30
Its convictionless competence is merely dull, denying the pleasures of an outright howler without providing much else.
We hate to say it, but we can't find anywhere to view this film.
What are people saying?
What are critics saying?
10
The Hollywood Reporter by Frank Scheck
It's completely undone by its terrible screenplay, inept direction, oppressive musical score and muddy visual palette.
50
ReelViews by James Berardinelli
A second-rate regurgitation of "The Lord of the Rings." Everything about it, down to the set and costume design, apes Peter Jackson's epic trilogy. However, while "The Lord of the Rings" was a grand story of scope and power, In the Name of the King feels small in more ways than one.
10
A plodding patchwork of derivative fantasy-adventure, medieval production design, risible dialogue, unimpressive CGI trickery and haphazardly edited action sequences.
20
The New York Times by Laura Kern
An awkward “Lord of the Rings” knockoff, it features both elaborate battles and bumbling humor, though it’s never quite clear when you should be laughing.
25
TV Guide Magazine by Maitland McDonagh
Director Uwe Boll sticks with what he knows -- how to turn video games into dull, cheap-looking movies.
11
Austin Chronicle by Marc Savlov
Who among us can explain the enigma wrapped in a riddle surrounded by fierce, ravening, razor-toothed conundrums that is German director Uwe Boll?
25
The Globe and Mail (Toronto) by Rick Groen
Is this movie so god-awful bad that it's hilariously good? Can't be bothered deciding. Figure that's an answer in itself.
25
Cultists will be happy to discover that In The Name Of The King bears all the so-bad-it's-good hallmarks of a classic Boll production.
25
This is the sort of movie where men stand blankly over dead loved ones, then start digging. Masculine stoicism or emotional botox? You decide.