Movie Review: In The Name Of The King

Good Lord, what was I thinking? I've been buying movies for a while now, and only once or twice do I consider that I've been had. The first time was when I found the Bourne Identity for dirt cheap, bought the DVD, and realized once I got it home that it was a full screen edition as opposed to the wide screen editions I prefer. I know that's not much of a difference, but I really dislike full screen aspect ratios as it does not match what the director saw when he or she filmed the movie. The other time I feel that I was suckered was when I purchased a Superbit edition of the Fifth Element; I was lured by the idea of a very high resolution version of what I considered a great movie. Well, the movie quality is exactly the same as any other DVD of the same film I've seen, except that it only contains the movie, nothing else. I've come to expect a few extras with the DVDs I purchase, and in many cases, these extras have provided just as much entertainment as the original material itself. The official explanation is that these features are removed in order to make space for the main feature at a higher bit rate. Right.

So yesterday, as I was going through the bin of DVDs on sale at the store, browsing through such great movies as The Abyss, The Green Mile, and yes, even Commando (I know it's not really a great movie, but it is funny, and entertaining at the very least!), I saw In The Name Of The King, with Jason Statham, and I thought, why not? I mean, although Statham is not exactly an Oscar winner, he's been in some pretty decent action movies, like the Transporter series, Crank, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch. So I thought, at the very least, there will be some decent action scenes, and for the price of five dollars, how could I lose? I even went as far as to read the summary in the back: family man, wife kidnapped, boy killed, evil wizard, evil army, rescue, revenge, etc... Sounds like a decent fantasy-type story to me, and being a fan of fantasy stories, I thought the deal sounded good. And so I return home, happy as a clam with my purchases.

My wife and I decided that we would watch this movie yesterday evening. The movie starts, and for the first minute, it looks pretty convincing. Nice scenery, medieval-type architecture, father farmer tending to his crops with his son. The wife comes out of the quaint little farmhouse, and that's when I start wondering. She is quite attractive, and practically wearing makeup! Well, it's a fantasy story, I tell myself, it doesn't have to be historically accurate. Then they begin to speak, and I wonder about the dialogue within the first several sentences. Who wrote this drivel? Well, a movie can't be perfect, so we continue watching.

All I can tell you is that around the halfway mark, my wife got up and returned to browsing the Web, and I just, well, dozed off. I can't begin to tell you how utterly dreadful this movie is; the dialogue is terrible, and at some points, I get the impression the actors are looking at each other and really wondering what the hell they are doing here? The plot is convoluted, and twists and turns at all of the wrong moments. It's like someone decided to do Lord Of The Rings in two and a half hours, with one tenth the budget, and the Coles Notes to the book. I picked up the DVD case from the living room table and looked at the director. In the fraction of a second before I looked at the back of the case, I wondered about some of the worst directors I've ever experienced, and one name stood out, Uwe Boll. Then I saw the movie's director: Uwe Boll. I just laughed. At least I can say one thing about him, he is consistent. I can now safely say that yes, ALL of his movies are absolutely terrible, just complete rubbish. It's not that he doesn't know about the technical aspects of movie making. But he just can't tell a story.

I've been trying to come up with a way to describe how bad the storytelling is, but words fail me. I read up a bit on Boll, trying to figure out how he had managed to get people to put up money for him to make movies, and I discovered some interesting facts about the German entertainment industry. Apparently, due to some interesting tax incentives, it makes sense to invest in a movie made by a German company. Any money invested becomes 100% deductable, and taxes will only be garnished on any profit the movie makes. If the movie loses money, the loss becomes useful tax wise, and since the investment had been deducted beforehand, any profit losses can still turn out to be advantageous. Wow.

Under no circumstance should you even see this movie. I paid five dollars for it, and I now realize that I would gladly pay ten dollars to get rid of it. Good Lord man, Boll, what's wrong with you? Did you actually watch this movie and think: yes, I'm proud of this work, I'm sure people will like it? Do you do this for all of your movies? I'm not saying I could do better, but I sure as hell would not do worst! If you did, then perhaps you might take a lesson from George Costanza, and do the opposite. It might be the best thing you'll ever do.