Wow. That was the first word that came to mind after sitting through this ďmovieĒ. I have so many questions as to how this film got made and how someone with actual filmmaking experience could make such a poor film. Iíll refrain from personally insulting Mr. Boll by calling him names like ďtalentless hackĒ, but I have literally seen better directed movies on Youtube.
So lets take a look at what was bad in the film. First, thereís the dialogue. Granted, thatís not all Mr. Bollís fault, but there were some deliveries of lines that made you scratch your head. The lines were so obviously bad that everyone watching it could tell. Surely they had to have noticed when reviewing their dailies. Second, the ďspecialĒ effects were just plain embarrassing. There comes a point where you have to accept you either donít have the budget or skill to create an army of monsters. They would have done much better with regular guys dressed in armor than some of the creatures they tried to get by with.
Have you ever seen a Civil War re-enactment where not everyone is into it? You have half the people that are obsessed with every last detail and the other half is wearing Timex watches and Nike shoes. Thatís kind of what this movie felt like, except without the half that was into it. It really looked like they took these actors off the street and half-heartedly threw a costume on them.
I could go on all day about how awful Uwe Boll is and how he should never be allowed to make another film. But everyone from the screenwriter to the set designer is to blame for the disaster that is IN THE NAME OF THE KING, including anyone who paid money to see it. After a very long 2 hours, consider me among the many who find Uwe Bollís directing ability down right laughable.
Deleted/Extended Scenes (9:34): There are only three scenes, but two of them contain extended fight sequences. Yes theyíre bad, but at least itís not more dialogue.
There are also some Previews