Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

ActuallyGlimmer The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Michael Ledo Dolph plays Granger, a marshal arts instructor and ex-military man who is transported back in time to fulfill a prophecy about defeating evil. If the accent and bad acting of Lochlyn Munro as King/Raven doesn't make you laugh, stay tuned as the acting gets worse. The king's sorceress (Natalia Guslistaya) who transport Dolph dies, but her spirit sticks around a few scenes to help Dolph. Michaela Mann plays a bad actress who Dolph is too tired to have sex with.After a little bit of wine, Dolph goes from telling the king to "stick his prophecy..." to "let me at the B...." He must kill the Holy Mother (Christina Jastrzembska) most likely due to her rejected Renaissance performance. Natassia Malthe (Bloodrayne: Deliverance)is the King's doctor who will accompany Dolph on his quest after he takes her virginity. She reminds me of a horrendous medieval Mila Kunis. Meanwhile the king will work on attempting to fully grow out his beard.Dolph realizes things aren't the way he is being told and the water isn't purified. This sets us up for the twist...and a dragon.No f-bombs, sex, or nudity. Some minor Pg-13 words and sexual innuendos. With the bad acting, simplistic plot, and language it would appear the movie was designed for a tween to early teen crowd, but due to the violence got an R rating, placing it in the worse of both worlds. For serious movie watchers, 1 to 2 stars. For young teens about 4 stars. Might do well during an MST marathon

adonis98-743-186503 An ex-Special Forces soldier gets thrown back to medieval times to fulfill an ancient prophecy and ends up finding redemption for his own battlefield experiences. In the Name of the King: Two Worlds is a sequel to a pretty forgettable film that starred Jason Statham and this time he is being replaced by Jason Statham a capable action hero who unfortunately doesn't get to do much with such a silly and boring concept and people will probably forget that this movie even existed in a matter of hours, minutes or days the most. (0/10)

Platypuschow Uwe Boll is the stuff of legends, he's a director so detested that he's become one of those things that is trendy to hate. People slate him and rate his movies without even seeing them and I find that a damn shame.The trouble with Boll is he doesn't have a style, you watch a Bruckheimer/Bay/Spielberg/Nolan etc film you can tell it's one of theres whereas Boll has no identity beyond his love of adapting video games.I personally don't think the hatred is justified, yes he's done some stinkers and yes the man himself is a lunatic but he has done some very enjoyable films as well. In The Name Of The King (2007) wasn't one of them, but it was passable. This sequel however is a cliched mess.It was doomed from the outset, Lungren turned the roll down and only later changed his mind due to his divorce and financial situation. So immediatly you have a leading man who doesn't want to be there, and was vocal about this fact.To make matters worse Lungren injured himself on the first day of filming, this is evident throughout the movie as he is barely mobile and has a nasty limp.The film itself is a highly cliched tale involving a man who is dragged through time and forced to fullfill a prophecy. Yeah, exactly.The Good:Natalie Burn & Aleks PaunovicCGI is better than expectedThe Bad:Script is poorStupidly clichedLungrens injury is blatantThings I Learnt From This Movie:Every fantasy movie needs a black forest from which no man has ever made out alive!

TheLittleSongbird As bad as the first In the Name of the King film was and wasted a potentially good cast of talented actors, this sequel- which doesn't do anything with its much lower budget and largely unknown actors- is even worse. Some of the scenery and the music score are beautiful but that's it for redeeming merits, the film on the whole is a complete shambles and one of the worst sequels I've seen in a whole. The photography is too jittery and has a real shoddy effect in the action sequences and the castle/fortress is really artificial-looking. The special effects are even more fake, the dragon is the least bad effect and brings a speck of excitement when it appears but its design is still anaemic-looking rather than imposing. The costumes don't look all that authentic and the sort you'd find at a medieval dressing up party, and the make-up likewise, too 21st century-like. Even the weapons look like plastic toys. The script is an utter mess and was in desperate need of at least two or three read-throughs, because someone clearly didn't check to see whether it made sense or flowed well. Almost all the time I was asking what did the writers and characters mean by that?, and just as bad are the use of done-to-death fantasy clichés and the awkward mix of medieval jargon and contemporary-speak, never did this viewer like they had been effectively transported back in time to the medieval era. The story is far too thin to sustain the length, with some scenes feeling like filler that leads nowhere, it makes the further mistake of being so dull that it makes the nearly 100 minute length seem longer. The action/battle sequences are shoddily shot and edited, sometimes not being able to see what's going on, and have no tension or excitement whatsoever, doesn't help that they are very under-populated. Uwe Boll proves that his reputation as one of the worst and most inept directors around is justified, the ending is a real cop-out with the last fight like one big stupid anti-climax and the characters are ones we know nothing about other than their roles in the movie and what kind of character they are and never care for as a result. The acting is awful all round, especially from a woefully miscast Lochlyn Munro who portrays one of the weakest and least threatening Kings you'll find on any movie with the charisma of a squashed cabbage. Natassia Malfe speaks her lines like she's constantly gasping for air and like she's reading them from a cue, and the most and only really well known actor Dolph Lundgren should have been perfect for the lead role but is wooden and looks befuddled a lot of the time. Other from Christina Jastrzembska nobody looks natural in their roles. Overall, the first film may have been a very bad film but it is a masterpiece compared to this shambolic mess of a sequel. 1/10 Bethany Cox