20th Century FoxReview in a Hurry: This thin swords 'n' sorcery epic is easily the best film hackteur Uwe Boll has ever made—which means it may be slightly better, on balance, than Ernest Goes to Jail.
The Bigger Picture: In the name of all that is holy, could it be that Boll, whose ouevre of incompetent videogame adaptations (BloodRayne, Alone in the Dark) brings shame to us all, has taken a no-name license and turned it into a worthwhile film? Well, no, but at least there are signs he's trying. You could call his latest project something he made rather than something he's guilty of.
In the Name of the King stars Jason Statham—you know, from The Transporter—as a deadly medieval farmer (whose name is, uh, Farmer) out to save what's left of his family from an evil wizard (Ray Liotta, present in body but not in spirit) and his horde of monsters.
The cast is filled out with a number of actors who apparently need work (Ron Perlman, Matthew Lillard, Leelee Sobieski and a deeply incongruous Burt Reynolds) and scads of extras in leftover Lord of the Rings "orc" paraphernalia. In traditional Boll fashion, most of them seem to be acting in completely different movies with a haphazard array of accents and styles.
Boll clearly still has no idea how to direct or edit a movie, but there is evidence to suggest he has at least learned how to shoot one. Small chunks of King are actually watchable, mostly battle scenes unspoiled by attempts at dialogue or exposition. The rest is merely irritating, a quantum leap forward for a director responsible for several of the worst films of the 21st century. At this rate, he might make a good one before the end of it.
The 180—a Second Opinion: You might warm to In the Name of the King during a climactic fight in the forest that features some nice choreography. Be advised to leave then, as there are still 45 minutes to go of nothing much worth seeing.