Genres

Visitors Review

2012-05-25 05:53:49

UWE BOLL = GAME ADAPTATION TO BAD MOVIE

His movies are bad and have never gotten good reviews from people who have seen it so why should this be any different?

2012-05-24 10:49:33

Shockingly bad

This movie was actually recommended to me by a friend so I made an effort to like it. Although I have generally liked all of Jason Stratham's movies (I thought even Chaos was decent) I could not get through more than 15 minutes of this. It was incredibly boring and poorly written. The dialogue and the acting were actually irritating to watch. The action scenes were horrendous; the monsters would not even work in a B movie. This movie was so bad I have lost respect for my friend for recommending it. Besides losing a friend, I also lost 15 minutes of my life that I will never get back. If you like Jason Stratham check out Revolver and Crank instead.

Josh Gordon 2012-05-20 23:09:21

Yawn! Better than Eragon...but not by much

If you can stay awake through the whole movie, you'd actually enjoy apicture that is very underwhelming. Congratulations. For a movie that's based on a computer game, I have to admit that Ididn't expect much, and I wasn't disappointed. I actually played thegame this movie was based on, and I really don't see any connectionbetween the two, either. It's like they pulled all the fantasy scriptsfloating around Hollywood, picked one, then rewrote it with some"Dungeon Siege" names, then slapped the game's name on it, hoping topull in some dough from fans or something (and just to be clear, Iwatched it because I like Jason Statham, not Dungeon Siege). For somerather big (has-been and B-list) names, I expected better. The scriptis just pathetic (whoever wrote it failed miserably with the dialog),the action is okay (Lord of the Rings, Braveheart, etc. were muchbetter for army vs. army fights), and the special effects could havebeen done on my computer at home, probably.I'd recommend renting Red Sonja or Conan instead of this. At leastyou'd be watching a couple classics that way.

Katana-0 2012-05-20 17:44:14

I never stopped laughing!!!

In all seriousness this was an awful, awful movie. However, I enjoyedevery ridiculous moment of it. How can you hate a movie that has ForestLesbians swinging from vines, Forest Ninjas running up trees, the Krug(who were obviously played by extras from Planet of the Apes), RayLiotta who simply makes a movie better by appearing in it, and to topit off Burt Reynolds as the king of this truly magical land.I'll never be able to forget some of the many memorable scenes in thismovie. Like the touching scene when the cross-eyed guy received thesword from his father, or how he hit on the girl that was chained upnext to him in the caves, despite there they’re very dire situation.I'm still recovering from the shock I felt when I found out that JasonStatham was the king’s sons, honestly who saw that one coming. I nearlycried, as Burt on his death bed gave an incredibly heartfelt,informative and lucid speech to his son only be shown dead as thecamera returns his darkly tanned and well groomed face.Besides the characters and deeply intriguing plot the soundtrack andspecial effects were top notch. This movie was clearly made a crackteam of professionals and I for one, am glad that they were able toproduce this timeless classic that will be enjoyed year after year.

ash-225 2012-05-15 20:11:36

If you're into absolute crap, see this film

Horrible. I don't know how else to describe this movie.Thanks to good old' Uwe Boll, king of the video game-based flop, eventhis cast looked like a B-list acting crew. I've heard better dialogand seen better special effects on Cinemax late-night TV-MA.Quite a few others have already dropped more witty comments on just howbad, yet strangely perplexing, this movie actually is. I wasn't sure ifI was supposed to be laughing or crying (or laughing so hard I cried)during some of the more dramatic scenes.Here are a few random bits from the movie: - When Claire Forlani finds out that her parents and son have beenkilled, the wails she let out sounded like they were sound bites from areally bad porno.- Reynolds, Perlman's death scenes... Wow. In the blink of an eye, yougo from dying to camera on another actor and then back to a deadReynolds/Perlman. No dramatic speech, no final breath. One secondthey're talking about something mindless and the next they're dead.- Liotta's death scene. "Oh no, there's a scratch on my neck! I shouldroll my eyes back in my head and fall over stiff as a board, dead." -The tree women. What was the point of having them at all? - Thecostumes of the bad guys looked like rubber suits with handfuls of mudstuck onto them.- Were they all supposed to have different accents? I wasn't sure ifthis was supposed to take place in England or Alabama.Take those few things and throw in a terrible plot, worse editing, anuninspired cast, and Uwe Boll and you get yourself a great big steamingpile of cow dung.Way to crank out those blockbusters Uwe! You the man!

2012-05-15 07:03:40

What the hell?!?!?

I really don't know where to begin here. I didn't even know that this movie would be packed with so many stars I know and love. Well, I guess I'll throw my two cents in:1) The Farmer turns out to be a top notch martial artists, wrestler, and sword fighter. When and Where did he acquire the knowledge and skills to both learn farming and combat skills? I mean his fighting was above par by any standard.2) The tree sprits are feminists tree huggers. While they shoo away the males from their forests, they drop their high morals and ethics at the mere beck and call from a female.3) At the final battle, the outnumbered human army literally has the high ground on a muddy hill yet they charge down the hill ruining the biggest advantage that they've got.4) Ninja's!?!?5) So many different accents all around it's hard to believe they all come from the same region.I've learned to stop buying movies "just" because. I'll rent them first and if possible, get it for free before I ever consider buying it. Never again will I waste my money in making liberal democrat actors rich.

firephoenixan 2012-05-13 05:39:12

Uwe Boll

This movie isn't as bad as Space Mutiny; I'll give Uwe Boll that. I'djust have to say that its only downfall is that it really doesn't haveanything to do with the game besides include similar characters andlocations. Beside that, it's your basic mediocre fantasy movie. Not"good," not the absolute worst, but in between somewhere.The movie also tends to skip around plenty, but the plot was at leasteasy to follow as well amidst all the battles and dialog. It may becheesy, and it may be clichéd, but at least it has some decent effectshere and there and alright fight moves.If you have to see this, and you played the Dungeon Siege game, go witha friend, as I did. It should make for a good laugh.All-in-all, despite it being a pretty average movie, it's Uwe Boll'sbest so far.

ian-crowley 2012-05-12 13:53:29

Much better than Lord of the Rings

This movie would have been a shoo-in for a 10 out of 10, but thevine-women knocked it down to a 9. First off, the cast was much highercaliber than LOTR's; John Rhys-Davies, Ray Liotta, Painkiller Jane,Burt Reynolds, Ron Perlman, Jason Statham, and the chick from Mallrats.I personally will take King Farmer over King Aragorn any day of theweek, and John Rhys-Davies makes a better Gandalf than Magneto everdid. Only the most un-American terrorist-lover would set a movie in NewZealand when we have the beautiful Pacific Northwest right in ourbackyard. One highlight was Jason Statham's beautiful escape from beinghung by twirling around while hanging from the noose and killing theguy and cutting the rope with one swing of the bad guy's sword (thoughthe ladies in the audience will undoubtedly argue he never reallyescaped from being hung). This movie also puts books firmly back intheir rightful place as the weapons of villains, which was a move thatwas long coming. I can only wait and hope that the next two movies arepicked up to top off the trilogy.

fritzlang 2012-05-05 00:30:55

This was fun! What is with people?

This is my first Uwe Boll film. I have deliberately tried to keep anopen mind on this director until I have actually seen one of his films.It sounds like a lot of people trash his films before they see themjust because it is directed by him. I think that is both insane andunfair.So I really had no idea of what to expect. After a few moments it wasclear that this was a LOTR clone, with an infinitesimally smallerbudget and done in a "B-movie" style. Taken on that level, my wife andI really enjoyed the film.I honestly cannot fathom the hatred for Dr. Boll. The film wascompetently directed, and I found some of the photography breathtaking,the music beautiful, some really cool stunts and fight scenes, andfound at least some of it really suspenseful. Whatever one may feelabout this movie, to say it is done by someone who has NO talent is -in my opinion- a grossly unfair and unreasonable statement.Yes, some of the acting was poor (the mother in particular), but mostof the acting was fine and I took Liotta's role as a hammy-over-the-topperformance that it was meant to be and really enjoyed him chewing upthe scenery. You really can't take his scenes seriously - and I don'tthink they were meant to me.The plot was decent, and made a lot more sense than the NationalTreasure 2 disaster I saw. And the movie experience was infinitely morepleasurable than sitting through any of the Star Wars prequels orMatrix sequels. And those were done by some of the most respecteddirectors by both critics and audiences alike.Personally, I think Dr. Boll was having fun with this film. And if Icould fault him for anything it was to be too ambitious with a modestbudget in a genre that has films like LOTR associated with it. But thatcan be viewed as a complement for a man who obviously is trying tostretch himself as a filmmaker.I understand his other works may be turkeys (I will refrain fromjudgment until I see them for myself), but each film needs to be judgedon it's own merits. Personally I found the Hulk, Matrix Reloaded andPhantom Menace to be real turkeys- so does that mean it's OK to callthose directors 'the worst directors ever to have lived' and sign apetition to have them stop directing? This film struck me as a Saturdaymatinée experience - at 2pm with a bunch of friends and a big bucket ofpopcorn. A "B" movie to be sure, but one of the better ones to me.No, this isn't a great movie, but an enjoyable one if you can let go ofcomparisons and previous comments about the director. When I seereviews start off with "just like any other Boll film, you can expectgarbage.." it makes me wonder how many people really gives his films achance.Count me as a minority of one, but I look forward to seeing more of hisfilms. Certainly more so than another film by Lucas or the Wachowskibrothers.I gave this a 7. If you want to take into consideration all the unfaircrap this director has gotten, I would bump it up to an 8 just to helpeven out the score.

dbborroughs 2012-05-04 13:57:19

Actually this is a pretty good fantasy

In the Name of the King, the latest film from Uwe Boll. Boll thewhipping boy of film fans everywhere continues to make movies despitethe fact that people "hate his films", which they go to even thoughthey hate them. Yes I've disliked a number of his films, House of theDead is one of the worst films ever made; Alone in the Dark ishorrible, but plays better if you come in 25 minutes in and can make upwhat you've missed; and BloodRyne I liked, despite performances thatranged from good to nonexistent because it reminded me of the ItalianFantasy Films of the early 1980's. Boll is back in theaters with one offour films released world wide in 2007. (2007 is a busy year andincluded his boxing, literally, critics who despised his films-he won)The plot of the film has something to do with Jason Statham, a farmergoing off to take revenge after an evil horde invades his town, killshis son and kidnaps his wife. He travels with Ron Perlman and severalother in a quest that leads them into several big battles and to thecastle of the evil wizard Ray Liotta.Watching the film I came to a rather odd conclusion, this is actually apretty good, if very dense little film.The film looks good. the actorsare all pretty much on the same page, the action is nicely staged, andthe story is light years better than most of the direct to video filmsthat were spawned by Lord of the Rings. This plays very much like weare in a real place so is unlike the dress up/ Ren Faire we've beengetting lately (the Dungeons and Dragons films anyone?) I liked thefilm enough to look forward to getting it on DVD and the hunkering downand watching it on a rainy Sunday with my brother.To be certain the film is not perfect. I could see tell at the outsetthat Boll's means of casting (through lots of money out close to thetime they shoot in order to get any actor in need of quick cash to getbigger names then he has a "right" to) was going to be a problem in afew places. First off its going to produce a cast with accents all overthe place, Ray Liotta, Jason Stratham, John Rhys-Davies, LeeleeSobieski and Burt Reynolds are all in different places vocally. Itsalso a problem in that the acting styles clash, with Liotta seeminglyout of place and Reynolds, whom I never ever expected to see in a filmlike this, a bit too knowing.(I won't discuss the hair styles of any ofthem because that would take too long)If the film itself has any problems its that its a long dense haul.Agreat deal happens and is discussed and after a about an hour I didbegin to wear down. I'm sure once this hits DVD or cable it will playbetter where there can be breaks.Boll is growing as a director. He's made a decent little fantasy. Ilook forward to seeing this again, and I'll even go see the threatenedsequel.7 out of 10

phileeguy9 2012-05-02 12:42:14

Longer than Lord of the Rings (well not really, but it felt like it)

I went to see this movie because I needed some time to kill, and atover 2 hours in length, this seemed like a decent candidate. Boy, I waswrong.Like previous reviewers that have posted before me, I would say thatthis movie was "choppy," in that you never are watching one scene/actorfor more than 5 minutes at a time. The back and forth between all thecharacters makes you feel a bit overwhelmed at first, but after a whilewhen you get to grasp the plot it just becomes annoying. It's like theDirector is saying "Okay, now we've got to show you what's going onwith these characters right this second," even if what they're cuttingto is inconsequential.The acting itself is underwhelming, as is the script. The script callsfor the cast to sound noble or poetic at times, but it just comes offas cheesy. The plot was a bit outlandish, but I cannot complain here asI knew it could be as this was a Fantasy. So you'd think that thespecial effects would redeem this as it's a bigAction/Adventure/Fantasy type? Sorry, the monsters didn't look morethan a pile of mud wearing mud colored armor, the battle scenes weren'tanything special, and the magic special effects weren't anything wehaven't seen before with a few twists.Pros: Jason Statham finally shows that a Boomerang can be a deadlyweapon. Much Better than Paul Hogan in Crocodile Dundee. Cons:"Choppy," too long, bad acting, bad script, sub-par effects.

2012-05-02 10:37:10

Really not a good movie

I really enjoy the fantasy genre, both in literature, games and movies. This movie, however, hardly justifies what theaters would charge to see it. I'm not going to beat a dead horse, but wait for this one to show up on TV. There won't be anything to cut out, and you'll have some much-needed commercial time to get away for a couple minutes.In fact, this movie should probably have gone straight-to-SciFi, so Joel McHale could use it for material on The Soup.I gave it three stars because though it was no LoTR epic, it wasn't the complete trash others have described it as. You just have to set your expectations before watching it. Then manage your expectations and resist the temptation to fast forward just to get through it faster.If you subscribe to a movie rental service and are looking for something to watch before another good movie is released, and you're even mildly into this genre, go for it. I'll pass the afternoon just fine.

2012-04-28 21:40:40

WHAT IN THE WORLD???

Yes, this one is really, really bad. Uwe Boll has developed something of a garbage can reputation in recent years, and turkeys like this aren't going to get him out of the dog house with many fans. The plot: an evil sorcerer has raised a bestial army and is working with a traitor in the King's court to conquer the land. But when he steps on the innocent family of a farmer named...well, Farmer...he makes an enemy more dangerous than anybody could have foreseen. Can Farmer and some newfound allies (the King's wizard, his somewhat precocious daughter, a clan of female tree sprites) put an end to the evil uprising before all is lost?It sounds generally Tolkien-esque, but please don't even go there. This might have made a good movie if certain things had been handled properly, but poor writing, direction, and questionable casting doom this picture from the get-go.Mind you, I don't uniformly hate all of Uwe Boll's pictures. Boll has his faults, but he can also sometimes capture some very unique shots that bring a fresh perspective to movie action and suspense. Alas, IN THE NAME OF THE KING deserves all the negative reviews it got. There are so many things gone wrong in this movie I'm not sure where to even start. The dialogue is often laughable, sometimes painful. The action is usually poorly choreographed so that what should be exciting is instead simply boring. There are a few asides concerning war and its cruelty but certainly never anything thought-provoking, just trite. And the aforementioned cast...just look at all the great actors in this one: Jason Statham as Farmer, Ray Liotta, Leelee Sobieski, John Rhys-Davies, Ron Perlman, Kristianna Loken, Matthew Lillard, Brian J. White, Burt Reynolds...but it's all for naught. Whether it's just the poor script or the director's inability to motivate his actors or both, the fact is most of the performances are way below par. Statham is the star, and certainly an adept action performer, but his character is too stupid to stand a chance. His fight scenes are way over the top, even by the standards of fantasy/action. How does a farmer learn what amounts to medieval kung-fu out in the sticks? He never wears armor, carries pedestrian weapons, and has no formal training in combat whatsoever--and yet he's a worldbeater. Ray Liotta is usually a can't-miss prospect as anybody's bad guy, but he comes off as a poor caricature of himself in this one with some of the film's very worst lines. There are a few plusses, though not many. The set design and special effects are of good quality, so that at least everything looks nice and suitably medieval. The music is pretty good and helps set the right tone. Every now and then there's a neat stunt or action scene, and the magical climax is visually impressive. That's about it.I have seen worse movies, and I can't say I regret renting IN THE NAME OF THE KING because it's one of the film's that's so bad it's kind of fun. The thing is, with a fairly large budget and so many talented performers involved, this should have been a really good movie. Well, maybe...but it's not.

nwestwood1 2012-04-28 13:33:46

Superb for the wrong reasons

My god a over plastic Ray Liotta giving hammy overacting a newdefinition with his broad New Jersey acting as an evil wizard/sorcerer???. Burt Reynolds as a king?? He looks so bored, his hairpiece wasmore awake. Matther Liilard was basically being an obnoxious version ofhis Shaggy role. As for Jason Statham he looks he came straight off theset of Crank, as much as I find the guy superb- low rent sword &sorcery is not his forte!! Still without miscasts from hell- this isentertaining and enjoyable. Just get very drunk- while viewing it! I'veheard this director is infamous for making appalling video gameadaptations- it's true.

jonnyreggay1 2012-04-27 10:48:17

This film is at least a 6!

I really don't know how people can be so harsh. The movie isentertaining, and good fun for most of it. Nearly all of the actors init are good, and well known. The CGI is very impressive and i wassurprised. The fight scenes are good and fun to watch. I actuallyenjoyed it.Things that let it down are: 1) Matthew Lillard is a joke - he reallycant act, and makes you cringe when he speaks its so bad. 2) A terriblemusic score - people talk about how music can make a movie - imagineJaws without the theme, and Halloween without the tense music!! Wellthe music is so bad in this film it spoils it. I wonder how well itwould have done with Hans Zimmer or the late John Williams behind themusic 3) Nothing particularly new in the story, very similar to partsof LOTR and EragonOverall i liked it, and people who gave it such bad scores must not beinto this sort of genre, or are being too picky, as its an enjoyablemovie to watch.

bboyfarii 2012-04-27 02:10:10

Not good, but you may watch it

Well, as always, I must first say that I rented the DVD, and watched iton a CRT TV of 29'.The movie is as almost all reviews says, I'm sorry. At most times it islaughable and hilarious. I must say I liked the idea of the movieduring its first half, but then on the second half, it becomes verybad. Dialogues are at moments stupid and at others somewhat acceptable.Fight scenes are really bad, they are constantly cut and completelyboring. Some other details about costumes and the world might be bad,but they were acceptable. But then, on the second half there are somethings that you say... WTF. On the final battle there were NINJAS. Noone knows where they come from, just appeared there and started to dosome flic flacs and killing people. The tarzan girls from the treesjumping everywhere throwing tree's vines. The krugs seemed like thebreed from an orc and a monkey. And Gallian really fails at being theevil mage of the movie. There are many fails about this movie, somemakes you laugh, others makes you cry. Either way, if you have nothingto do, and just wanna see a movie to pass time by, it is acceptable.Otherwise, don't watch it.

synapsamov 2012-04-24 23:40:07

This movie sucks badly

Compared with this movie Lord of the Rings is a masterpiece. "In thename of …", it is a bad copy of Lord of the rings, Matrix and Blade.The acting of Burt Reynolds in king's role sucks as always. Reynoldsremains a sex-symbol of 60's and 70's without acting skills. RayLiotta, the evil character in this movie, it plays Matrix fight alikescenes with a fat belly. Jason Statham, the good character was good inThe Transporter but not in this so called epic story. I never saw abald medieval hero. About monsters costumes: even in the 50's themonster costumes were better. The movie ends abrupt. Never in my life,I felt so good when a movie ended. Bad script, bad director, badcostumes. From time to time we have to see a bad movie if we want totruly appreciate a good one.Conclusion: dump this movie to the garbagecan.

marquis2100-1 2012-04-24 13:00:15

Far better than the biased reviews suggest

I don't know anything about Uwe Boll. Never seen a film of his exceptthis one - and therefore don't have any prejudices that seem to aboundin these reviews. I simply saw this film without expectations orpreconceived ideas.In all, it is a very good B movie. Very entertaining with above-pareffects and good production values. As with all B movies, it suffers insome areas, notably in dialogue. However there were some nicesurprises, as Jason Statham and Ron Perlman delivered well and notablyBurt Reynolds was actually convincing and not contrived in the role asthe king.If you're looking for good escapist fare, but not expecting the Lord ofthe Rings, this movie will satisfy.

2012-04-23 00:07:44

Worse Than The Power Rangers Movie

I am not going to waste my time writing a long review. However, at first glance of the "monsters" in this flick, you will think you are watching a very cheap Mighty Morphin Power Rangers type kiddie-show. Turn off the tape...and back away quickly! Stratham is one of my personal favorites....but he sure does have a few stinkers! If you are a fan of Stratham - check out The Bankjob! It is stellar!

aernest 2012-04-22 06:34:54

How does Uwe DO it!?!?!

Everyone keeps asking how Boll gets such good actors -MONEY. These areworking actors - Ron Perlman openly admitted he's just trying to gethis kids through school.Dear lord, does this movie stink. The worst thing IS the casting.Individually, all of these actors have their strengths. Liotta andStatham are superb in modern urban situations. But as, respectively, anevil wizard and a medieval FARMER!?! Really? I thought Liotta was gonnapop an aorta, he was EMOTING so hard. Burt Reynolds should never playanything but versions of his own wisecracking self, and he is cast as aking - a medieval king. Experienced character actors like Perlman andRhys-Davies come off the best, because they can play anyone in any timeperiod. But still, given the execrable script, even they manage to suckat times. I've never seen such tone-deaf casting and writing in mylife, and remember, I've seen Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus. If youvalue your time and your sanity, stay FAR away from his movie. Me, I'mjust glad to help my man Ron's kids get through school.