Lumos 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.

Kuma I'm officially boycotting all Uwe Boll movies, I've seen two of his films and their all a waste of time and money, I didn't even realize this was one of this films till it was too late.This movie sucked, terribly. The only thing that I liked was the detail that went into the dragon... otherwise it was terrible. You knew first thing that the "king" was wearing a wig... and a really bad one at that. The fight scenes were pathetic and poorly done, in acting, choreography, and filming of, just terrible. Its said that even in the initial scenes they couldn't even bother to put the fake blood on the knife/dagger/swords even after a stabbing. Why make a fight scene if you aren't going to follow through and make it interesting or even semi-believable? Natassia Malthe must be really good on her knees, because she sure can't act. I find her extremely annoying and cheesy, everything that she means to be serious and dramatic comes out funny and sub-par. Her character is a down right laugh and waste of film time. The character suddenly and out of character, jumps Granger without the slightest bit of a hint at attraction... just suddenly uses Granger as an over-sized and rather talkative dildo.With brings me to Granger, played by Dolph Lundgren.... yeah, he sounds like a really crappy impressionist of Sean Connery, her moves like a guy who's 70 and for someone who's character is former military sure doesn't have an movements or mannerisms that make the view believe that thought.This movie sucked.... was a waste of time and money and wasn't the slightest bit interesting, a complete waste of time and a real snooze fest. Uwe Boll you are a waste of air.

Maya First of: We bought this movie because we wanted to try out a 3D movie. I did like the first film (Statham) and Lundgreen is an OK actor - we knew what to expect. There is no way one can take this movie serious - and it never claims to be one. Dolph has some dry humor, the ladies are nice to look at, it even has some some story and a few amusing situations. No, it was not a waste of money but it's no A-movie either. The story is known from the summary, so I will not go into it. The only thing disturbing was too much camera movement sometimes - that gives you a headache in a 3D movie. The effects are good as it was shot in 3D not after wards altered. Sometimes the scenes appeared like in a computer game but still, I'll probably watch it again in half a year or so. Don't expect too much and you will have a nice TV-evening. Better than some crap that's around or on TV at any given night.

Floated2 Im not exactly sure I even bothered to watch this. Just by reading some reviews, and viewing the trailer, one can tell alone that this film was set-up to fail. I tried giving it a chance but the film just isn't good. Not a surprise really because Uwe Boll directed it. The first one was also awful but that had Jason Statham, Ray Liotta, Ron Pearlman, Burt Reynolds, Leelee Sobieski and had some unintentional comedy from the lines and mid-evil fantasy but this one was just boring and ridiculously insane. Some would find parts in this as comedy but I really didn't. Even though Two Wolds was only 96 mins, it felt longer.I don't hate Uwe Boll like others. Id actually like to see him do a good film (Rampage was good, Darfur was decent and Postal was kind of funny) but apart from that, most of his films are trash. It's as if he just rushed in production and the script and the end result ends up coming out as trash. He shouldn't direct video game type films, seeing as Rampage was loosely based on a video game and that turned out surprisingly well. In The Name of the King: Two Wolds has a current rating of 3.6 with only 638 votes (showing that most people are sick of him by now with so little votes, but the film just been released I believe a few weeks ago- votes will go up by the end of the year).I know this film was bad but I think Boll has a setup for a sequel. The last scene shows something like it, in which Dolph Lundgren gets home from the mid-evil times to the present after following the "fake" king into the portal, they start attacking one another and Lundgren drowns him in his bathtub. Afterwards he goes in the kitchen then pours himself a whiskey and talks to a picture of his dead war comrades. The camera then zooms in on the medallion then cuts to the black screen. Film ends, credits roll.