I think a lot of people don't take you seriously if they hear it's a video-game-based movie, and a lot of press people don't write about you. With BloodRayne, a lot of serious newspaper people didn't actually even see the movie. They went online to see other reviews, and then wrote their own. I think comic-book-based movies have a better image. We see it with 300, Sin City, Spider-Man - they are A-list features, and video-game movies are B-list.

Everybody says video-game adaptations are all the same, but I disagree. Normally, video-game adaptations are like Alone In The Dark, Resident Evil, Alien Vs. Predator - sci-fi creature stuff. But I think I've covered] a wide range of genres and time periods, like Transylvania in 1700 and now a Western with BlodRayne II, or adventure with Dungeon Siege, or comedy and satire with Postal.

I think video games are a great kind of entertainment. They have replaced a lot of games people normally play with their friends and neighbours, like Monopoly.

Actors don't have real value.

I think the harsh reviews helped, in that I spent way more energy in the preproduction and development. From this point of view, I'm very thankful for the harsh critics. I still think the critics were unnecessarily insulting in a lot of things, but I think it helped.

I want to be like, "Look at Postal like Quentin Tarantino did it. Brainwash yourself and convince yourself that Tarantino did it. Forget my name and enjoy the 100 minutes and then write your review."

House was the first film where I had no influence on the script. I had to buy the script with the game rights.