It fits perfectly with that narrative: Europe censors, X is a territory of freedom.
Of coursethe reactions of those close to Musk (Libs of TikTok, Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos) were immediate. But we have already seen the reality of the matter: no one has censored ‘Citizen Vigilante’, which has simply been rejected at a private ratings board.
To watch. As is usual in cases of films used as throwing weapons between political factions, opinions are dispersed: audience score of the 93% on Rotten Tomatoesbut only three critic reviews, all negative. Variety He said the film is “so astonishingly bad that it almost seems like Boll is deliberately sabotaging his protagonist, whose return can only be harmed by this project.” But thanks to Musk’s push, he is in the 31st place on IMDB.
For now, until tomorrow the film will be able to be seen on X, on Musk’s own account. The movie is possibly horrible. But not everyone can boast of having Elon Musk as an enthusiastic distribution partner.
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings