Somehow, I actually had the feeling that this would happen all the way back when I watched it, weeks ago. Specifically, that Armie would basically backstab Uwe Boll - without whom he would have remained cancelled - and refuse to do the sequel that Boll intends to do, because Boll has outlived his usefulness to him and continued association with Boll would be unlikely to help his reignited career.

Admittedly, the recent evidence for this happening is simply second-hand: so far, it is something like a reporter claiming that someone said to her that Armie Hammer called her while crying and called the final product hateful and disgusting.

When I read this, I thought that there are three possibilities:

Firstly, Armie generally didn't realize how the film would look. He sees it and the Judeo-Leftist in his paternal ancestry (e.g. Armand Michael Hammer was very friendly with the Soviets and seems to even have been a Soviet spy; Julius Hammer was a communist who helped get the CPUSA up and running) genuinely thinks: 'What on Earth have I done?', and starts calling people in hysterics. Even his name is Leftist: Julius cleverly named his son Armand because the symbol used by his particular communist group was an arm and hammer at the time (his name, then, was really a veiled way of saying 'arm and hammer'). Armand Michael Hammer then passed the name down to his son, Armand Douglas Hammer, that is, Armie Hammer. (It is, however, worth mentioning that 'Armand' is not pronounced like 'Ah-Manned' or 'Almond': the last letter in 'Armand' is silent, nor does the second syllable consequently become 'mon' rather than 'mond' as a result, but is like 'yarn' with the 'y' swapped for an 'm'. Pronounce it like 'Ah-marn'.)

Secondly, the performative interpretation, closest to my first paragraph. Armie knew what he was getting into, but as he was quoted as saying, he would even be willing to act in a dogfood commercial if that's what it would take to restart his acting career. Thus, Armie accepts the role for $250,000, but backstabbing Uwe was always at the back of his mind. Thus his calling people in hysterics, calling it hateful and disgusting is a pre-planned act with the goal of severing ties with Uwe.

Thirdly, the 'bs' interpretation: somebody (e.g. the original reporter, or the original reporter's source) is circulating lies about Armie. The evidence, admittedly, is currently weak. Let's consider Boll's perspective. It is worth mentioning that Boll's social media and interviews deny that this has happened. Boll instead says that Armie was present during much of the editing, and also saw a version (maybe not fully complete) of the film at a film festival back in November 2025. Consequently, the idea that Armie had no idea what the final film would look like seems slim.

My verdict at this point is that either interpretation 2 or 3 are correct. Interpretation 1 makes very little sense unless the editing and the film festival version that Armie saw in November differed very significantly from the final film.

In conclusion, my reasoning is this: it's either bs and Armie will be back for Citizen Vigilante 2 (interpretation 3) or Armie simply worked with Uwe to use him as a springboard to catapult him back to (relative) fame, with the intention of backstabbing him all along once association with him became more of a liability than an expedient (interpretation 2).

Somehow, I actually had the feeling that this would happen all the way back when I watched it, weeks ago. Specifically, that Armie would basically backstab Uwe Boll - without whom he would have remained cancelled - and refuse to do the sequel that Boll intends to do, because Boll has outlived his usefulness to him and continued association with Boll would be unlikely to help his reignited career.

Admittedly, the recent evidence for this happening is simply second-hand: so far, it is something like a reporter claiming that someone said to her that Armie Hammer called her while crying and called the final product hateful and disgusting.

When I read this, I thought that there are three possibilities:

Firstly, Armie generally didn't realize how the film would look. He sees it and the Judeo-Leftist in his paternal ancestry (e.g. Armand Michael Hammer was very friendly with the Soviets and seems to even have been a Soviet spy; Julius Hammer was a communist who helped get the CPUSA up and running) genuinely thinks: 'What on Earth have I done?', and starts calling people in hysterics. Even his name is Leftist: Julius cleverly named his son Armand because the symbol used by his particular communist group was an arm and hammer at the time (his name, then, was really a veiled way of saying 'arm and hammer'). Armand Michael Hammer then passed the name down to his son, Armand Douglas Hammer, that is, Armie Hammer. (It is, however, worth mentioning that 'Armand' is not pronounced like 'Almond': the last letter in 'Armand' is silent, nor does the second syllable consequently become 'mon' rather than 'mond' as a result, but is like 'yarn' with the 'y' swapped for an 'm'. Pronounce it like 'Ah-marn'.)

Secondly, the performative interpretation, closest to my first paragraph. Armie knew what he was getting into, but as he was quoted as saying, he would even be willing to act in a dogfood commercial if that's what it would take to restart his acting career. Thus, Armie accepts the role for $250,000, but backstabbing Uwe was always at the back of his mind. Thus his calling people in hysterics, calling it hateful and disgusting is a pre-planned act with the goal of severing ties with Uwe.

Thirdly, the 'bs' interpretation: somebody (e.g. the original reporter, or the original reporter's source) is circulating lies about Armie. The evidence, admittedly, is currently weak. Let's consider Boll's perspective. It is worth mentioning that Boll's social media and interviews deny that this has happened. Boll instead says that Armie was present during much of the editing, and also saw a version (maybe not fully complete) of the film at a film festival back in November 2025. Consequently, the idea that Armie had no idea what the final film would look like seems slim.

My verdict at this point is that either interpretation 2 or 3 are correct. Interpretation 1 makes very little sense unless the editing and the film festival version that Armie saw in November differed very significantly from the final film.

In conclusion, my reasoning is this: it's either bs and Armie will be back for Citizen Vigilante 2 (interpretation 3) or Armie simply worked with Uwe to use him as a springboard to catapult him back to (relative) fame, with the intention of backstabbing him all along once association with him became more of a liability than an expedient (interpretation 2).

Somehow, I actually had the feeling that this would happen all the way back when I watched it, weeks ago. That Armie would basically backstab Uwe Boll - without whom he would have remained cancelled - and refuse to do the sequel that Boll intends to do, because Boll has outlived his usefulness to him and continued association with Boll would be unlikely to help his reignited career.

Admittedly, the recent evidence for this happening is simply second-hand: so far, it is something like a reporter claiming that someone said to her that Armie Hammer called her while crying and called the final product hateful and disgusting.

When I read this, I thought that there are three possibilities:

Firstly, Armie generally didn't realize how the film would look. He sees it and the Judeo-Leftist in his paternal ancestry (e.g. Armand Michael Hammer was very friendly with the Soviets and seems to even have been a Soviet spy; Julius Hammer was a communist who helped get the CPUSA up and running) genuinely thinks: 'What on Earth have I done?', and starts calling people in hysterics. Even his name is Leftist: Julius cleverly named his son Armand because the symbol used by his particular communist group was an arm and hammer at the time (his name, then, was really a veiled way of saying 'arm and hammer'). Armand Michael Hammer then passed the name down to his son, Armand Douglas Hammer, that is, Armie Hammer. (It is, however, worth mentioning that 'Armand' is not pronounced like 'Almond': the last letter in 'Armand' is silent, nor does the second syllable consequently become 'mon' rather than 'mond' as a result, but is like 'yarn' with the 'y' swapped for an 'm'. Pronounce it like 'Ah-marn'.)

Secondly, the performative interpretation, closest to my first paragraph. Armie knew what he was getting into, but as he was quoted as saying, he would even be willing to act in a dogfood commercial if that's what it would take to restart his acting career. Thus, Armie accepts the role for $250,000, but backstabbing Uwe was always at the back of his mind. Thus his calling people in hysterics, calling it hateful and disgusting is a pre-planned act with the goal of severing ties with Uwe.

Thirdly, the 'bs' interpretation: somebody (e.g. the original reporter, or the original reporter's source) is circulating lies about Armie. The evidence, admittedly, is currently weak. Let's consider Boll's perspective. It is worth mentioning that Boll's social media and interviews deny that this has happened. Boll instead says that Armie was present during much of the editing, and also saw a version (maybe not fully complete) of the film at a film festival back in November 2025. Consequently, the idea that Armie had no idea what the final film would look like seems slim.

My verdict at this point is that either interpretation 2 or 3 are correct. Interpretation 1 makes very little sense unless the editing and the film festival version that Armie saw in November differed very significantly from the final film.

In conclusion, my reasoning is this: it's either bs and Armie will be back for Citizen Vigilante 2 (interpretation 3) or Armie simply worked with Uwe to use him as a springboard to catapult him back to (relative) fame, with the intention of backstabbing him all along once association with him became more of a liability than an expedient (interpretation 2).

Somehow, I actually had the feeling that this would happen all the way back when I watched it, weeks ago. That Armie would basically backstab Uwe Boll - without whom he would have remained cancelled - and refuse to do the sequel that Boll intends to do, because Boll has outlived his usefulness to him and continued association with Boll would be unlikely to help his reignited career.

Admittedly, the recent evidence for this happening is simply second-hand: so far, it is something like a reporter claiming that someone said to her that Armie Hammer called her while crying and called the final product hateful and disgusting.

When I read this, I thought that there are three possibilities:

Firstly, Armie generally didn't realize how the film would look. He sees it and the Judeo-Leftist in his paternal ancestry (e.g. Armand Michael Hammer was very friendly with the Soviets and seems to even have been a Soviet spy; Julius Hammer was a communist who helped get the CPUSA up and running) genuinely thinks: 'What on Earth have I done?', and starts calling people in hysterics. Even his name is Leftist: Julius cleverly named his son Armand because the symbol used by his particular communist group was an arm and hammer at the time (his name, then, was really a veiled way of saying 'arm and hammer'). Armand Michael Hammer then passed the name down to his son, Armand Douglas Hammer, that is, Armie Hammer. (It is, however, worth mentioning that 'Armand' is not pronounced like 'Almond': the last letter in 'Armand' is silent, nor does the second syllable consequently become 'mon' rather than 'mond' as a result, but is like 'yarn' with the 'y' swapped for an 'm'. Pronounce it like 'Ah-marn'.)

Secondly, the performative interpretation, closest to my first paragraph. Armie knew what he was getting into, but as he was quoted as saying, he would even be willing to act in a dogfood commercial. Thus, Armie accepts the role for $250,000, but backstabbing Uwe was always at the back of his mind. Thus his calling people in hysterics, calling it hateful and disgusting is a pre-planned act with the goal of severing ties with Uwe.

Thirdly, the 'bs' interpretation: somebody (e.g. the original reporter, or the original reporter's source) is circulating lies about Armie. The evidence, admittedly, is currently weak. Let's consider Boll's perspective. It is worth mentioning that Boll's social media and interviews deny that this has happened. Boll instead says that Armie was present during much of the editing, and also saw a version (maybe not fully complete) of the film at a film festival back in November 2025. Consequently, the idea that Armie had no idea what the final film would look like seems slim.

My verdict at this point is that either interpretation 2 or 3 are correct. Interpretation 1 makes very little sense unless the editing and the film festival version that Armie saw in November differed very significantly from the final film.

In conclusion, my reasoning is this: it's either bs and Armie will be back for Citizen Vigilante 2 (interpretation 3) or Armie simply worked with Uwe to use him as a springboard to catapult him back to (relative) fame, with the intention of backstabbing him all along once association with him became more of a liability than an expedient (interpretation 2).

Somehow, I actually had the feeling that this would happen all the way back when I watched it, weeks ago. That Armie would basically backstab Uwe Boll - without whom he would have remained cancelled - and refuse to do the sequel that Boll intends to do, because Boll has outlived his usefulness to him and continued association with Boll would be unlikely to help his reignited career.

Admittedly, the recent evidence for this happening is simply second-hand: so far, it is something like a reporter claiming that someone said to her that Armie Hammer called her while crying and called the final product hateful and disgusting.

When I read this, I thought that there are three possibilities:

Firstly, Armie generally didn't realize how the film would look. He sees it and the Judeo-Leftist in his paternal ancestry (e.g. Armand Michael Hammer was very friendly with the Soviets and seems to even have been a Soviet spy; Julius Hammer was a communist who helped get the CPUSA up and running) genuinely thinks: 'What on Earth have I done?', and starts calling people in hysterics. Even his name is Leftist: Julius cleverly named his son Armand because the symbol used by his particular communist group was an arm and hammer at the time (his name, then, was really a veiled way of saying 'arm and hammer'). Armand Michael Hammer then passed the name down to his son, Armand Douglas Hammer, that is, Armie Hammer.

Secondly, the performative interpretation, closest to my first paragraph. Armie knew what he was getting into, but as he was quoted as saying, he would even be willing to act in a dogfood commercial. Thus, Armie accepts the role for $250,000, but backstabbing Uwe was always at the back of his mind. Thus his calling people in hysterics, calling it hateful and disgusting is a pre-planned act with the goal of severing ties with Uwe.

Thirdly, the 'bs' interpretation: somebody (e.g. the original reporter, or the original reporter's source) is circulating lies about Armie. The evidence, admittedly, is currently weak. Let's consider Boll's perspective. It is worth mentioning that Boll's social media and interviews deny that this has happened. Boll instead says that Armie was present during much of the editing, and also saw a version (maybe not fully complete) of the film at a film festival back in November 2025. Consequently, the idea that Armie had no idea what the final film would look like seems slim.

My verdict at this point is that either interpretation 2 or 3 are correct. Interpretation 1 makes very little sense unless the editing and the film festival version that Armie saw in November differed very significantly from the final film.

In conclusion, my reasoning is this: it's either bs and Armie will be back for Citizen Vigilante 2 (interpretation 3) or Armie simply worked with Uwe to use him as a springboard to catapult him back to (relative) fame, with the intention of backstabbing him all along once association with him became more of a liability than an expedient (interpretation 2).

Somehow, I actually had the feeling that this would happen all the way back when I watched it, weeks ago. That Armie would basically backstab Uwe Boll - without whom he would have remained cancelled - and refuse to do the sequel that Boll intends to do, because Boll has outlived his usefulness to him and continued association with Boll would be unlikely to help his reignited career.

Admittedly, the recent evidence for this happening is simply second-hand: so far, it is something like a reporter claiming that someone said to her that Armie Hammer called her while crying and called the final product hateful and disgusting.

When I read this, I thought that there are three possibilities:

Firstly, Armie generally didn't realize how the film would look. He sees it and the Judeo-Leftist in his paternal ancestry (e.g. Armand Michael Hammer was very friendly with the Soviets and seems to even have been a Soviet spy; Julius Hammer was a communist who helped get the CPUSA up and running) genuinely thinks: 'What on Earth have I done?', and starts calling people in hysterics. Even his name is Leftist: Julius cleverly named his son Armand because the symbol used by his particular communist group was an arm and hammer at the time (his name, then, was Arm and Hammer). Armand Michael Hammer then passed the name down to his son, Armand Douglas Hammer, that is, Armie Hammer.

Secondly, the performative interpretation, closest to my first paragraph. Armie knew what he was getting into, but as he was quoted as saying, he would even be willing to act in a dogfood commercial. Thus, Armie accepts the role for $250,000, but backstabbing Uwe was always at the back of his mind. Thus his calling people in hysterics, calling it hateful and disgusting is a pre-planned act with the goal of severing ties with Uwe.

Thirdly, the 'bs' interpretation: somebody (e.g. the original reporter, or the original reporter's source) is circulating lies about Armie. The evidence, admittedly, is currently weak. Let's consider Boll's perspective. It is worth mentioning that Boll's social media and interviews deny that this has happened. Boll instead says that Armie was present during much of the editing, and also saw a version (maybe not fully complete) of the film at a film festival back in November 2025. Consequently, the idea that Armie had no idea what the final film would look like seems slim.

My verdict at this point is that either interpretation 2 or 3 are correct. Interpretation 1 makes very little sense unless the editing and the film festival version that Armie saw in November differed very significantly from the final film.

In conclusion, my reasoning is this: it's either bs and Armie will be back for Citizen Vigilante 2 (interpretation 3) or Armie simply worked with Uwe to use him as a springboard to catapult him back to (relative) fame, with the intention of backstabbing him all along once association with him became more of a liability than an expedient (interpretation 2).

Somehow, I actually had the feeling that this would happen all the way back when I watched it, weeks ago. That Armie would basically backstab Uwe Boll - without whom he would have remained cancelled - and refuse to do the sequel that Boll intends to do, because Boll has outlived his usefulness to him and continued association with Boll would be unlikely to help his reignited career.

Admittedly, the recent evidence for this happening is simply second-hand: so far, it is something like a reporter claiming that someone said to her that Armie Hammer called her while crying and called the final product hateful and disgusting.

When I read this, I thought that there are three possibilities:

Firstly, Armie generally didn't realize how the film would look. He sees it and the Judeo-Leftist in his paternal ancestry (e.g. Armand Michael Hammer was very friendly with the Soviets and seems to even have been a Soviet spy; Julius Hammer was a communist who helped get the CPUSA up and running) genuinely thinks: 'What on Earth have I done?', and starts calling people in hysterics. Even his name is Leftist: Julius cleverly named his son Armand because the symbol used by his particular communist group was an arm and hammer at the time (his name, then, was Arm and Hammer). Armand Michael Hammer then passed the name down to his son, Armand Douglas Hammer, that is, Armie Hammer.

Secondly, the performative interpretation, closest to my first paragraph. Armie knew what he was getting into, but as he was quoted as saying, he would even be willing to act in a dogfood commercial. Thus, Armie accepts the role for $250,000, but backstabbing Uwe was always at the back of his mind. Thus his calling people in hysterics, calling it hateful and disgusting is a pre-planned act with the goal of severing ties with Uwe.

Thirdly, the 'bs' interpretation: somebody (e.g. the original reporter, or the original reporter's source) is circulating lies about Armie. The evidence, admittedly, is currently weak. Let's consider Boll's perspective. It is worth mentioning that Boll's social media and interviews deny that this has happened. Boll instead says that Armie was present during much of the editing, and also saw a version (maybe not fully complete) of the film at a film festival back in November 2025. Consequently, the idea that Armie had no idea what the final film would look like seems slim.

My verdict at this point is that either interpretation 2 or 3 are correct. Interpretation 1 makes very little sense unless the editing and the film festival version that Armie saw in November differed very significantly from the final film.

In conclusion, my reasoning is this: it's either bs and Armie will be back for Citizen Vigilante 2 (interpretation 3) or Armie simply worked with Uwe to use him as a springboard to catapult him back to (relative) fame, with the intention of backstabbing him all along once association with him became more of a liability than an expedient (interpretation 3).

Somehow, I actually had the feeling that this would happen all the way back when I watched it, weeks ago. That Armie would basically backstab Uwe Boll - without whom he would have remained cancelled - and refuse to do the sequel that Boll intends to do, because Boll has outlived his usefulness to him and continued association with Boll would be unlikely to help his reignited career.

Admittedly, the recent evidence for this happening is simply second-hand: so far, it is something like a reporter claiming that someone said to her that Armie Hammer called her. He was crying and called the final product hateful and disgusting.

When I read this, I thought that there are three possibilities:

Firstly, Armie generally didn't realize how the film would look. He sees it and the Judeo-Leftist in his paternal ancestry (e.g. Armand Michael Hammer was very friendly with the Soviets and seems to even have been a Soviet spy; Julius Hammer was a communist who helped get the CPUSA up and running) genuinely thinks: 'What on Earth have I done?', and starts calling people in hysterics. Even his name is Leftist: Julius cleverly named his son Armand because the symbol used by his particular communist group was an arm and hammer at the time (his name, then, was Arm and Hammer). Armand Michael Hammer then passed the name down to his son, Armand Douglas Hammer, that is, Armie Hammer.

Secondly, the performative interpretation, closest to my first paragraph. Armie knew what he was getting into, but as he was quoted as saying, he would even be willing to act in a dogfood commercial. Thus, Armie accepts the role for $250,000, but backstabbing Uwe was always at the back of his mind. Thus his calling people in hysterics, calling it hateful and disgusting is a pre-planned act with the goal of severing ties with Uwe.

Thirdly, the 'bs' interpretation: somebody (e.g. the original reporter, or the original reporter's source) is circulating lies about Armie. The evidence, admittedly, is currently weak. Let's consider Boll's perspective. It is worth mentioning that Boll's social media and interviews deny that this has happened. Boll instead says that Armie was present during much of the editing, and also saw a version (maybe not fully complete) of the film at a film festival back in November 2025. Consequently, the idea that Armie had no idea what the final film would look like seems slim.

My verdict at this point is that either interpretation 2 or 3 are correct. Interpretation 1 makes very little sense unless the editing and the film festival version that Armie saw in November differed very significantly from the final film.

In conclusion, my reasoning is this: it's either bs and Armie will be back for Citizen Vigilante 2 (interpretation 3) or Armie simply worked with Uwe to use him as a springboard to catapult him back to (relative) fame, with the intention of backstabbing him all along once association with him became more of a liability than an expedient (interpretation 3).

Somehow, I actually had the feeling that this would happen all the way back when I watched it, weeks ago. That Armie would basically backstab Uwe Boll - without whom he would have remained cancelled - and refuse to do the sequel that Boll intends to do, because Boll has outlived his usefulness to him and continued association with Boll would be unlikely to help his reignited career.

Admittedly, the recent evidence for this happening is simply second-hand: so far, it is something like a reporter claiming that someone said to her that Armie Hammer called her. He was crying and called the final product hateful and disgusting.

When I read this, I thought that there are three possibilities:

Firstly, Armie generally didn't realize how the film would look. He sees it and the Judeo-Leftist in his paternal ancestry (e.g. Armand Michael Hammer was very friendly with the Soviets and seems to even have been a Soviet spy; Julius Hammer was a communist who helped get the CPUSA up and running) genuinely thinks: 'What on Earth have I done?', and starts calling people in hysterics.

Secondly, the performative interpretation, closest to my first paragraph. Armie knew what he was getting into, but as he was quoted as saying, he would even be willing to act in a dogfood commercial. Thus, Armie accepts the role for $250,000, but backstabbing Uwe was always at the back of his mind. Thus his calling people in hysterics, calling it hateful and disgusting is a pre-planned act with the goal of severing ties with Uwe.

Thirdly, the 'bs' interpretation: somebody (e.g. the original reporter, or the original reporter's source) is circulating lies about Armie. The evidence, admittedly, is currently weak. Let's consider Boll's perspective. It is worth mentioning that Boll's social media and interviews deny that this has happened. Boll instead says that Armie was present during much of the editing, and also saw a version (maybe not fully complete) of the film at a film festival back in November 2025. Consequently, the idea that Armie had no idea what the final film would look like seems slim.

My verdict at this point is that either interpretation 2 or 3 are correct. Interpretation 1 makes very little sense unless the editing and the film festival version that Armie saw in November differed very significantly from the final film.

In conclusion, my reasoning is this: it's either bs and Armie will be back for Citizen Vigilante 2 (interpretation 3) or Armie simply worked with Uwe to use him as a springboard to catapult him back to (relative) fame, with the intention of backstabbing him all along once association with him became more of a liability than an expedient (interpretation 3).