Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Let me explain: I live under a rock and I'm very happy there. When I walk into a DVD shop, half the titles are unfamiliar to me. I haven't watched TV in the last 12 years (highly recommended course of action, btw)! I do, however, enjoy films a great deal, and I couldn't help noticing that the name Uwe Boll seems to have the words Utter Crap attached to it more often than not. Long story short, I saw In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale in my local DVD store. Bad movies are a kind of delicacy for me, so I'm curious... how bad can it be?

Sure, go ahead and watch it if you're feeling masochistic. Just remember, what has been seen cannot be unseen.

I was sent Dungeon Siege as a 'gift', the guy who sent it to me got a batch second hand and passed me the films from genres he didnt want, fantasy included.

I am yet to let him live it down.

Anyway I watched it, and it is dire. Best thing to do is watch it on your computer in window mode while doing something else. This way you are not wasting your time. I do suggerst watching it though now you have got it, Uwe Boll is an experience, the negative that helps you appreciate the positive.

You want a comparison of an Uwe Boll movie?

Punch yourself in the balls for two hours.

That's about the same as watching his crap.

Kanluwen wrote:You want a comparison of an Uwe Boll movie?

Punch yourself in the balls for two hours.

That's about the same as watching his crap.

Nonono that is to pleasent, punch yourself in the balls for two hours, while showing a cucumber up in your nr 2, while a crazed mecican guy in drag gear folgs you with barbed wire. Not that is how bad he is

I love a bad movie, but I've found Uwe Boll movies boring. They're not like sci-fi originals or the kind of stuff you see MST 3000, where someone with a real love but absolutely no talent and production lovingly crafts a crap movie. Boll is a guy with no talent that doesn't care, he's happy to make generic genre crap and take his paycheck. I think the only reason he's gotten any fame is because he made films based loosely on video games.

Dungeon Siege has Ray Liotta in a bathrobe looking quite embaressed and a whole lot of other famous people who were happy to take a paycheck, but there really isn't much else going on.

What I find strange about Name of the King is that Uwe Boll had the resources and raw materials to make a very good film, it was very hard to make it as bad as he did allowing for what he had.

I saw Jason Statham, when I saw the headlines for it.


It was to late when I found out it was directed by uwe.... He had a great cast, and RUINED the movie SO bad.

I think I just threw up in my mouth....

After you guys hyped it up by punching yourselves in your scrotums, I couldn't stand the anticipation anymore. Saw it last night, here's the review:

IN THE NAME OF THE KING: A DUNGEON SIEGE TALE
An Uwe Boll film

Uwe Boll makes movies that are great because of their unintended consequences. You laugh, but you're not meant to. You cry, but not from sentiment. It's like a David Lynch movie without the perversity, and actually pleasant. Boll is spectacularly inept at everything related to film-making, but he is also one of the few cinematic punks, someone with a sense of self-confidence born not from technical skill but from a overwhelming love for his chosen field. Boll is like the enthusiastic, rich old lady who fancies herself an opera singer, and gets away with it because she can afford to book Carnegie Hall. What the vast majority of her audience will miss, however, is the carnival spectacle of her performance. Her confidence in her ineptitude becomes her saving grace, and so it is with In the Name of the King.
It opens with a scene of so audaciously confusing it feels like an outtake from a David Lynch movie. Multiple perplexing jump cuts ensue. We suddenly (and I mean suddenly - the movie's timing is abrupt to say the least) end up in a farmer's field with Jason Statham, a tremendously straight-faced British actor whose serious treatment of his role contrasts nicely with the nature of the film he's in. Casting Dolph Lundgren in Scary Movie would have had the same effect. Statham's character, by the way, is called Farmer. After losing Child and seeing Wife kidnapped, Farmer sets out with Sidekick and Other Sidekick on a quest to... ah, who gives a s##t. They end up in a forest surrounded by lesbian tree women who descend from vines in slow motion.
Burt Reynolds makes a typical appearance, playing King. Reynolds, and actor who perpetually looks like your drunk grandfather no matter what the make-up people do to him, has the distiction of delivering the movie's finest performance. Watch the death bed scene, I beg you. Describing it would be pointless. He is seconded by Traitorous Nephew, an actor who should choose to hide himself from public view for a while. How he could have been allowed to ham it up as badly as he does is unclear, but it is possible that Boll took pity on him after seeing him sniff coke in the men's room of a gas station.
Rounding out the vibrant cast are Psycho Evil Guy (Ray Liotta, scaring 9 year old boys everywhere) and... spinning tree ninjas. Yes, that last part needs to be seen to be appreciated. With these fundamentals in place, the structure proceeds to fall apart in such a spectacular way that, in my opinion, the viewer gets his or her money back regardless. Some highlights: the aforementioned deathbed scene, the "inspirational" pre-battle speeches and... spinning monkey ninjas. But there are also many others. Really, the movie is a horn of plenty. Blow it, and as regards Boll: long live the king!

Are you a film critic as a profession? Because that was really nicely written lol. But I still hate anything the man touches. I agree with the testicle slapping, its just that bad, ALWAYS

Think of Kevin Kostner forgetting to do an english accent in robin hood, then times that by infinity +2, and that's how bad the acting is.

Just remember, the 2 hours spent watching this movie are 2 hours of your life that you will never, ever get back, even if wormholes were real.

I haven't seen anyone mention it, but in past few years, they've actually released a NEW version of House of the dead with previously deleted scenes put back in.



Notice that they're marketing this version as the "Funny Version". The back even mentions about how the movie was unintentionally funny because of how bad it was and that the new scenes make it even more so.

I thought that all of his movies were intended to be deleted scenes. I guess thats just wishful thinking.