In the Name of the King II: Two Worlds (2011) – Review

3 Stars

Anyone who claims Uwe Boll is the worst director of all time hasn’t seen enough movies. I would argue that Roland Emmerich is just as critically derived, but alas that debate leads to madness. In the Name of the King II: Two Worlds is actually a much better film than the original. It’s true the first had a larger budget with a big name cast, but that picture moved in ebbs and flows and for the majority of it’s 156 minute running time it was just plain dull. This sequel is an outlandish tale that is far more streamlined and very amusing. Personally I loved the tongue in cheek touches in the witty script by longtime special effects guru turned scribe Michael Nachoff. If you’re wondering if this is a true sequel or a cash grab to pull in fans of the original, I’d say it’s both. There is no real reason this couldn’t have been titled just Two Worlds, however there is a minor revelation that Dolph’s character Granger is the son of Jason Statham’s character from the first film. Turns out old Dolph was born in the ancient days but hidden in an orphanage in present day America. Judging by that last sentence you’ll know if King 2 is your kind of movie.

There is a certain level of production value evident in some great looking shots and a melodic score by Jessica de Rooij that is a bit underused. Most will probably feel cheated in the lack of action and the fact that Dolph’s character never truly embraces the craziness around him. He’s chosen to play his character as a put on, incinuating that he’s in on the joke. Personally I feel the movie is better because of it. The story of a modern day warrior transported to medieval times is quickly paced and clearly draws out it’s plot, then proceeds to go about it’s business with charm and a wink to the audience. It’s reminiscent of something that would have played in the era of USA Up All Night with Gilbert Godfrey.

Story wise there is definitely a Wizard of Oz meets Beastmaster 2 vibe going on here, and I mean that as a compliment. The basic story structure most closely resembles A Knight in King Arthurs Court. The cast in these sword and sandals flicks is always important. An actor who is a bit too modern is just as deadly as one that overplays his or her role. Are you listening Matthew Lillard? Locklyn Munro is a lot of fun (hiding behind some laughable facial hair) and a welcome sight after having fallen out of public view in recent years. Some of the other roles, while not as well known as the stars from part one, do their best and come off to varying degrees of effectiveness.

In the Name of the King II: Two Worlds is a suprisingly good time and I’m encouraged at the results that the collaboration between Dolph and Uwe has produced. Uwe Boll is one of our most underrated genre directors, if you scoff, check out Far Cry, Tunnel Rats or Rampage. Get off the Boll-hater bandwagon and give King 2 a spin, you could do worse. Trust me.

Director: Uwe Boll
Stars: Dolph Lundgren, Natassia Malthe, Lochlyn Munro

6 thoughts on “In the Name of the King II: Two Worlds (2011) – Review

  • February 7, 2012 at 11:43 am

    This movie was trash. Id have to say the first film was better than this, but that isnt saying much.

  • January 29, 2012 at 12:02 am

    To give ‘ In The Name Of The King Two Worlds’ 3 stars says to me that you are receiving money from whoever made this absolutely stupid, poorly made piece of crap. Only a deaf and dumb blind moron could give it three stars out of four.
    As a reviewer you fail miserably and therefore can NEVER be a reliable source of movie reviews. I strongly urge that you get a different job.
    This website has proven beyong a doubt that it has NO credibility when it comes to movie reviews.

    • January 30, 2012 at 7:14 pm

      Firstly I’d encourage you to read the reviews instead of just the star ratings which clearly, as you’ve stated you don’t know who made this film, you did not.

      Secondly ratings are not directly comparable. We aren’t giving away a cash prize here for technical prowess, and as such we don’t “judge” the movies based on any one standard. It’s a level of enjoyment and entertainment the reviewer got out of the film. Every reviewer does it this way, unless it’s a review on the quality of a DVD or Blu-ray, in which there are strict guidelines for what is good and what is bad. To think that this three star rating would directly compare to a three star rating for a Spielberg film with a budget of $100 million or any other movie is moronic.

      Thirdly if watching this movie hurt you this badly maybe movies aren’t your thing. I hope leaving a worthless comment such as this, in which you don’t explain why you disagree with the reviewer, only that you’re opinion must be better for some reason, allows you to get over the pain you suffered while watching In the Name of the King 2.

      Thank you for you comment, we’ll be shuttering our doors immediately based off your sage and wise advice.

  • January 21, 2012 at 5:42 pm

    hoy vi en el nombre del rey me gusto mucho mucho

  • January 20, 2012 at 11:04 am

    estoy anciosa que llege a CHILE viva DOLPH LUNDGREN

  • January 20, 2012 at 11:02 am

    dolph una maravilla


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *