Yeah, the king had a cadre of bodyguard ninja, and there were a troupe of Cirque du Soleil trained elves.
There was a Bloom County cartoon with the punchline "Okay, it wasn't that bad, but Lord it wasn't good." That's how I felt about this movie. JJ Mohareb On Jan 13, 2008 11:41 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "mediocre", not "bad"? Was it good for a laugh at least? I chuckled just > watching Statham's incredibly anachronistic fighting moves in the trailers > > Ninjas and lesbian elves? WTF??? > > -------------- Original message -------------- > From: "Justin Mohareb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Already seen it; friend of mine had a couple passes. > > > > It was a mediocre fantasy flick. The ninjas and lesbian elves were cool. > > > > Amusingly enough, Boll's production company uses German production > > regulations that make it a great tax shelter, so he has no problem > > getting funding (if they make money, they make money. If they lose > > money, they make money). > > > > JJ Mohareb > > > > > On Jan 13, 2008 8:59 PM, wrote: > > > How does Uwe Boll keep getting work? Has he made even *one* picture that > > > rises > > to the level of being half bad? Surely none of you plan to waste your > > ducats on > > this film? And Jason Statham: he has good screen presence. The potential > > for it, > > at least. I've enjoyed him in fare such as "The One" and "The Italian Job". > > Liked the first "Transporter" okay, but the plot was DOA. I can see Statham, > > given the right material, being a really good action star, maybe even get > > his > > only spy series or something. But, easygoing, undemanding guy that Statham > > is, > > he also keeps doing true junk like "Crank" and, I guess, this movie... > > > > > > An E online review is below. The source doesn't really matter: i'll bet > > > all > > the reviews are the same, but I found this funny from it: > > > > > > 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, > > > > > > **************** > > > > > > [E online Review] > > > > > > Review 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. > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Read the Bitter Guide to the Bitter Guy. > > http://thebitterguy.livejournal.com > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- Read the Bitter Guide to the Bitter Guy. http://thebitterguy.livejournal.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
