Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Forums on 2008 RAZZIE® "Winners" > IN THE NAME OF THE KING: A DUNGEON SIEGE TALE
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: YAY! (And Also YUCK!) UWE’s BACK!!
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

YAY! (And Also YUCK!) UWE’s BACK!!

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234
Author
Message
cvcjr13 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1190
Post Options Post Options   Quote cvcjr13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: YAY! (And Also YUCK!) UWE’s BACK!!
    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??????

Back to Top
cvcjr13 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1190
Post Options Post Options   Quote cvcjr13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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?!    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! 


 

Back to Top
SchumacherH8ter View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 06 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Online
Posts: 2994
Post Options Post Options   Quote SchumacherH8ter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Back to Top
Sanndman228715 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 31 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 524
Post Options Post Options   Quote Sanndman228715 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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)
Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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)
Back to Top
SchumacherH8ter View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 06 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Online
Posts: 2994
Post Options Post Options   Quote SchumacherH8ter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Back to Top
joey446 View Drop Down
Berry New Comer
Berry New Comer


Joined: September 23 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
Post Options Post Options   Quote joey446 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 23 2008 at 3:37pm
OK let me say one word, Ninja's!! WTF!!
oie oie oie
Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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 POSTAL after his name (thereby all but guaranteeing Uwe a well-deserved nomination)... 

 

"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)
Back to Top
cvcjr13 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: September 01 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1190
Post Options Post Options   Quote cvcjr13 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

 

Back to Top
Michaels View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: May 12 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2848
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michaels Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
dEd Grimley View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: July 31 2008
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2024
Post Options Post Options   Quote dEd Grimley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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-
Back to Top
TaRaN-RoD View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: November 20 2009
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 174
Post Options Post Options   Quote TaRaN-RoD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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!
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6873
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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 @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6873
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 29 2010 at 4:57pm
Well...a sequel to this in in production.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down