Un asesino es contratado para un último trabajo: secuestrar a los hijos de un empresario local. Las cosas se desmadran cuando resulta que ha sido elegido para regresar a la Edad Media y devo... Leer todoUn asesino es contratado para un último trabajo: secuestrar a los hijos de un empresario local. Las cosas se desmadran cuando resulta que ha sido elegido para regresar a la Edad Media y devolver el orden a un reino sumido en el caos.Un asesino es contratado para un último trabajo: secuestrar a los hijos de un empresario local. Las cosas se desmadran cuando resulta que ha sido elegido para regresar a la Edad Media y devolver el orden a un reino sumido en el caos.
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Elenco
- Boy
- (as Yoan Mihaylov)
- Woman
- (as Tatyana Pedersen)
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
It's so bad, on every possible level, that it become funny.
Nothing more to add than the other reviewers on this website has already said:
- acting is awful
- logic is not present
- camera does nothing extraordinary other than being present
- all the aerial shots of our marvellous heroes came from the same 300*200 acres meadow
But I would still recommend it for a good laught. Dominic Purcell doesn't seems to really understand what is he doing in this production. The 'large' battles of the movie are edited with a new camera angle every 1.2 second (which will make you dizzy, be careful, this movie wants to harm you) and the ending doesn't make any sense.
Uwe Boll also hide a third reich logo on one of the waggon, close to the end of the movie.
What I liked about ITNOTK 3: Dominic. His acting was low-key and emotionless, but I guess that's appropriate for a hit man. The landscape. The dragon which was pretty good, although I would have liked to see more of it. And to see the hero engage with it a little more than just firing at it.
What I didn't like: the cheesy accents. The inspiring speech before the climactic battle was embarrassing. The plot: it made little sense.Nothing fit together: Why did the same actor play both villains, in the past and the present? Why did the hero have the tattoo? Why did the little girls have the amulet? Why was he chosen to lead them to victory when he actually did very little? And my biggest question: why did he decide to rescue the children when he had been the kidnapper? What made him change from a bad-ass hit man to a compassionate (I presume) rescuer? Was it something the princess said? ("That's not a job for a man.") Is that really enough to turn someone's life around?
The best line in the movie: "We're all going to die."
Was it worth watching? If you like Purcell, and dragons. If you want a coherent plot and superb acting, look elsewhere.
I found the fake reviews hilarious. 90% of the reviews for this film are fake, made by members that (surprise) joined IMDB the same day they wrote their review, and they only have one review written, the one about this film.
I'm a longtime Boll defender, movies like this do not help my cause at all.
The first In The Name Of The King (2007) was mediocre but passable, it's sequel (2011) was a bit of mess but nothing too offensive. This however, is a slap in the face with a part of Uwe's anatomy we should not discuss anywhere........ever.
Here we see mercenary Dominic Purcell ham it up as another guy ripped through space and time, mistaken for a "Chosen one" and forced to battle evil forces including an awful looking cgi dragon.
Nothing against Purcell in fact I think the guy is a decent enough actor for the genres he tends to do, but here he is officially phoning in his performance and looks bored from the outset.
Now onto the stupidity, for a start our protagonist is a bad guy with few redeeming features. No movie which starts with a guy kidnapping children is going to get me to root for him.
Secondly the front cover is yet another dishonest one, at no point does Purcell wear a suit of armor.
Boring, mindless stupidity is all you'll find here.
The Good:
Not so much
The Bad:
This is a protagonist, really?
CGI is really poor
Unforgivably boring
Dishonest cover
Things I Learnt From This Movie:
Even Hollywood recognises womens insistence on going for the biggest a-hole available
Upon being pulled through a portal you will have instantly attained the ability to wield a sword like an expert
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThere is a tattoo on the arm of Hazen Kaine, played by Dominic Purcell. The sign has a very important role in the plot of the film. In reality it is based on the Pliska Rosette - a seven-pointed bronze rosette with a type of runic letters and signs on it found in 1961 in Pliska, the medieval capital of Bulgaria. It is dated by archaeologists to the VII-IX century. The plot of the film also takes place in Bulgaria.
- ErroresAfter the first battle, Arabella and Hazen are sitting by the river. Arabella has two very visible eyebrow piercing marks above her right eye.
- Citas
Hazen Kaine: Listen. I understand what I need to do now. I need to defeat Tervin to get the medallion so I can go home and you won't have to worry about Tervin anymore. We can work together.
Arabella: Look, you fight only for yourself and you're not a skilled fighter, even if you think you are.
Hazen Kaine: Try me.
Selecciones populares
- How long is In the Name of the King: The Last Mission?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- In the Name of the King III: The Last Job
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 3,500,000 (estimado)
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 26 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.78 : 1