Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
32 of 33 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Just A Bit Of Fun For 2 Hours.. Nothing More Or Less., 23 Jun 2008
I'll be honest - I didn't think this was too bad. Ok, so it shamelessly rips off the million times better LOTR movies, but it was fairly enjoyable! I grew up in the time of Hawk The Slayer, Beastmaster, Sword And The Sorceror, Dragonslayer, Krull etc. Trust me, some of these were no Lord Of The Rings either! For every Conan the Barbarian, Excalibur or Dragonslayer (classics!) there was The Iron Master, The Sword Of The Barbarians & Ator The Fighting Eagle!!! Red Sonja and Willow were a bit iffy too, to say nothing of Sword Of The Valiant...
At least, this is innocent of any movie or album's cardinal sin, in that it is never boring! There's plenty of action, the CG is decent in most places - there's some reasonably impressive 'Marching Army' visuals, and the battle choreography is ok, apart from some kung fu elements which are misplaced. Have to say that the 'evil' army, a beast like race known as The Krug are basically a rip off of The Orcs, right down to the subterranean caverns that they live in! The Krug make up & costumes are a bit shoddy and won't give Weta Workshop any sleepless nights!
At least, the armour & costumes are more impressive for the 'good' army!
It's not as dark as The Rings epics and certainly suitable for younger viewers - there's no sex or strong violence, the battle scenes are relativeley bloodless. The film is often light hearted, and after a bit of a shaky start, improves considerably with time
It's basically like a pantomime - lot's of well known faces turn up, in something that is just out to entertain!
Jason Statham; unusually cast but more than ok as the hero, Burt Reynolds; improves as the story evolves, John Rhys-Davies; always good in any movie!
Kristanna Loken; as gorgeous as in Terminator 3.
Ray Liotta; have to say totally miscast as the evil sorceror!(a REALLY poor villain), Matthew Lillard; as entertaining as a bout of dermatitis!
It's not Return Of The King, It's not Troy, BUT if you can happily watch Hercules: The Legendary Journeys or Xena:The Warrior Princess, then there's a fair chance you'll enjoy it.
I know this movie has been really slated, and I can't disagree with a lot of the bad press, BUT come on, how many of us happily sit through Warlords Of Atlantis on Channel 5 or Land That Time Forgot on BBC2 ?? The FX in those films were awlful, even for the 1970's BUT we enjoyed them, we suspended disbelief!
There's a few decent extras on the disc, it hardly costs the earth, so if you like your fantasy, and are a bit forgiving, then at least rent it. It's more than passable entertainment for 2 hours. If you hate it, then dig out the old 'uns like Jason And The Argonauts or The Seventh Voyage Of Sinbad...
|
|
|
14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
One of the better High Fantasy offerings, 26 May 2008
In the world of heroic fantasy there are very few really good movies outside of the LOTR franchise. We watched this movie in a double bill along side 10000BC and to be 100% honest there was no one there who felt this was the weaker of the two!
The cast is good, the story though not groundbreaking does career along at a good pace with enogh going on that I did not become disengaged.
In short if you like your high fantasy then you will probably like this.
If you take the rather sad but not uncommon approach that all fantasy is by default rather rubbish and only something spectacularly good is comparable to mediocre offerings in other genres then this is probably not hte movie for you.
|
|
|
11 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
So bad it hurts, 5 Sep 2008
I like Jason Statham as an action hero and with a cast that also included Burt Reynolds and Ray Liotta I was willing to give In the Name of the King a go. I really wish I hadn't. These guys were so miscast that it bordered on the hilarious.
Can you picture Burt Reynolds as the king. No....neither could Burt Reynolds.... and he doesn't even try. Picture his nephew and heir? Do you see Matthew Lillard! No....me neither. How could anyone possibly take a fantasy epic with Burt Reynolds and Matthew Lillard as the only royalty in evidence as anything other than a joke? Lillard plays himself, and his hamminess is only outdone by Ray Liotta as the evil wizard villain. Liotta is so amazingly bad it's hard to believe he would sign up for this garbage. I also don't quite understand why Ray Liotta was dressed like Liberace. I expected him at any moment to stop controlling the evil beasties and start playing the piano. He certainly had the cheesy banter and flamboyant moves down pat.
Jason Statham's performance wasn't awful, but his character was such a cardboard cliché; the humble farmer with phenomenal fighting skills and a mysterious past. The physical effort Stratham puts into the fight scenes and stunts is astonishing but even he can't save this movie from everything else that's wrong with it.
To sum up - the dialog is awful, the writing is yawn-inducing, add the one-dimensional characters and you've got nothing going for this movie. The person responsible for writing this story seems to have ripped off nearly a dozen different fantasy films without bothering to veil the attempt. This movie was definitely one of the top ten worst films I've ever seen.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|