I just watched this last night and wow, the middle and end were okay, but the beggining was all over the place, my brother thought it was terrible and I sympathised with him, then I saw the end credits, directed and produced by none other than the legendary Uwe Boll. Big surprise on this movie's quality. Anyhoo, to my knowledge this is first Boll picture I've ever seen, and besides the beggining it was allright.
Boll isn't the terrible director people make him out to be. He's just a bad to mediocre one, but who does everything to get his films noticed, and manages to p**s off rabid gamers in the process. Kudos to him.
Can't wait til Postal gets released, bet it'll be his best one and possibly even good.
The biggest reason Boll is considered the worst is that most theater goers haven't seen some of the utterly abysmal movies like the ones reviewed on this site. Really, Boll is mediocre compared to some of them.
The only thing I don't like about him is his pretentious attitude, calling himself a genius like it's common knowledge, and then throwing out other movies as being horrible when they have nothing to do with his, or even with the topic at hand.
I think that he got a lot of flak for "Zombie Island Rave Massacre" - oops, I mean "House of the Dead" - and "BloodRayne." Gamers tend to be quite protective of beloved games, and it seems that in both cases Boll could have cared less about the game. He just wanted the audience its name could guarentee.
A review for "House of the Dead" is coming to the site this summer or early fall, and I was not terribly kind. Of course, a bunch of (extremely stupid) ravers going all Matrix gun-fu on hundreds of horrible hopping zombies does not a movie make.
It's on par with many of the sequels of Friday the 13, Halloween and Nightmare on Elm Street in my book. Not very good, in fact rather bad... but still nowhere near the worst movies ever made. It's also completely hilarious.
Is Uwe Boll really that pretentious, or perhaps it's all a clever marketing tool...
http://kotaku.com/5011019/uwe-boll-gets-serious (http://kotaku.com/5011019/uwe-boll-gets-serious)
In The Name of the King was kind of bad, but watchable. Some of the worst casting ever with Ray Liotta - his jacket is one of the most obnoxious anachronisms I've ever seen in a film.
Probably the one actor who seems to be having a good time and really pulls off his role is John Rhys-Davies. He also looks great for a man past 60, and he's lost a TON of weight it seems.
Jason Statham was also OK, but just his usual self.
The fight scenes are surprisingly competently choreographed and shot.
Worth a watch, though I wouldn't pay a full rental fee for it.
Quote from: Jim H on June 02, 2008, 03:52:47 AM
his jacket is one of the most obnoxious anachronisms I've ever seen in a film.
Got that right, I don't think they made that kind of clothing in medieval times, even in some sort of magical world where people turn into a powder that goes through walls.
Didn't Uwe state prior to the this one's release that there was going to be a director's cut DVD reinstating something like 45 minutes of footage at some point?
Wouldn't surprise me...at some point I remember herr Doktor saying that the film would be around three hours long. Then again, being a Boll film...would they even blow the money on a DC release?
Perhaps a Uwe Boll's and In The Name of The King's website only release
SUpposedly he made a new cut of Alone in the dark a while ago where he completly cuts out Tara Reid, but doubt that had much bigger of a release than the option above.