Print Page | Close Window

YAY! (And Also YUCK!) UWE’s BACK!!

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: Forums on 2008 RAZZIE® "Winners"
Forum Name: IN THE NAME OF THE KING: A DUNGEON SIEGE TALE
Forum Discription: "WINNER" of 1 RAZZIE® for WORST DIRECTOR (Uwe Boll for 3 Titles)
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2383
Printed Date: September 02 2014 at 10:05am


Topic: YAY! (And Also YUCK!) UWE’s BACK!!
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: YAY! (And Also YUCK!) UWE’s BACK!!
Date Posted: December 20 2007 at 4:32am

2007's FAILURE to PROVIDE EVEN ONE BAD MOVIE from PERENNIAL RAZZIE® CONTENDER http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0093051/awards - UWE BOLL LEFT OUR MEMBERS FEELING LET DOWN...BUT 2008 STARTED OUT with a BANG from "HIS BADNESS"!

  http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=246 - IN THE NAME OF THE KING: A DUNGEON SIEGE TALE HAS the USUAL BOLL CAST of INTERNATIONALLY KNOWN (BUT OBVIOUSLY HARD-UP) ACTORS, IS BASED on a VIDEO GAME and (with UWE at the HELM) PROVED to BE DELICIOUSLY LAME. 

NOW IT's YOUR TURN to WELCOME BACK "THE RAZZIE® MASTER"...

OMG -- It features Burt Reynolds AND Ray Liotta !

 



-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry



Replies:
Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: December 20 2007 at 5:03am
The guess from where I sit is that anyone who watches this tripe will envy the poor souls locked away in said dungeon.

-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: wetbandit82
Date Posted: December 20 2007 at 10:23am

BARF:  Abandon ship!  Abandon ship!  Women and Mawgs first! 

Never mind the king, in the name of humanity put THIS GUY in the dungeon (just suppose what we'd have if he'd been tapped for the nightmare that was Dungeons and Dragons...on second thought, don't, that's cruel and unusual punishment).  At least it'll probably disappear three days after it's released, or at least until he starts claiming the critics are part of advanced sleeper cells for a worldwide Neptunian invasion or what have you.   



-------------


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: December 20 2007 at 10:53am
Let's not forget "Postel" which is supposed to come out in 2008. The only directors that stand a chance against Uwe are Aaron Seltzer and Jason Friedburg, but with two films Uwe will be hard to beat.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: December 20 2007 at 2:20pm

Boll's movies are designed to be laughed at, groaned at, leave you feeling "what the hell?".  However, I must confess, the one scene in BloodRayne where Meat Loaf played a kind of vampiric Bacchus actually was good.  Unfortunately, he hired a bunch of Romanian prostitutes as extras, but it still wound up being a good scene.  That's one thing Uwe Boll has done that Ed Wood, Jr. never did--Among his last three movies, Boll did make one good scene. . . .

 



Posted By: thomsonmg2000
Date Posted: December 21 2007 at 9:42am
Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

Let's not forget "Postel" which is supposed to come out in 2008. The only directors that stand a chance against Uwe are Aaron Seltzer and Jason Friedburg, but with two films Uwe will be hard to beat.


I actually heard on IMDB that Postal is not that bad... They said it was pretty funny, but gross.

About Dungeon Siege, the trailer makes this film look like a Lord of the Rings ripoff (mountains, orc-like creatures, swords etc.). Wow, how is Uwe Boll still able to make films?


-------------
Seltzerberg is back?

OH MY GOOOOOOOOOOD!!!!!!!

http://www.disastermovie.org
http://www.vampiressuck.org/


Posted By: Movie Man
Date Posted: December 22 2007 at 5:16am

I might see it when it comes out. It's 2 and a half hours, and I heard that the director's cut on DVD will be around 3 hours and 15 minutes.


 



-------------


Posted By: saturnwatcher
Date Posted: December 22 2007 at 11:32pm
Originally posted by cvcjr13

  Unfortunately, he hired a bunch of Romanian prostitutes as extras, but it still wound up being a good scene.  That's one thing Uwe Boll has done that Ed Wood, Jr. never did--

Let's not underestimate old Eddie. The idea might well have occured to him, but he probably just couldn't afford it.



-------------
Nine times out of ten, in art as in life, there is no truth to be discovered, only an error to be exposed.--H.L. Menken


Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: December 23 2007 at 1:39pm

How does Uwe Boll keep getting good actors to be in his films? Sir Ben Kingsley, Michael Madsen, now Ray Liotta. ( Whose choices of projects this year are a far cry from Goodfellas, to say the least.) He's gotta be a warlock.......... or he just offered them a lot of money.

I prefer the former explanation.  

 



-------------


Posted By: wetbandit82
Date Posted: December 23 2007 at 2:22pm

Or he knew Anthony Pellicano well, and used him to get these people...

 



-------------


Posted By: bruin_522
Date Posted: December 24 2007 at 2:08pm
Looks like another bad movie from Uwe Boll...


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: December 25 2007 at 6:03am
Originally posted by saturnwatcher

Let's not underestimate old Eddie. The idea might well have occured to him, but he probably just couldn't afford it.

          



Posted By: wetbandit82
Date Posted: December 28 2007 at 7:30am

TV spots for this put no credits up at the end--just the "coming by such and such date" tag, and official website -- so clearly they're scared stiff to let the public know this is connected with Boll in any way, shape or form! 

 



-------------


Posted By: Movie Man
Date Posted: December 29 2007 at 3:46pm

That's been done with other movies as well, so it hardly means that they're not connecting this movie with him. "Independence Day" did it, and so did all three JP movies (in some TV spots).  


Originally posted by wetbandit82

TV spots for this put no credits up at the end--just the "coming by such and such date" tag, and official website -- so clearly they're scared stiff to let the public know this is connected with Boll in any way, shape or form!



-------------


Posted By: Nasty Man
Date Posted: January 06 2008 at 3:07am

Whoa! 2008 isn't even two weeks old, and already we've got a Uwe Boll film to pick on!  Things are looking, as the Head RAZZberry himself might say, "Berry Good" for the year ahead!

 



-------------
Everything SUX!


Posted By: tomsmobr
Date Posted: January 06 2008 at 5:39am
When I saw The Trailer for http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=246 - IN THE NAME OF THE KING: A DUNGEON SIEGE TALE  I thought about Dungeons & Dragons


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 06 2008 at 10:30am

I'm fairly surprised at the decent actors in this movie...



-------------


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 06 2008 at 12:35pm
That's one thing that amazes everyone about Uwe Boll films - despite his reputation, he is able to sign up a few well known actors.  For example, Michael Madsen as a vampire hunter in BloodRayne, or Christian Slater as Carnby in Alone in the Dark.


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: January 06 2008 at 1:22pm

A trailer so bad moviewizguy's questining it? Damn, this must be bad!

Originally posted by moviewizguy

I'm fairly surprised at the decent actors in this movie..
                                                                                                

Also, "Seed" may be getting a release this year. Three Uwe Boll movies in one year -- he's practically begging for a Razzie!!



-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Berrynoia
Date Posted: January 06 2008 at 2:00pm

 And yet The Toilet Boll has evaded Razzie "wins" each time so far (M. Night for Lady in the Water over Uwe's Bloodrayne, for example).  Meet the Spartans looks even worse than this, though, and with Jason & Aaron probably being nominated for a 2007 Razzie for Epic Movie, who is begging more??

 



-------------


Posted By: moviewizguy
Date Posted: January 07 2008 at 10:23am
No, I haven't seen the trailer yet but I think it looks decent. lol


Posted By: Mayhem5185
Date Posted: January 08 2008 at 5:39pm

M. Night stole that award! Anybody that actually saw both movies would know that Bloodrayne was complete garbage, and should have won. If Boll's new movie is as bad as people say it is, and if they release Seed and Postal this year, Uwe Boll should win a Worst Director Razzie no contest. Come on people, he's been asking for it since House of the Dead!!


 



Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: January 10 2008 at 12:00pm
I read somewhere that Uwe was directing a "FarCry" movie that's due out this year. That means... that there will be... 4 Uwe Boll movies in... a single year!! If he doesn't win this year it will be an atrocity!!

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: moat
Date Posted: January 10 2008 at 2:11pm
I wonder just how much of the film's budget went toward the actors hired, because there are quite a few capable actors in the cast for such a likely misfire.

Anyway, I don't know about you guys, but I'm betting this one isn't as bad as Boll's three previous theatrical releases, mainly because he's dropped the horror content in favor of an attempt at creating an adventurous experience. The formulas for this particular fantasy genre aren't as tired as the slasher conventions Boll recycled for movies like House of the Dead, but it will be interesting to see just how badly his spin on this style of film making will be.

I'd also like to point out Liotta's most recent U.S. releases are: In the Name of the King, Revolver, Bee Movie, Wild Hogs, and Smokin' Aces. That's a mean losing streak for the someone with as much talent as he has.


Posted By: whennow
Date Posted: January 11 2008 at 1:01am

Wild Hogs was a big box office hit though, so I doubt Liotta cares if it was crap!



-------------


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 11 2008 at 3:11am

Terrence Howard, another talented actor, is only doing a little better than Liotta, having appeared in Pride, The Brave One, August Rush and Awake in 2007. 

And yeah, Wild Hogs, as well as The Bee Movie, kicked over $100 million.  But if Liotta keeps it up, his name will become synonymous with second rate movies, and that would be a shame.  I'd love to see him land another Goodfellas or Field Of Dreams.  He still has plenty of talent in him! 



-------------


Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: January 11 2008 at 8:30am

HeadRazz, sorry it took so long to answer, my computer was acting up. I did get the razzie ballot. Ray Liotta was in several bad movies last year, but because he was pretty good in said movies, he managed to avoid being listed as a potential nominee. Can he do what Sir Ben Kingsley couldn't and survive an Ed Wood......pardon me, Uwe Boll film unscathed? As good an actor as Ray Liotta is, Uwe Boll is like the kiss of death for anyone. Even the dreaded Schumacher is a better director than him. I do think we should have a poll, though. Who is the 21st century's answer to Ed Wood: Boll, or the two guys who "blessed" us with Epic movie and date movie? I still can't decide that one.



Posted By: PlanB
Date Posted: January 13 2008 at 2:16pm
Did anyone see the episode of Sopranos where Christopher is trying to get Ben Kingsley to do the horror movie he's producing?  Kingsley totally blows him off, which is supposed to be funny on one level, but it's even funnier on a DIFFERENT level, because anyone that knows anything about Kingsley's filmography over the last few years knows that he'd appear in ANY movie if you asked him nicely or made him his favorite sandwich or something.  Oh, and blackmail photos.  Those must always work too.   


Posted By: jb razz
Date Posted: January 17 2008 at 9:03am
Jason Statham (who plays the lead in this movie) will play the lead in another film coming out this year: a Paul WS Anderson film called Death Race! That means he worked with two of the worst directors of all time back to back. I think Death Race will greatly increase his chances of getting a worst actor nomination a year from now.


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 17 2008 at 5:09pm
The theatre owners are actually letting Ooo-he Blows run a second week.  It is showing at over 1300 screens, which is a drop of just under 300 screens.  I thought it was only going to show one week and then it's gone. 


Posted By: CDNDestroyer
Date Posted: January 20 2008 at 3:18am
Originally posted by cvcjr13

Terrence Howard, another talented actor, is only doing a little better than Liotta, having appeared in Pride, The Brave One, August Rush and Awake in 2007. 

And yeah, Wild Hogs, as well as The Bee Movie, kicked over $100 million.  But if Liotta keeps it up, his name will become synonymous with second rate movies, and that would be a shame.  I'd love to see him land another Goodfellas or Field Of Dreams.  He still has plenty of talent in him! 



I don't know what's wrong with Ray Liotta because he is very talented but picks bad projects.  The only one of mention he's done since Goodfellas is voice acting the main character in the Grand Theft Auto: Vice City video game (which was well done, I thought).

Yes, I'd like to see him make a comeback with a spectacular performance in a great movie...but it doesn't look to happen anytime soon.


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 20 2008 at 10:56am

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i1f048e311710f2fbd98c7b8bdcd3fb63 - Hollywood Reporter says Uwe Boll announces that because In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=inthenameoftheking.htm - bombed at the box office , he won't be able to make any more big budget pictures.

I don't understand!  It made more money at the box office than BloodRayne

That's the good news.  The bad news is that he will continue to make small budget video game adaptations. 

I have one question.  Am I understanding this article correctly?  Did ITNOTK actually cost $70 million to make?! 

 



Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: January 21 2008 at 12:28am
Originally posted by CDNDestroyer

Originally posted by cvcjr13

Terrence Howard, another talented actor, is only doing a little better than Liotta, having appeared in Pride, The Brave One, August Rush and Awake in 2007. 

And yeah, Wild Hogs, as well as The Bee Movie, kicked over $100 million.  But if Liotta keeps it up, his name will become synonymous with second rate movies, and that would be a shame.  I'd love to see him land another Goodfellas or Field Of Dreams.  He still has plenty of talent in him! 



I don't know what's wrong with Ray Liotta because he is very talented but picks bad projects.  The only one of mention he's done since Goodfellas is voice acting the main character in the Grand Theft Auto: Vice City video game (which was well done, I thought).

Yes, I'd like to see him make a comeback with a spectacular performance in a great movie...but it doesn't look to happen anytime soon.
                                                                                       He voiced Tommy Vercetti. Awesome! Also, Burt Reynolds was Avery Carrington.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Bonogamy
Date Posted: January 21 2008 at 2:25pm
I've heard that this Toilet Boll dump cost anywhere from 60-70 million dollars.  I'm actually tempted to see it: In the Name of the King OPENED at my local second run movie house and it would only cost three bucks to go for a matinee on my day off.  If that's not a telling sign of how far Boll has dropped (albeit it's not a long drop), I don't know what is.

I have a question for fans of Dungeon Siege: I've never played the game, but in your opinion could the game have been made into a better movie?  I'm a big supporter of GTA: Vice City and GTA: San Andreas, and I'm of the opinion that neither game could be made into a good movie since it would essentially be a knock off of movies and TV shows that portray the essence of the games more accurately and authentically (Scarface, Miami Vice, New Jack City and Boys in the Hood, for example, mostly because the games were inspired by them.)

I'm assuming Warcraft will be made into a movie (if it's already not in production,) but I have no idea how the game will translate into a quality movie without seeming like a deliberate rip-off of Jackson's LotR.  For most fans of Warcraft, the movie will always pale in comparison to the game, and I'm wondering why there isn't more of a  gamer backlash to Hollywood's money-grubbing cynicism that gamers will empty their wallets at anything with their games' name on it.  Hopefully, In the Name of the King is the beginning of that backlash.


-------------
Dreams for Stallone sequels:

Hawk: Over the Top Part II
Marion Cobretti: Cobra Part II
Joe Bomowski: Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot Part II
Nick Martinelli Rides Again: Rhinestone Part II


Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: January 24 2008 at 8:40am

I disagree with with the opinion that Liotta's best work since Goodfellas was Grand Theft Auto Vice City. I thought he was great in Narc, and good in Cop Land, and The Rat Pack.

Anyway I saw Dungeon Siege yesterday. I am amazed at the incompetance of the film. ( Ninjas in that time period, in that part of the world?!) This film had so many unintentional laughs I lost count. Almost everyone in the cast either looked uninterested in the film, or angry to be in it ( Or both, like Burt Reynolds)  But the acting "Dis-honors" goes to Matthiew Lillard, who has to be seen to believed. Let's just say that Jim Carrey's Ace Ventura would tell him to "Tone it down, a little bit", and thank God the film wasn't in 3-D or half of the audience would have came in raincoats in preparation for everytime Lillard opened his mouth. I'm a fan of Ray Liotta, but the man seriously needs to get a new agent. However, I'm happy to say that "The Uwe Boll Actor curse" has finally been broken. There was a performance in it that I and the guy sitting in front of me dared call, in 100% sincerity "Pretty good". John Rhys Davis did a good job as the good wizard. So remember kids, if you have a horrible script that is going to be made into a film, get a Shakespearian actor to play at least one part, it will come in handy ( For referance see McDiarmid, Ian in Star Wars Episode 3).  Still, one decent performance is one more than in all of Uwe's other American films combined. (Well, I think, I never saw BloodRayne)



Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 24 2008 at 2:50pm

John Rhys-Davies gave a good performance in the awful http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0435617/ - Chupacabra Terror , too.  He seems to be one of the most dependable actors out there, even when he's a tall man pretending to be four feet tall! 



Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 24 2008 at 5:10pm

The bad news:
In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale will have a third week in theatres.

The good news:
It will only be showing in 75 theatres, a drop of over 1,200 theatres from the previous week, http://www.boxofficemojo.com/counts/chart/?yr=2008&wk=04&p=.htm - according to Box Office Mojo .

I'm sad about this in a way.  ITNOTK's failure means that Postal may never be released in theatres in Los Angeles or New York. 



Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: January 25 2008 at 12:36pm
Rhys-Davies is like Brian Cox, Brenden Gleeson, and Timothy Spall, in that they're usually good, no matter how bad the film they're in is. Like Cvcjr said, they're all good, dependable character actors.


Posted By: bts228
Date Posted: February 13 2008 at 11:48am
Didn't Leelee Sobieski used to be one of the most talented "up-and-coming"
actors?

What the hell happened?


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: February 14 2008 at 9:22am
Sobieski was, also, in "The Liquor Man".

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: February 18 2008 at 4:54am
Originally posted by cvcjr13

John Rhys-Davies gave a good performance in the awful http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0435617/ - Chupacabra Terror , too.  He seems to be one of the most dependable actors out there, even when he's a tall man pretending to be four feet tall! 

                                                                                      "Chupacabra Terror" might be one of the funniest films I've ever seen. It has an army of cliches. There's the overzaelous scientist willing to sacrifice humen lives, the b*tch with an annoying dog that you just know will be Chupacabra food, the greddy man willing to die to get rich, and the war veteran.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Mayhem5185
Date Posted: February 19 2008 at 5:28pm
John Rhys-Davies is a movie whore plain and simple, however no matter how bad the movie is, he will still gives it his all (One only has too look at his appearance in the VG Dune 2000 and Wing Commander) Ron Perlman is kinda the same way too, although I haven't heard anything about his performance in this movie yet. 


Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: March 04 2008 at 8:40am
I like Ron Perlman, I thought he made the perfect Hellboy, but even he looked kind of uninterested during the film, as did everyone else who wasn't either A.) Overacting or B.) John Rhys-Davies. 

-------------


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: March 04 2008 at 10:57am
I like Ron Perlman and he was perfect as Hellboy.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: April 17 2008 at 2:36am
Uwe Boll may be the worst thing to happen to video games since Shaq Fu!

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Date Posted: April 17 2008 at 1:32pm

I finally saw this on DVD*... All I can say is: WOW!

If this isn't the most incoherent movie ever made, it's certainly in the top ten. Uwe Boll doesn't know how to establish time, place or character, each of which is essential to understanding what's going on in a movie. His complete incompetence at establishing any of them makes this one of Boll's worst efforts (and given his track record, that's saying a lot!). Perhaps because they all know that appearing in something directed by Boll is The Kiss of Death Career-Wise, almost every actor in KING gives either a lethargic or ludicrously over-the-top performance. All five slots in our Worst Supporting Actor category could be filled by this one film alone! Among the likely RAZZIE® contenders here are our 1993 Worst Actor "winner" Burt Reynolds as a tired old king, John-Rhys-Davies as an emaciated wizard, Ron Perlman as a piss-and-vinegar peasant, Matthew Lillard as a spoiled royal nephew given to hissy fits, Leelee Sobieski as a princess encrusted in 17th-century Maybelline, Claire Forlani as the main character's main squeeze, and Kristanna Loken (a Worst Actress nominee for BLOODRAYNE) as a forest sprite who seems to have escaped from Cirq d' So Lame.  But Ray Liotta, as the self-described "King of the Krug," is the most memorably awful, giving a performance even less subtle than his rape-of-Pia-Zadora-by-garden-hose cameo in LONELY LADY. 

The Netflix sleeve in which the DVD arrived said it ran 2-and-a-half hours, and I spent most of the film watching the time display on my DVD player crawl by, constantly thinking "Oh, my God -- It's got another HOUR to go!"  Turns out it actually runs only 2 hours and SEVEN minutes...but it's so hard to follow and pointless that it seems more like 3-and-a-half hours!

If there's any justice, this one will have multiple RAZZIE nominations (including Worst Picture, Worst Screenplay and, of course, Worst Director) come next January...

*It was released theatrically when I was too bizzy putting The 28th Annual RAZZIES® together to bother seeing it...



-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: April 17 2008 at 4:00pm

HeadRAZZBerry's review makes Uwe look like the worst thing to happen to video games since Atari refused to credit their developers. This angered the developers, so they started their own companies, causing many other people who had no idea how to make a videogame (like Quaker Oats) to get into the videogame business. They created a bunch of crappy videogames that were quickly returned. However, they weren't fast enough to return it to the factories before the company folded and dropped off the face of the earth. This left stores with a bunch of crappy games. So, they put them into bargain bins. Many gamers saw the cheap prices and bought them. They were disgusted by the udder crappyness of the games and many stopped gaming all together. Meanwhile, Atari was interested in releasing an American version of a Japanese game about a monkey named "Donkey" throwing barrels, by a little company called Nintendo. They were going to release it on the Atari 2600, when Coleco showed a demo of Donkey Kong on their (ill-fated) ADAM computer system. This made Atari executive Ray Kassar think that Nintendo was selling information to Coleco and cut themselves off from them. At the same time, Atari had released a bunch of outright bombs like E.T." and their bastardization of "Pac-Men". This caused the destruction of the Atari 2600. They could have rebounded with "Donkey Kong", but they severed ties with Nintendo. With a, formerly, respectable video game company in ruins, a bunch of crappy games at a cheaper price, and a lack of interest from the public the video game industry crashed. It was later recovered, with help from Nintendo. Uwe's gonna have to make 20 video game-based movies to measure up to that!

 



-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: JoeBacon
Date Posted: May 04 2008 at 3:54pm
Holy crap! I see that the iTunes Movie Store is charging $14.99 to buy In the
Shame O The King! You cannot rent it. Most other movies go for a mere
$9.99. How does The Toilet Bowl get to charge 50% more than everyone
else??????


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: May 04 2008 at 4:18pm

Undoubtedly to make back all the money he squandered on this picture.  I had to re-check this thread to remember what the estimate was -- $70 MILLION!  The economy is in the toilet and the money is going down the Toilet Boll!!!  !!!

Originally posted by JoeBacon

Holy crap! I see that the iTunes Movie Store is charging $14.99 to buy In the
Shame O The King! You cannot rent it. Most other movies go for a mere
$9.99. How does The Toilet Bowl get to charge 50% more than everyone
else??????



Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: June 04 2008 at 2:41pm

Even I didn't expect this.  Seven weeks out on DVD, and ITNOTK is still on the rental chart?!    And has racked up over $21 million in rentals?!    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=homevideo&id=inthenameoftheking.htm - Click here to check it out at Box Office Mojo.

It must be because Jason Statham starred in it.  I can't think of any other reason! 


 



-------------


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 09 2008 at 9:23am
I saw this yesterday. It makes "Meet The Spartans" look like a frickin' masterpiece! The acting was atrotious (only Jason Statham came out even remotely watchable), the direction was horrific, and the dialogue ("I'm my father's daughter") was to bad to discribe. The special effects cost $80,000,000?!? The best effect was when Statham threw his boomerang. The film rips-off "The Lord Of The Rings" so much, I was expecting Peter Jackson to appear so he could sue Uwe's ass off. Burt Reynolds' death was stolen from Borimir and Ray Liotta's lair is just a less-guarded Mt. Doom. But, the film rips-off "The Two Towers" the most. The (horribly shot/edited) battle sequence towards the (merciful) end was ripped right from Helm's Deep and the Krugs are just retarded Orcs (the Krug's creation is so similar to the Orc's, that it makes a lawsuit even more likely). Why was this film 2 hours, 7 minutes? They could have cut a lot of stuff out. (Apparantly, there's a 2 hours, 45 minutes version floating around!) They could've cut all of Kristanna Loken's scenes. Her part (as a lesbian wood-nympho) served no purpose that couldn't be filled by another character. The film feels like 4 hours, 14 minutes. Not sense "P.S. I Love You" has a film had such pacing problems. Matthew Lillard was annoying and deserves a nod, as is Burt Reynolds. But, the worst part, hands down, was Ray Liotta. Ray, if you really need money, then take a page from Lee Tamahori, and whore yourself out. Loken, Leelee Sobeiski, and Claire Forlani deserve nominations as well. And lets not forget Uwe. He's the main reason the film sucks. For your consideration: Worst Picture, Worst Director, Worst Supporting Actors (Lillard, Liotta, and Reynolds), Worst Supporting Actresses (Forlani, Loken, and Sobeiski), Worst Screenplay, and Worst Remake Or Rip-off (Rip-off of "The Lord Of The Rings", "Star Wars", and "Dung-eons & Drag-ons")

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: Sanndman228715
Date Posted: June 09 2008 at 9:35am
Ray needs to get Scorcese on the phone ASAP. His performance in this has used up the good will his performances in Goodfellas and even Revolver have made for me. (Well, maybe not completely)


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: June 09 2008 at 3:52pm

 Based on the review below, it sounds like this movie is THE ONE to sweep the Razzies! You might as well give out an "award" for "Worst  Cast," because it sounds like everyone who had any amount of screentime deserves to "win!" Oh yes, this is Boll's year, there's no way he's escaping this time! This IS his "Plan 9 From Outer Space!"

Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter

I saw this yesterday. It makes "Meet The Spartans" look like a frickin' masterpiece! The acting was atrotious (only Jason Statham came out even remotely watchable), the direction was horrific, and the dialogue ("I'm my father's daughter") was to bad to discribe. The special effects cost $80,000,000?!? The best effect was when Statham threw his boomerang. The film rips-off "The Lord Of The Rings" so much, I was expecting Peter Jackson to appear so he could sue Uwe's ass off. Burt Reynolds' death was stolen from Borimir and Ray Liotta's lair is just a less-guarded Mt. Doom. But, the film rips-off "The Two Towers" the most. The (horribly shot/edited) battle sequence towards the (merciful) end was ripped right from Helm's Deep and the Krugs are just retarded Orcs (the Krug's creation is so similar to the Orc's, that it makes a lawsuit even more likely). Why was this film 2 hours, 7 minutes? They could have cut a lot of stuff out. (Apparantly, there's a 2 hours, 45 minutes version floating around!) They could've cut all of Kristanna Loken's scenes. Her part (as a lesbian wood-nympho) served no purpose that couldn't be filled by another character. The film feels like 4 hours, 14 minutes. Not sense "P.S. I Love You" has a film had such pacing problems. Matthew Lillard was annoying and deserves a nod, as is Burt Reynolds. But, the worst part, hands down, was Ray Liotta. Ray, if you really need money, then take a page from Lee Tamahori, and whore yourself out. Loken, Leelee Sobeiski, and Claire Forlani deserve nominations as well. And lets not forget Uwe. He's the main reason the film sucks. For your consideration: Worst Picture, Worst Director, Worst Supporting Actors (Lillard, Liotta, and Reynolds), Worst Supporting Actresses (Forlani, Loken, and Sobeiski), Worst Screenplay, and Worst Remake Or Rip-off (Rip-off of "The Lord Of The Rings", "Star Wars", and "Dung-eons & Drag-ons")

 



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: SchumacherH8ter
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 8:11am
Maybe, for this year's other award, we should have Worst Ensemble. "Meet The Spartans" and "One Missed Call" would deserve nominations as well. One thing I forgot to mention in my rant was that I saw "Prince Caspian" a couple days ago, and the scenes in that movie completely blew "Dung-eon Siege" away.

-------------
I'm the Goddamn Batman.-All-Star Batman And Robin #2
https://twitter.com/Scott_DAgostino
Upcoming reviews: http://www.razzies.com/forum/topic7513.html
Up-next: Transcendence


Posted By: joey446
Date Posted: September 23 2008 at 3:37pm
OK let me say one word, Ninja's!! WTF!!

-------------
oie oie oie


Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: December 01 2008 at 7:19am

Amazing. At the beginning of the year, this movie was the #1 contender to sweep the Razzies. Yet somehow, it has been topped by half a dozen movies. It's kind of a shame, since this one does indeed suck, but it's now overshadowed by "Postal", "Disaster Movie", "Meet Dave", and "Love Guru." 

RESPONSE from Head RAZZberry: Maybe this'll cheer you up -- I've decided that on this year's RAZZIE® Nominating Ballot, we should treat Uwe Boll just like we would any actor who made more than one bad film in a year -- Boll will be lisited for Worst Director with both this and http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_topics.asp?FID=274&no_cj_c=1 -  



-------------
"Just once I want my life to be like an 80's movie ... but, no, no. John Hughes did not direct my life." ("Easy A", 2010)


Posted By: cvcjr13
Date Posted: January 11 2009 at 4:02am

MAJOR SPOILERS

During the Razzie Prevue Night, instead of the schedule showing of The Hottie and the Nottie, which you didn't have to see in order to know the plot (let me just say that the key to finding someone who is truly in love with you is to be dishonest about yourself. . . . er. . . .), the HeadRAZZBerry "changed gears" and showed us this cluster, er, masterwork by the Master of Miasma himself, the man reputed to be the World's Worst Living Director, Uwe Boll. 

Before I begin hurling brickbats at the movie, though, I'd like to talk about Boll's oven, er, oevre.  I've watched four Boll films within a year; I've seen Alone in the Dark and Bloodrayne on the SciFi Channel, I've seen Postal with around a dozen other unfortunate or deluded moviegoers in one of the four theatres it showed, and I saw In The Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale last night (and yes, in response to a question, I did somehow survive).  To sum up Boll's work with a few words, Boll blows. . . . chunks.   For its ambition, good casting and a few more than the one good scene Boll accidentally films for each movie, Postal would be the best.  However, that's like saying cyanide is safer to ingest than hydrochloric acid.  If I had to chose between the two for Worst Picture, I would choose Postal hands down.  If you are a connoisseur of bad films, you must subject yourself to Postal at the soonest inconvenience.  Viewing Postal is such a bad experience, it can never be called "convenient."

ITNOTK starts off with Leelee Sobieski and Ray Liotta fully clothed in bed together (how refreshing, leaving things to our imagination, a return to old values! (sarcasm alert)), with Leelee sweetly telling Ray, "I knew you'd come."  The unintentional double entendres just keep, er, coming throughout the movie. . . .

The HeadRAZZBerry alerted us to another source of amusement.  When magus John Rhys-Davies makes a house call on King Burt Reynolds, Rhys-Davies puts his ear to Reynolds' chest, sniffs his crotch, and then declares that the king has been poisoned.  From that point on, we observed and debated the effectiveness of crotch-sniffing in magic and medicine.  We even observed that this talent for crotch-sniffing can be spiritually transferred upon one's death to the next generation, although they may not immediately apply this useful technique. . . .

Another source of amusement are the battle scenes, where each scene is so blurred or distorted that you cannot tell what is going on (which seemed to be most of the battle scenes) or, when you can tell what is going on, it makes no sense.  Let me give you three examples of the latter.  When you want to catapult fireballs at your opponent, you do not load the catapult with one of your own men and then set them on fire, no matter how fierce and relentless they may be.  When you have an elite corps of tree climbing martial arts fighters, much like you'd find in House of Flying Daggers, you don't have them climb the trees just to drop down into plain sight before the attack.  And a little boy, being pursued by a giant lumbering enemy who every step thunders as he goes, can endlessly evade his pursuer, which means Farmer and Bastian must have bundled up poor Zeph and buried him alive and evil Gallian went along with the deception. . . .

Yes, our hero is Farmer Ted from Sixteen Candles, played expertly by Jason Statham despite some of the worst lines and reasoing Boll and hack screenwriter Doug Taylor put in his mouth.  The reason why Statham's character is called Farmer is because that's what he's called in the videogame, er, because Boll and Taylor were too lazy to come up with a good name, er, because Farmer believes a man is as he does.  Upon reflection, we could have had a lot of fun inserting the line "I'm just a poor farm boy" into Statham's mouth during the bad dialog of any numerous scenes throughout the movie.

Getting back to the battle sequences, another hilarious twist is when Gallian (Ray Liotta) sends thunderstorms and darkness to cover his troops during the last great battle sequence of the movie.  Now, in the books of The Lord of the Ring, Sauron does this because regular goblins do not fight well in sunlight.  But the subhuman beings in ITNOTK, called Krugs, have already proven they could fight slightly less as badly in the sunlight as they can in the dark, so why have them fight in the mud, rain and dark against the humans?  Trying to make things hard for your own army? 

What do we learn?  We learn that dungeons are the best place to try pick up lines.  We learn that tree-dwelling Amazons are capricious about which men they allow through their forest and which men they will simply kill.  We learn that when good men have an evil traitor in their midst, they simply let them go so the traitor may kill them later.  Likewise, when an evil sorcerer captures a good opponent in a spell of flying books, he just sits the good man back on the ground so the good man can slit his throat for the fourth and final time. 

And, of course, we learn about the merits of crotch-sniffing.

And then there's the incredibly bad acting of Shaggy, er, Matthew Lillard as Duke Fallow, the snivelly, treacherous royal nephew.  Some of those facial expressions, not to mention his line readings, are unintentionally hilarious.  It's not that he had bad lines; all the actors had bad lines, but most of the others turned in a good performance despite the bad lines.  Lillard brings the comedy to this stupefying badness when no comedy is called for or even wanted. 

But Lillard is not the only bad actor in the movie.  Now, I can understand why Burt Reynolds is lethargic, half-asleep, headachey and even by appearances drunken during the scenes where he had been poisoned.  However, both before and after these scenes, Reynolds continues to appear as if lethargic, half-asleep, headachey and drunken.  At best I'd accuse him of properly recognizing how deep and long Boll's crap runs and would then almost forgive Reynolds for turning in a likewise performance.

Rating: a generous three out of ten stars.  Razzie noms: Worst Picture, Worst Actor to Ray Liotta (the way he laughed in many of those scenes. . .), Worst Supporting Actor to Burt Reynolds and Matthew Lillard, Worst Supporting Actress to Leelee Sobieski, Worst Screenplay to Doug Taylor, and last but hardly least and in fact most responsible, Worst Director to Uwe Boll.  Do I recommend this?  Only to Uwe Boll fans and to people who love to heckle bad films, and even then, rent it. 

To Jason Statham fans; he does some great fight scenes, but this movie is far, far beneath the talents he showed with Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, Snatch or the first Transporter

A commendation to Claire Forlani for taking what could have been an abysmal female role and actually making something out of it, despite the bad scenes she was given.

 



Posted By: Michaels
Date Posted: January 13 2009 at 1:14am
cvcjr hit the nail on the head with that review. I have seen most of Uwe Boll's movies, and they are some of the most thrown-together, lazy, no thought behind them movies of the past decade. The man can't film or edit action or fight scenes at all and I doubt he gives his actors any real direction as to how to act. Thankfully, Boll's career is all but dead and his Lifetime Award will be well deserved if he does indeed "win" it.


Posted By: dEd Grimley
Date Posted: July 03 2009 at 3:27am
I'd once again like to state for the record that In The Name of the King wasn't nearly as bad as advertised. It was a totally watchable made for TV movie quality movie.

-------------
-Iron helps us play-


Posted By: TaRaN-RoD
Date Posted: January 16 2010 at 9:08pm
Honnestly.... after watching this movie, I didn't understand why did I spend time for this!

It's uncredibly awful!


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: December 29 2010 at 3:15pm
I just saw this, my first Uwe Boll movie! And I'm so glad I hated it, because I didn't want to be the only one who liked him.  

It makes me sad that there isn't an award for "Worst Film Editing." Every 5 seconds, I cringed. And I thought James L. Brooks sucked at hiring editors(if you don't know what that means,watch the awful editing of TERMS OF ENDEARMENT(6/10)and SPANGLISH(2/10),both by Richard Marks).

I have a list of the best casts of all times,and this made me think if I should create one for the worst casts.Jason Statham doesn't even try,unlike John Rhys Davies,Ron Perlman,LeeLee Sobieski and Burt Reynolds,which are passable.Ray Liotta and Claire Forlani sucked,and Matthew Lillard seemed to have stayed in SHAGGY mode with his over-the-top-ness.

The cinematoraphy was lazy,the story uninteresting,and the action sequences boring(except maybe the final fight).Also I couldn't care less about the characters.So,shockingly,Uwe Boll's directing is the least of the things worth mentioning.

I give this 1/10(I could've given it 0).


-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: December 29 2010 at 3:46pm
Ah, you never forget your first Uwe Boll movie ... much like puberty, it is a life changing event in itself. To think that such of man of limited talents was allowed to make movies ... yes, movies, as in more than one! Unthinkable!

-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.


Posted By: Vits
Date Posted: December 29 2010 at 4:57pm
Well...a sequel to this in in production.

-------------
You can follow me http://www.twitter.com/@Vits_Chile - @Vits_Chile


Posted By: BurnHollywoodBurn
Date Posted: December 29 2010 at 8:07pm
Yeah, but a movie being "in production" and a movie actually being released (in theaters, or on DVD, or online... or any method in which people can watch it) are two totally different things!  

Originally posted by Vits

Well...a sequel to this in in production.


-------------
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.



Print Page | Close Window