IMDb RATING
3.1/10
5.5K
YOUR RATING
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.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.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.
Natalie Burn
- Elianna
- (as Natalia Guslistaya)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
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 Paunovic
CGI is better than expected
The Bad:
Script is poor
Stupidly cliched
Lungrens injury is blatant
Things I Learnt From This Movie:
Every fantasy movie needs a black forest from which no man has ever made out alive!
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 Paunovic
CGI is better than expected
The Bad:
Script is poor
Stupidly cliched
Lungrens injury is blatant
Things I Learnt From This Movie:
Every fantasy movie needs a black forest from which no man has ever made out alive!
It amazes me that people are still giving this guy money to make movies. He has yet again demonstrated that he should never ever ever make another movie again. The story was probably one of the worst ideas he has had yet. After the last movie with a great cast being, yet another, total let down I didn't have high expectations on this one. Even with the extremely low expectations I had going in to this one it was worse than I could possibly imagine. The acting was mediocre, and the overall plot was not interesting at all. I was ashamed that Dolf even took the part in this movie.
Save your money and don't bother with this.
Save your money and don't bother with this.
Let me begin by saying that I found the first "In the Name of the King" quite entertaining and I gave it a 7 or 8 stars, if I recall correctly, even though it didn't deserve them. This film may not even deserve the three I'm giving it. I'm trying my best to think up of something coherent to say in this film's defence, and I find it quite problematic. Even if we forget about the blatantly obvious car behind the trees in a few medieval scenes, there's still a lot of problems remaining. The acting feels unnatural, events happen for no reason, epic armies consist of ten men on each side. Come on, herr Boll! You did far better with the first one. Yes, the first one was hands-down better. I thought about racking my brains on some of the things and events in the film, but this will mean that I should include spoilers, which I wouldn't really like.
The largest problem however seems to be that the film attempts to be "larger" than it is. It tries to imply that it's grand, while constantly contradicting itself through the points suppiled above.
I really like this film's poster though. Please, dear reader, open a new tab with the picture and analyse it. You see our hero Granger clad in what seems to be full plate armour, holding a longsword heroically. You see a battle of epic proportions happening in the background. You see a fair lady dish out the pain using a hand-and-a-half sword or something like that. You see a dragon that breathes fire with devastating effect. You see that guy with the beard on the left of the sword-maiden (played by Aleks Paunovic) about to stab someone in this conflict of epic proportions. You see a great city, or at least a part of it, in the background. What I really like about this poster is that the film also contradicts each and every single damn thing in it. Not ONE thing is the same as the poster portrays it.
If you're a masochist like I would appear to be (for watching yet another Boll-film), or if you like bad films like I do, go ahead and give it a watch. Else, please go and watch something more entertaining. Your life is more valuable than this film.
The largest problem however seems to be that the film attempts to be "larger" than it is. It tries to imply that it's grand, while constantly contradicting itself through the points suppiled above.
I really like this film's poster though. Please, dear reader, open a new tab with the picture and analyse it. You see our hero Granger clad in what seems to be full plate armour, holding a longsword heroically. You see a battle of epic proportions happening in the background. You see a fair lady dish out the pain using a hand-and-a-half sword or something like that. You see a dragon that breathes fire with devastating effect. You see that guy with the beard on the left of the sword-maiden (played by Aleks Paunovic) about to stab someone in this conflict of epic proportions. You see a great city, or at least a part of it, in the background. What I really like about this poster is that the film also contradicts each and every single damn thing in it. Not ONE thing is the same as the poster portrays it.
If you're a masochist like I would appear to be (for watching yet another Boll-film), or if you like bad films like I do, go ahead and give it a watch. Else, please go and watch something more entertaining. Your life is more valuable than this film.
By second most boring film I mean it was the longest 90 minutes of my life, the most boring film I've ever seen was a low budget horror movie called NECROSIS, a movie with a pace so slow it actually feels like its standing still.
However, deep in the back of my mind I don't think Dolph Lundgren is very happy with this film, to think the other potential candidates for the lead role were Randy Couture and Steve Austin (Imagine how it would've turned out then.) the film honestly is terrible, Uwe Boll doesn't create scenes that are great to look at, they are dull and are basically just tight close ups of the actors, most of the cast don't even fit their roles, Lochlyn Munro is completely miss cast as the king, I mean I don't have a problem with him as an actor or otherwise but he doesn't work as the king, Natassia Malthe who is a gorgeous woman and a great actress, struggles to say her lines with a straight face but if you hear the stuff she has to say you can't blame her.
The plot itself is actually pretty lousy and slower than a snail, to be more specific if you're familiar with many adventure games where you ask a character a question about something and he or she takes one to two hours to give you the full history of everything than that's how this film really is for a full 62 hours before the first action scene eventually happens.
Overall, the one good thing about it is that its a great alternative to a sleeping pill but otherwise its better to go for something directed by someone other than Uwe Boll, I know making movies is hard but you can only cut a film so much slack.
However, deep in the back of my mind I don't think Dolph Lundgren is very happy with this film, to think the other potential candidates for the lead role were Randy Couture and Steve Austin (Imagine how it would've turned out then.) the film honestly is terrible, Uwe Boll doesn't create scenes that are great to look at, they are dull and are basically just tight close ups of the actors, most of the cast don't even fit their roles, Lochlyn Munro is completely miss cast as the king, I mean I don't have a problem with him as an actor or otherwise but he doesn't work as the king, Natassia Malthe who is a gorgeous woman and a great actress, struggles to say her lines with a straight face but if you hear the stuff she has to say you can't blame her.
The plot itself is actually pretty lousy and slower than a snail, to be more specific if you're familiar with many adventure games where you ask a character a question about something and he or she takes one to two hours to give you the full history of everything than that's how this film really is for a full 62 hours before the first action scene eventually happens.
Overall, the one good thing about it is that its a great alternative to a sleeping pill but otherwise its better to go for something directed by someone other than Uwe Boll, I know making movies is hard but you can only cut a film so much slack.
Well, what can u say. You cant blame Uwe Boll for not trying, can you? Make no mistake, this movie is not going to disappoint you - IF you are a true Uwe Boll-fan. Im NOT. You might think Uwe Boll learned from his mistakes from his last movies, but his directing style is not going anywhere - it is still utterly horrible. Two worlds does not have a big budget as some of Uwe bolls other movies, nor are there any bigger names to talk about either. The story is just plain stupid and the way it is told is even more stupid. At some point you will wonder if you are watching a bad comedy or something, cause you simply cant take it seriously. I don't even have to tell you what the movie is about cause you will most likely turn the movie off before you even passed the intro-scene anyway. The movie does not even qualify for television, its that bad. The only reason i watched this movie was to see HOW bad it was. Considering all the movies Uwe Boll has directed, and not progressed an inch from it, Uwe Boll must be the worst director ever out there.
Did you know
- TriviaDolph Lundgren had turned down Uwe Boll's offer once, before he eventually agreed on the advice of associate producer Bob Van Ronkel who had introduced them during a festival in Kazakhstan. Lundgren said in an interview to Empire magazine: "It was an experience, it wasn't exactly my taste, but I did it for other reasons. I was getting divorced at the time and I needed some cash quickly to pay for a few things... lawyers."
- GoofsWhen in front of king's castle gates cars parked behind the trees can be seen several times.
- How long is In the Name of the King: Two Worlds?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- In the Name of the King 2
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $4,500,000 (estimated)
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content