In the Name of the King 2 (2011)
Movie InfoGranger - a warrior in medieval times - is sent on a quest to fulfill an ancient prophecy. Venturing through the now war torn Kingdom of Ehb, he teams up with an unlikely band of allies with the goal of slaying the leader of the "Dark Ones". Fighting against all odds, they must free the land from the grasp of the evil tyrant Raven and save the world.
No Friends? Inconceivable! Log in to see what your friends have to say.Login
Critic Reviews for In the Name of the King 2
There are no critic reviews yet for In the Name of the King 2. Keep checking Rotten Tomatoes for updates!
Audience Reviews for In the Name of the King 2
Uwe Boll just needs to stop because In the Name of the King: Two Worlds is absolute garbage.The storytelling is a bumpy roller coaster ride. The editing is horrendous and the fade-ins and outs make it hard to take this film seriously. The character buildup is tiresome and the entire 90 minutes are a complete bore with an ending that is just plain awful.The action is hounded by shaky camerawork and the CG is sub-par. The settings and costumes are also quite weak.Dolph Lundgren is rubbish. He cannot carry this movie to save his life. Natassia Malthe has some spirit in her performance, but she does seem out of place at times.In the Name of the King: Two Worlds is a 100% complete waste of time. Don't even consider it.More
In the Name of the King 2: Two Worlds has a tenuous at best connection to the original 2008 In the Name of the King, noted as the most star-studded Uwe Boll film and the last Boll film to get a theatrical release. I think that highest-profile belly flop, and the revision of the German tax code loopholes, is what banished Boll to the little league of direct-to-DVD movies. I suppose the movie does involve things happening in the name of a king, but that's being overly generous. There's barely a mention of Jason Statham's (The Transporter) character from the first flick, a commoner who arose to become king and who was slain by an enemy that is pathetic and embarrassing. The only meaningful connection lies in the title and the prospect of Boll trying to draft attention to his sequel off the momentum of his pitiful predecessor.
Granger (Dolph Lungren) is a former Special Forces soldier who has retired and runs a karate studio for kids now. Then one day he stumbles upon a mysterious woman being chased by ninjas (Vancouver's ninja crime rate has skyrocketed since 2008). A portal to another world is opened and Granger gets sucked back to a feudal kingdom. The King (Lochlyn Munro) has awaited for a special visitor who would restore balance to the kingdom, drive away the Dark Lords. The prophecy says that Granger is their man. He's a little skeptical and even turns down the services of a concubine, though still accepts a little cuddling. Manhatten (Natassia Malthe) is the king's medic of sorts and accompanies Granger on his journey to defeat the evil sorceress and save the Kingdom of Whatever.
After having viewed 19 different Boll movies, all to certain degrees of willingness, I can safely say that this is the most boring of the bunch, and hopefully those words will still have meaning. The plot never really evolves further than its premise, another rehash of A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, or to genre fans, a rip-off of Army of Darkness, or to idiots, a rip-off of Black Knight. Granger goes back in time, bumps around some rather stock characters, gets told about prophecies and destiny, and then there's a fight and a dragon and a jump back to Earth and we're done. In between is very little to care about. This is the first movie I've seen that feels completely constructed as one long saggy middle. Just about every scene takes place in the forests of Vancouver (I mean... whatever the hell the other world is called). It gets repetitious very quickly, never seizing on the fish-out-of-water comedic possibilities or just giving in completely to the genre elements of a medieval sword and sorcery flick. It's all just irritating blather; a "chosen one" here, a "dark one" there, something something "prophecy." When people badmouth fantasy, they think of this kind of stuff. I kid you not at one point Malthe's character says, "You are the villain of this tale" to the said villain. Thanks for clarification, but the third act betrayal was telegraphed well over an hour ago.
The writer, Michael Nachoff, has written exactly one other movie, Bloodrayne 3, and served previously as an office coordinator, post-production assistant, and in material serving. That last one sounds like a made-up job or some kind of finessing that a prostitute would put to make her resume sound more professional. Whatever the case, Nachoff has shown that after two movies he cannot be counted on to deliver anything resembling a competent plot. This is the laziest more yawn-inducing hero's journey I've ever witnessed. The movie literally put me to sleep. There are all sorts of dropped setups and subplots, including the notion that Granger must complete three trials, though we only ever get one. That's bad sooth-saying, but then again the seer gets murdered so I can't imagine she was first in her class at prescience. Nachoff keeps using the phrase "time travel," and so do I, but I think what they really mean is dimensional travel. I'm fairly certain that Granger is not just from the future but an altogether different world. Yet at one point a character says, "Your fear will carry you to the pits of hell." Ah, I see that Christian missionaries must have visited this alternate dimension. Oh well, the character also seem to keep erroneously saying "biological weapon" when clearly the bad guy assembled it out of various powders and chemicals. They even refer to his skill as alchemy, which of course is all about biology, right?
The action is mirthless and hastily thrown together, often becoming incomprehensible because the villains, the Dark Lords, wear dark cloaks and our heroes too wear dark clothes. Good luck deciphering who's who on the battlefield. Maybe you'll be like me and just become crippled by apathy. Granger isn't a very compelling hero either. Under Nachoff's compliant attention, he is strictly stock: 1) he is retired, 2) he helps kids, 3) he has a past that haunts him, 4) he drinks to cope, 5) he is entirely boring. If you're going to go fish-out-of-water, at least have your guy be funny. Granger's quips just seem too surreal even given the nature of the movie. After killing a baddie and sampling his stew: "Underdone." On entering the Black Forest: "Given the name, bigger is probably better," and brings a larger broad sword. Oh boy. Nobody's gonna miss you, are they?
The production seems to be taking a cue from Lungren (The Expendables), who is unfazed from beginning to end despite some strange goings-ons. The man just sleepwalks through the whole film, cracking wise in the same somnambulant tone. It's like Lungren swallowed an entire bottle of Quaaludes. Lungren isn't exactly the most charismatic or expressive actor on the planet given that he's made a living being tall and beating up smaller men, but I would have hoped for some life in the guy. He's so straight-laced that it's absurd. It drains any potential interest from the character, sapping our time-traveling hero of empathy. Who cares if he can't be bothered to care? Malthe (Bloodrayne: The Third Reich) is just as uninspiring as his sidekick. She's just so impassive, probably because she doesn't get to wear a corset in this Boll movie to highlight her assets. Letting her speak medieval vernacular and syntax was a mistake. Usually actors can at least adequately hide their displeasure about their participation in a lousy movie. Either these actors aren't even good at that or they just don't care, take your pick.
And now it's time for my regular reoccurring segment in a Boll film review - who got ripped off this time? Allow me room to pontificate. The concept of a fantasy world mixed with some adult themes, like strong bloody violence, nudity, sex, profanity, and darker themes, would lead me to believe that Boll was inspired by HBO's hit fantasy reinvention series, Game of Thrones. Then again Boll shot this movie in December 2010, a full four months before Thrones' aired its excellent pilot episode. Then again who's to say that Thrones didn't influence Boll during the editing stage or at least make him itchy for some reshoots to tart up this tedious movie. At least that would give the viewer something worthwhile to look at besides an oft-used castle exterior that LARP-ers would howl at.
In the Name of the King 2: Two Worlds just reeks of lethargy and indifference. Devoid of interesting characters, an engaging story, even tasty genre elements, this low-budget fantasy flick would falter in comparison to the cheesiest Sci-Fi Channel original movie. I cannot overstate how boring this movie is. I'm struggling even to effectively communicate how monotonous this movie is; I'm tempted to just write "boring" a thousand times but you, dear reader, deserve better. And so I rack my brain to come up with more specific and sarcastic criticism of what is execrably an awful movie. Boll's no stranger to awful movies, but In the Name of the King 2 is the first time where I felt like even he didn't give a damn about his final product in any shape. And it shows.
Nate's Grade: C-
A seriously grand epic with outstanding special effects and stoic acting all round...is what I might be saying if this were a serious attempt at a fantasy film, but its a Boll film.
How does he do it anyway? how does he keep getting major stars to act in his films despite the fact EVERYONE knows he makes crapola, its common knowledge. I realise money must have a say but even that would have to be impressive for some of the folk he manages to get. Maybe the stars think his work will become cults in time? or maybe Boll is involved with the mob and blackmails them into it hehe 'gulp!'
So at last we have a sequel to the original Boll fantasy epic, not connected in anyway to the original, a different beast this time. When I say different I mean just more rips from other well known fantasy films, you know the films. Not actually sure if its suppose to be set in another dimension or the past or another world etc...
To be honest it doesn't actually look too bad, the location work in the 'fantasy zone' is decent and shows some nice gloomy overcast scenery with lakes mountains, forests etc...courtesy of Canada.
That's pretty much all I can say accept for some nice costumes, although it looks like the wardrobe ideas came from the videogame 'Assassin's Creed'. Everything else is obviously rather poor, plot is childishly basic with many many problems. The best revolving around the fact no one from the 'fantasy zone' is bothered by simple advances in human technology like Dolph's clothes, boots, shoe laces, hair cut etc...simple things they would be amazed by I'm sure.
Its not the worst film I've ever seen but there are so many basic issues and inconsistencies, like Dolph being able to defeat several trained martial arts fighters at once in the present day but unable to defeat anyone in the 'fantasy zone', why? if he's such a badass fighter. There is also a dragon towards the finale, it isn't too bad in spots but about as good as a BBC documentary for the rest of the time.
I suppose you can't look too deep into a Boll film, we all know what to expect. Its just a shame as I think if he just tried a little harder he could make some half decent films. Just don't be drawn in by the films poster as its way way more exciting than the actual film.
Once again Uwe Bowell disapoints and disgraces the screen with his absurd and awful style. Dolph Lundgren looks like hes trying to have a goodtime in the film and trying to give it his all, but must must of felt robbed of his dignity and action hero presence to be in a fantasy that has no dignity and even tries to be mildly entertainingMore
Discuss In the Name of the King 2 on our Movie forum!