King Rising - Au nom du Roi
Original title: In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale
IMDb RATING
3.8/10
52K
YOUR RATING
A man named Farmer sets out to rescue his kidnapped wife and avenge the death of his son, two acts committed by the Krugs, a race of animal-warriors who are controlled by the evil Gallian.A man named Farmer sets out to rescue his kidnapped wife and avenge the death of his son, two acts committed by the Krugs, a race of animal-warriors who are controlled by the evil Gallian.A man named Farmer sets out to rescue his kidnapped wife and avenge the death of his son, two acts committed by the Krugs, a race of animal-warriors who are controlled by the evil Gallian.
- Awards
- 4 wins & 5 nominations total
Featured reviews
I am a big fan of fantasy movies. I love Lord of the Rings. But, I am sorry to say, this movies shows, what all can go wrong! The story is thin, the acting is average at most, the dialogs are embarrassing dumb. Even the special effects are not up to date. In one scene the CGI characters even judder ! The only nice thing are Claire Forlani, Kristanna Loken and Eva Padberg (although only one short scene) - but only because of their visual appearance. Leelee Sobieski is disappointing stiff. Jason Stratham is a good actor for action movies, but fiction movies have a story, too. Burt Reynolds - I don't know, why he did it. John Rhys-Davies a veteran to this genre - helpless. Ray Liotta - suffers from bad directing.
We went to this film intentionally (knowing its reputation) as a means of escaping a really busy and stressful Friday. We don't recommend the film to anyone with serious cinematic intentions, However, as kitsch this film almost succeeds. So, OK, we tried to come home and convince our "knowing" kids that "In the name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale" was worth the Friday opener vote, but broke down laughing about five minutes into our rave when they just were not having any of it.
So let me add a few cogent notes. For 'entertainment' value, given what we were looking for after a long Friday, we were very satisfied, though we worried at times that our guffaws and groans, and open commentary, might have disturbed some of the other 30 or so people in the theater (but for their own laughing). King Burt Reynolds? Oh well. We have to admit that Ray Liotta's "Goodfellas" reprise as an evil mage was the most amazing thing we've seen since Jack Lemmon's service as Horatio in Branagh's "Hamlet." Of course, this mention of Uwe Boll's effort alongside Kenneth Branagh is totally appropriate, except that Branagh's "Hamlet" had little entertainment value of any kind. School is still out on which of these two can make the worst film of a decade.
If Matthew Lillard's over-the-top contributions to "In the name o..." (which is all of the title that fits on the ticket marquee at the theater) served well in a film with vine dangling amazons, synchronized ninja archers, prolonged out-of-focus long shots, granular irrational close-ups, and some of the most inane dialog in the history of film, one wondered in that case why Scooby Doo didn't put in a cameo in one of the dungeon or castle scenes.
Nonetheless, many of the second tier characters were convincing and well acted, amidst all the mish-mosh of incongruous effects and disaffects. So there were moments when one, though not entirely forgetting how bad this film was, felt sorry for many of those who found themselves in it. Or should they all have known better?
But laugh! Oh my, did we laugh, to the extent that it became uncomfortable laughing at a screen strewn with dead bodies and actors struggling for motivation. Oh, we could have seen high drama or thought-provoking art, but this way our Friday night was pure poetry...
the dungeon it was dark and dank the bodies in a pile and there atop the smelly heap was Ray Liotta's smile.
his polyester wizard suit bespoke a man with guile but then behind a squeaky line was Ray Liotta's smile
when Uwe Boll directs a film the casting's done with style that's why for evil, nothing's like sweet Ray Liotta's smile
and though we hoot and holler at such feckless goofy bile now laughing all the way to bank is Ray Liotta's smile
So let me add a few cogent notes. For 'entertainment' value, given what we were looking for after a long Friday, we were very satisfied, though we worried at times that our guffaws and groans, and open commentary, might have disturbed some of the other 30 or so people in the theater (but for their own laughing). King Burt Reynolds? Oh well. We have to admit that Ray Liotta's "Goodfellas" reprise as an evil mage was the most amazing thing we've seen since Jack Lemmon's service as Horatio in Branagh's "Hamlet." Of course, this mention of Uwe Boll's effort alongside Kenneth Branagh is totally appropriate, except that Branagh's "Hamlet" had little entertainment value of any kind. School is still out on which of these two can make the worst film of a decade.
If Matthew Lillard's over-the-top contributions to "In the name o..." (which is all of the title that fits on the ticket marquee at the theater) served well in a film with vine dangling amazons, synchronized ninja archers, prolonged out-of-focus long shots, granular irrational close-ups, and some of the most inane dialog in the history of film, one wondered in that case why Scooby Doo didn't put in a cameo in one of the dungeon or castle scenes.
Nonetheless, many of the second tier characters were convincing and well acted, amidst all the mish-mosh of incongruous effects and disaffects. So there were moments when one, though not entirely forgetting how bad this film was, felt sorry for many of those who found themselves in it. Or should they all have known better?
But laugh! Oh my, did we laugh, to the extent that it became uncomfortable laughing at a screen strewn with dead bodies and actors struggling for motivation. Oh, we could have seen high drama or thought-provoking art, but this way our Friday night was pure poetry...
the dungeon it was dark and dank the bodies in a pile and there atop the smelly heap was Ray Liotta's smile.
his polyester wizard suit bespoke a man with guile but then behind a squeaky line was Ray Liotta's smile
when Uwe Boll directs a film the casting's done with style that's why for evil, nothing's like sweet Ray Liotta's smile
and though we hoot and holler at such feckless goofy bile now laughing all the way to bank is Ray Liotta's smile
OK, first off, all of the glowing, gushing reviews here were obviously (OBVIOUSLY) planted by someone doing PR for the film (which is shameful in and of itself). There is no way that anyone sane would think this movie was anything more than laughable tripe.
I saw it at a preview, and have to say that I was expecting much more. I didn't realize that Ewe Boll was directing, otherwise I would have skipped it altogether (he should never be allowed near a camera, ever). However, I like nearly every star, enjoy the genre and have been a big fan of the video games for years now, so I figured that this would be worth seeing (nothing will ever compare to LOTR, but it sounded promising).
So yeah, there's not much I can say that hasn't been said here already. Horrible dialog, two-dimensional characters, lousy cinematography, cheesy effects and a plot which is nearly impossible to care about makes this one worth skipping.
Seriously, don't pay to see this. It will only encourage them to give Ewe more projects.
I saw it at a preview, and have to say that I was expecting much more. I didn't realize that Ewe Boll was directing, otherwise I would have skipped it altogether (he should never be allowed near a camera, ever). However, I like nearly every star, enjoy the genre and have been a big fan of the video games for years now, so I figured that this would be worth seeing (nothing will ever compare to LOTR, but it sounded promising).
So yeah, there's not much I can say that hasn't been said here already. Horrible dialog, two-dimensional characters, lousy cinematography, cheesy effects and a plot which is nearly impossible to care about makes this one worth skipping.
Seriously, don't pay to see this. It will only encourage them to give Ewe more projects.
and is true, if you want something new in a fantasy movie then expect some good story. If you expect new creatures and new settings then you don't know what this genre is about. For example you cannot take the cowboys and the horses out from a western - is not going to be a western in the end no?
This movie is OK i think. The bad guys and the good ones. Is true that the details are a little bad and is true that seems everything is too rushed but just don't think like the herd. I can find many errors in The Gladiator but that doesn't mean is BAD. If you like fantasy movies you should see this movie.
(comments here need a little more objectivity - i'm really not interested to come on IMDb and read 30 comments with phrases like "i think this director is so bad - he should stop hurting people!". be mature and serious when comment please.)
This movie is OK i think. The bad guys and the good ones. Is true that the details are a little bad and is true that seems everything is too rushed but just don't think like the herd. I can find many errors in The Gladiator but that doesn't mean is BAD. If you like fantasy movies you should see this movie.
(comments here need a little more objectivity - i'm really not interested to come on IMDb and read 30 comments with phrases like "i think this director is so bad - he should stop hurting people!". be mature and serious when comment please.)
Okay, a crap script. Serious problem with that. But some good acting, beautiful sets, nicely shot, good special effects. If you want to see a fantasy movie, and you have seen all the good ones, this is worth a spin. Loads of action. Well choreographed. The trailer movies on the DVD imply you are an idiot man who likes to watch movies for the boobs and violence, which doesn't set the mood, I admit. But there is no exploitation of women in this movie, and some of the women even take up swords. So, okay, this isn't Shakespeare. If fact, prepare thyself for character arcs that are vapid and almost theme-less. It's basically a medieval/supernatural revenge tale. But if you're just looking for a no-brainer fix of non-dragon fantasy and action, especially on a weekend afternoon, you will enjoy this. Jason S. is excellent.
Did you know
- TriviaScript development took over a year. In the end, Doug Taylor re-wrote 80% of the script because the original story was considered too similar to the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy.
- GoofsWhen King Konreid, on horseback, addresses his troops in front of the castle, neither he nor his horse casts a shadow because of the poor compositing work.
- Quotes
General Backler: In your world, do you not kneel before your king?
Farmer Daimon: In my world, the king's army is expected to protect the kingdom, not just the castle.
- Alternate versionsDirector's Cut (available on DVD) is 34 minutes longer and includes 13 new scenes.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Troldspejlet: Episode #39.9 (2008)
- SoundtracksCarry the Blessed Home
Performed by Blind Guardian
Music & Lyrics by Hansi Kürsch (as Kürsch) / André Olbrich (as Olbrich)
Published by BG Publishing/Warner Chappell
Courtesy of Nuclear Blast
- How long is In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- En el nombre del rey
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $60,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $4,775,656
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $3,265,000
- Jan 13, 2008
- Gross worldwide
- $13,097,915
- Runtime2 hours 7 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was King Rising - Au nom du Roi (2007) officially released in Canada in English?
Answer