Jason Statham starred in one of the worst video game movie flops of all time

Director Uwe Boll is considered one of the worst film directors of all time. In the mid-2000s, he directed a series of well-received but critically panned video game adaptations that immediately sank to the lowest point in filmmakers’ assessments. In 2003 he directed “House of the Dead” and followed that up with “Alone in the Dark” and “BloodRayne” in 2005. He chased this with “In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale”, “BloodRayne 2: Deliverance” and “Postal” in 2007 and crowned his success in 2008 with “Far Cry”. Fans of the games these films were based on were outraged that Boll was so clumsy with the source material, and fans of the cinematic medium were outraged by it

Despite his critical reputation, Boll remained prolific, sometimes making several films a year. He directed “First Shift” and “Bandidos” in 2024 and is expected to release “Run” in 2025.

I interviewed Boll and it’s easy to see why he continues to get work. He is talkative, smart and pragmatic. When confronted with his critical reputation, Boll typically shrugs and responds with “whatever,” feeling that his achievement in producing a film surpasses anything critics have to say. He is also a source of ideas and knows how to present film treatments concisely and succinctly so that they are fascinating. He loves making films and that’s all he needs.

Furthermore, Boll’s films all feature an illogically impressive cast. He revealed that he usually only calls famous actors on filming weekends and asks if they are available. If they wanted a few bucks to sit on a throne and read a few lines and maybe take six hours out of their Saturday, then they’re in the movie. Some disgraced actors apply to stage their comeback via Boll.

This must certainly have been the case with In the Name of the King, which starred Jason Statham and Ron Perlman as well as Burt Reynolds, Ray Liotta, John Rhys-Davies and Matthew Lillard.

In the Name of the King is based on Dungeon Siege, a medieval fantasy role-playing game released in 2002 by Gas Powered Games. The story is about an evil magician named Gallian (Liotta) who attacked evil monsters called Krug in the land of Ehb. A simple man named Farmer (Statham) is able to protect his farm, but loses his son in the attack and his wife (Claire Forlani) is kidnapped. Farmer and his friends Norick (Perlman) and Bastian (Will Sanderson) go on a quest to rescue Farmer’s wife. Eventually, through his bravery on the battlefield, Farmer will attract the attention of King Konreid (Reynolds) and be adopted as his son.

The theatrical cut of In the Name of the King was a lengthy 127 minutes, although Boll’s 156-minute director’s cut was released on Blu-ray. Not that the extra footage helped much. “In the Name of the King” was released to abysmal reviews, only achieving a 4% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes (based on 51 reviews). Critics found the performances to be one-sidedly poor and the production values to be noticeably low. Although the film’s budget was around $60 million, this was the most expensive film of Boll’s career. Marc Savlov of the Austin Chronicle compared “King” unfavorably to the works of Edward D. Wood, Jr. and Laura Kern of The New York Times noticed that everyone on the screen looked dazed, like they were dressing up instead of starring in a movie.

The film also lost a lot of money. That $60 million budget only managed to recover $13 million worldwide. Many video game fans already knew Boll’s work from “House of the Dead” and “Alone in the Dark” and would be wise to stay away from it. Boll claimed he was a genius.

Once the blood was in the water, the cry of “In the Name of the King” grew. It became clear evidence that Uwe Boll was the Ed Wood of his generation, lacking only Wood’s strange, idiosyncratic dialogue and sexual fetishes. The Razzies nominated “In the Name of the King” in five categories, including “Worst Picture.” Boll won the award for worst director, although the film “lost” the top honor that year to “The Love Guru.”

Oddly enough, despite being a huge bomb and becoming one of the most hated films in years, Dungeon Siege’s IP still apparently has enough influence behind it to warrant a few follow-up films. In 2011, Boll reconsidered the original film’s premise and decided to make it a time travel story, taking a modern man and placing him in the world of Dungeon Siege. In the sequel, In the Name of the King 2: Two Worlds, Dolph Lundgren played a modern soldier who is magically transported to the Middle Ages. While one might expect an Army of Darkness-style farce, the film is neither action-packed nor funny. Its biggest advantage is that it was made for only $4.5 million. That’s modest, even for a direct-to-video release. Lundgren was the only notable celebrity this time.

Then, in 2014, Boll returned with In the Name of the King 3: The Last Mission. This film starred Prison Break’s Dominic Purcell and retained the time travel element from the second film. Purcell played an assassin who is thrown back in time thanks to a magical amulet. He fights dragons etc. This one only cost $3.5 million. It may be enough to acknowledge that it exists.

After that, Boll seems to have given up on video game adaptations and turned to other genre films and side projects. Boll has claimed that his films are good and much better known Hollywood directors are hackers. You can say whatever you want about Boll, the man sticks to his guns.