Genres

Visitors Review

2013-06-18 03:13:46

"This movie is so unbelievably bad that I have to break it down into parts for this review. "

It's more entertaining then a blank screen.Seemed interesting at start with the special effects. You lost me at "lizard" people in 1970s costumes.Excessively cliche.Good story though. Good cast. Cool ideas. I really wanted to like this money and that i was awesome in the first few minutes.Shame on the producer. He had good talent (cast), idea, money... wtf?

destruct-1 2013-06-17 13:12:36

worst movie I've seen in 10 years

wow, just wow. I expected it to be bad and it blew away my expectation.I was ready to enjoy it, for it's campy LOTR rip off that it was. Iblame the director 100% good actors delivering their worstperformances. Damn, so so terrible it's at least so bad that it's atrain wreck, if only it weren't a 45 minute too long train wreck.There were thing thrown in there for the sack of why not, such as inmedieval times, they through in ninjas randomly, it makes no sense andthey don't advance the plot at all. The mindless enemy had war machineslike catapults but the smart humans have nothing but foot soldiers noteven cavalry. It's called dungeon siege but there is no siege on adungeon that name is only from a video game of little relevance to themovie.

jukeboxhero2 2013-06-16 20:22:04

WHY this movie was awful.... Never again.

I must be a glutton for punishment, but I decided to see this moviebecause with the trailer, it looked like it might have some potential.I have seen only two previous Uwe Bowe films and they were horrible....I didn't have any high expectations, but I was just hoping this onewould be different. Never again.If I were to repeat what a previous reviewer mentioned ... how does heget such fantastic actors to do his movies? Don't these actors knowthat his movies are terrible? This definitely proves the fact that agood director is ESSENTIAL to a good movie. And that even great actorscannot shine when there is a horrible direction ...I see a lot of posts where people just say that a movie was awful andthat Bowe is an horrible director, but don't explain why....I'm not a professional director or anything, but I just want to know ifBowe understands that shooting a scene requires perhaps ... a point,and like, maybe something to be accomplished. This can't be done whenthe each scene is about 30 seconds long. And just ENDS abruptly - likewith a question that doesn't get answered. Slow things down a bit…. Andmaybe EXPLAIN some things.Even with the completely ridiculous dialogue in this movie, characterdevelopment is very important in a plot - and when an audience is justtaken on a whirlwind of different shots that don't linger long enoughto fulfill any depth, then we are left with a very confusing and flatstoryline. Seriously, is this a movie … or a music video??? There aremore cuts in this movie than an international hair show. Obviously Boweis very sloppy, lazy and doesn't spend the time to make anystoryboards… I'm sure if he did Greenpeace would be on his ass, causethat'd be a waste of a LOT of paper ....Scenes are also cut in between each other quite frequently. At which itmakes things utterly bewildering and a complete mess. Especially whenyou are inter-cutting a quiet dinner scene with a fight scene. Somereally good directors can do it – but there has to be a connectionbetween the scenes. Otherwise it is just idiotic. Remember the scene in***Spoiler for LOTR: Return of the King*** when Pippin is singing toDenethor and they cut between his song and the battle. That is the signof a good director. It was done with a reason and is incrediblypowerful to the film. I know it ludicrous to compare the two, but justto make my point that there must be some purpose for inter-cuttingscenes.In addition, EVERYTHING is scored. Music adds a lot to film, but it isnot necessary at every possible second in the movie. A good director isable to incorporate the score and with it, add emotion to a scenewithout the audience even noticing it. The score in this movie was sooverdrawn that it was annoying... in fact it helped to incorporate andeadly element of cheesy melodrama....It's quite obvious that Bowe is attempting to shadow the Lord of theRings trilogy as he quite blatantly steals many components of thefilms. However, comparing him to Peter Jackson... well ...I can't evenwrite both their names in the same sentence.This movie had tremendous potential. But adding Bowe into it is likedropping some fish sauce into your Lemon Meringue Pie.Don't waste money on this movie. I couldn't even finish it. It'sterrible. And these are reasons why I believe so.

fireblaze747 2013-06-16 05:51:47

A waste of 120mins of my life!

Well I guess I should have looked up this director (Uwe Boll) for moreinformation about his work. This movie was god awful. Being a fan ofJason Statham, I was quite compelled to buy this movie. But it was justa waste of money. This movie has just been a waste of money and onactors such as Statham, its going to look very bad on their portfolio.This movie has no character development whatsoever and there has beentoo much information squeezed into 127 minutes. And who ever heard ofnaming a farmer "FARMER".Overall in my opinion this is a very bad movie.I would not recommend this movie to anyone to watch even as a lastresort.

Michelle6175 2013-06-14 04:01:20

In the Name of the King REAL Review

First of all, I love Jason Statham and am a small fan of the Lord OfThe Rings movies and books. I rented this movie because of that.I have to admit that I was extremely disappointed on many levels. RayLiotta...OMG. I have a Blu-ray and it doesn't do him any favors. Andplease explain the Liberace ensemble? Boo to casting and wardrobe.Secondly, Leelee...should stick to independent films. She is the mostboring actress and completely manly.Then...the guy that plays Bastian looks like his next gig is the WWE.Tarish...the black army commander...well...the guy is nice to look at(loved him in The Family Stone) but during the speech on the edge ofbattle, he completely lost his fake British accent and sounded like wasdoing a VERY bad impression of the great Martin Luther King, Jr.And they casted SHAGGY!!!!! How the hell do you use the same actor fromScooby Doo and pick him above all the others that auditioned? BurtReynolds...another bad casting choice. He looked like he has had someMAJOR work and didn't quit while he was ahead. He also looked like hewas in a spoof movie...almost like he belonged in another Mel BrooksHistory of the World Movie.And for every woman out there that loves Jason Statham...where was thegratuitous no-shirt scene?? His manager should be fired for EVERagreeing to this mess of a movie. Thank god Death Race rocked.So, all in all, this movie sucked. I will never get back the two hoursand 7 minutes and I hope this review helps you.

MightyNeonFraa 2013-06-13 16:44:32

Absolute trash.

I just went to check out this movie tonight. I had never seen a movieby Uwe Boll prior to this and, honestly, had barely even heard of himexcept maybe in passing but certainly not enough to have anpreconceptions about his work.That said, this movie was definitely one of the top ten worst filmsI've ever seen in my 22 years of life. No, scratch that... top five.The dialog is awful, the writing is boring, the action scenes are jerkyand stupid and the characters are one-dimensional and phenomenallyuninteresting. This movie's got it all: the humble farmer who justwants to be left alone, the noble king who knows about seaweed and avillain who seems to have picked up his "bad guy speak" by followingSkeletor around and taking notes.So, with storytelling and writing in general being somewhere betweenincomprehensible and grating let's look at the fight scenes. Thechoreography was bad, the same shots were used over and over again andI got the impression that nobody working on the movie knew how toactually USE a sword (you do not fight with a longsword like you wouldwith a rapier, you simply do not), nor did they have any comprehensionon battlefield tactics. A few gems including why the Krugs are bringingsiege engines to a battle in a forest and exactly where the human armytraveling on foot with no wagons or ships managed to acquire bouldershuge enough to roll down a hill and crush the enemy.So... pretty much this is the first and last Uwe Boll movie I'll eversee, there is nothing good in this film and I wouldn't recommend it toanyone at anytime. Even if you ABSOLUTELY MUST rid yourself of eightdollars you'll have more fun converting it into pennies, putting it ina bag and tossing it off a bridge to watch the splash.

juliadinct 2013-06-12 21:49:08

I rarely walk on out movies...

but unfortunately this was one of the rare ones. I love epic fantasy,but this movie relates to LOTR and Gladiator as a bottle rocket relatesto the Starship Enterprise, and to mention them in the same breath is amonumental insult to those fine films. I really wanted to like it,honestly. I love Jason Statham and Ron Perlman, and the rest of thecast (yes, even Burt Reynolds, who didn't deserve the audience'sderisive laughter every time he appeared) were fine, although RayLiotta was comically miscast and mis-costumed as Liberace. The BritishColumbia scenery was nice. The storyline, scriptwriting and editing,however, were absolutely abysmal. Just awful. The attempts atmid-battle banter were incredibly inept - they actually stop fightingto say things like "What took you so long?" and "They don't scareeasily!". Jason Statham fights off big monsters who are armed withbroadswords with what looks like a flimsy machete, while Ron Perlmanuses a pickaxe(!). The opening scenes are amazingly clumsy, they justdump you randomly into the story with no preamble. And I am so tired ofthe overused Chinese martial arts film cliché of showing the audience aplain shot of mysterious badguys who suddenly aren't there as soon asthe movie characters look - it's so cheaply manipulative. Lame,predictable line follows lame predictable line. When John Rhys-Daviescomes to the bedside of the (unbeknownst to him) just-poisoned king(Burt Reynolds) I said to myself "If he says "The king has beenpoisoned!" I'm outta here... and guess what he said?

2013-06-12 19:55:11

I... I... I got nothin'

the film sums itself up perfectly with the closing credit, which reads: An Uwe Boll Film. $60 million budget and they couldn't even get that right?

2013-06-12 11:10:43

La Mejor Puteria

la mejor pelicula del momento y yo la recomiendo como nuna e recomendado otra pelicula viva la familia

2013-06-11 21:42:19

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?

kersus 2013-06-11 12:04:13

Fantasy Classic.

Jason Statham was a little bit of a fish out of water but held his ownand the rest of the cast was brilliant (and I mean brilliant!). Thiswas an excellent film that will be a staple of any fantasy moviecollection. It was marred by some of the combat related effects(crouching tiger, hidden dragon crap - but it's only a few scenes) anda couple odds and ends barely worth mentioning (mostly post-productionthings like awkward scene changes that many won't even notice). Whilenot campy like 'House of the Dead' Uwe Boll (director) has provedhimself to be someone to watch for. This is a must buy for me, and Iwould check out anything with Boll's name on it now. Too many people expected just another Statham action movie and othersdidn't go because they couldn't believe Statham in fantasy but wherethe former is simply a misplaced audience (and cranky about it), thelatter has really missed out on an incredible fantasy movie.

2013-06-10 15:43:46

Could've Been Fun

This could've been good, cheesy fun. Most of the cast is good. Jason Statham is a good hero type, and John Rhys-Davies gives the film a touch of class. The script is pretty bad, and the plot makes little sense. Those aren't deal-breakers for a lightweight sword and sorcery film. But, as said by several others, Burt Reynolds and Ray Liotta are horrendously mis-cast and are huge distractions. Liotta especially is so bad that i cringed with every line. And did anyone else notice that the music during the king's dramatic death scene is "It's a Small World"??

kamikaze008 2013-06-09 21:30:19

Best garbage

Wow Uwe Boll made his best film yet! Still a load of crap but he'sgetting less badder! I don't know how he does it but why would anybodywant to be in his films? Watch this for 2 reasons only. The effects arenot bad and Jason Statham is fine as a guy who says nothing and runsaround killing things. Don't watch this film for 2 reasons only. BURTRENOLDS and RAY LIOTA. They cannot act AT ALL! I could have done abetter job....YOU could have done a better job...My dog would have beenbetter. This film is like hearing about a good movie that somebody sawthat was then ripped off and shot in my backyard by toddlers. Mycomments are short cause thats all I remember from this film.

2013-06-09 13:04:36

sometimes imitation is NOT very flattering...

This movie is such a stinker, I haven't even made it to the end, because it's such a poor attempt at Lord of the Rings grandeur. Why it fails miserably: uber-predictable setup of a placid, family 'farmer', who it turns out can whip bad guys like nobody's business, which he gets to do , not 10 minutes into the movie, for no explainable reason (other than you KNEW it was coming)...Ray Liotta is unintentionally hilarious as the bad guy, he come's across as 'goodfella/scorcerer' with his exasperated rants. The hyper-cheesey bad guys look like they're in costumes rejected from LOTR. The ridiculously over-dramatic music was so cheesey , it actually DETRACTS from some scenes. The entire affair looks, feels, sounds and flows like an amateurish production by a 1st timer,who borrowed and lifted ideas shamelessly from films of this genre, most obviously LOTR. The there's the bizarre, sepia toned look to the movie...you'll want to constantly adjust your color, maybe they were going for a 'period effect' , but it doesn't work. I hope the video game is more entertaining than this stinker of a movie!

R C 2013-06-09 05:04:18

Why all the hate ?

I enjoyed this very much, I don't understand all the one stars I reallydon't. Jason provided action in a genre where we usually lose out. I amnot sure what all you 1 star people were hoping for. Yes the characterscould have been more developed. However that is difficult to do unlessyou are going to put it into an already known genre/realm (lotr) andspend a lot of money and over three films on it. Précis I enjoyed it,you haters need to chill out. As far as I am concerned anything thatentertains me is a win, I find myself entertained. To let you knowwhere I stand, Eragon (as a recent reviewer mentioned) was notentertaining, like sticking every good book I had read and putting itin a blender.

devilishshewolf69 2013-06-08 13:39:09

Not great but good

I actually liked this movie. It wasn't the greatest I've seen but itwas good. I think it could have been better had they spent more time onthe actual story as to the war scenes though. I was very surprised tosee Burt Reynolds in it, but then again he hasn't done a lot lately,let alone done anything good. His character in this film was betterthan the Dukes of Hazzard role. I didn't really like Matthew Lillard'scharacter either. He is a good actor but this was to be a more seriousrole as opposed to his comedy roles and it just didn't work for me. Ilove Ray Liotta and Jason Statham and those two alone would have beenworth the price of admission, thankfully I won two tickets to see it.It's a slow moving, have to pat attention plot but it was good.

Brian Fergus 2013-06-07 16:04:55

very good

This is an excellent movie. I'm my book rates as one of the bestfantasy movies ever. The cinematography is excellent! You truly have toappreciate artistic films to enjoys this! Do not listen to the poor reviews. See this movie and you will probablynot regret it. The scenery was excellent, I really enjoy a wellchoreographed movie with a artistic flow such as. The effects weregreat and the colors were as well.My only beef was that some of the acting was a little lacking, also thelack of a consistent accents is an issue. The other thing is castingBert Reynolds as a main actor in anything is a mistake especially aepic movie. The main villain is also a annoying actor that could havebeen played by someone else.

Enchorde 2013-06-07 04:44:02

Thin at best

Recap: Seemingly without cause the wild krug beasts suddenly organizeand arm themselves and start attacking the towns and farms of Ehb. Soonmost of the country is set aflame. Behind it all is an evil magus andDuke Fallow, who wants the throne. In the midst of it all is Farmer. Asimple farmer whose kid was killed in an attack and now his wife ismissing. And her fate is tied together with the fate of the kingdom.Comments: This is thin, at best. The story is sketchy and thinner thancrust, some cuts jumps in place and time and adds to the confusion.Also the characters, as the story, are thin. There is no depth, nohistory, no real motivation for anything. And with no depth orcharacter to build upon, the acting is poor.And it is a shame, because the cast is actually quite good. JasonStatham has proved himself solid in action movies and manages theaction well here. Rhys-Davies and Perlman is good veterans, as isForlani. Loken seem to appear in many of Boll's movies, but is givenvery little screen time, which is a shame because she handles thesetypes of movies well. And then there is Burt Reynolds, Matthew Lillardand Ray Liotta. It's a big cast, full of actors and actresses that haveshown to do well before. But their characters are so thin, so sketchy,so devoid of any complex feelings they have little to work with.What saves it for me, and by saves it I means I give it an averagerating, is the genre. I really like fantasy movies. Swordplay andmagic, and there is a lot of it. Nothing spectacular, though some cgieffects are quite nice, but enough to make up for some of the basicsthat is lacking.It is unfortunate that this type of movies doesn't get better materialand effort to work with, and I sincerely hope that Boll doesn't own therights to the brand. Hopefully someone else can make a better effort.5/10

2013-06-05 16:10:39

In the Name of the King - A Dungeon Siege Tale

This movie had great actors in it, the story was a little rushed but exciting none the less. If you can see it for free and have an hour to kill, go nuts; but dont go out of your way to watch.

2013-06-04 23:42:08

great

This review is from: In the Name of the King - A Dungeon Siege Tale (DVD) Though it's not LOTR it is a good movie.....Jason does a sexy job as the hero, don't know the actress that plays his wife does a lousey crying scene for the most part shes okay. The actor who plays the selfish Duke Fallow has the most expressive face, I loved watching him. Burt Reynolds is Burt Reynolds though I'm not a fan he did his job well. Rhys-Davies is great whether as Magas or Gimli (LOTR). And I enjoyed LeeLee S, and Ray Liotta and don't know the guys name but he's the kings right hand man Tarish. Watch the movie it's good..................ss