Remember how in Dracula, they used existing classical music, which enhanced the mood and the action perfectly, so much so that hearing those themes from Swan Lake brings to mind images of Bela Lugosi?
Well, In the Name of the King seems to have not had enough budget for a proper composer, but the music very often doesn't fit in the slightest. Often it seems almost comical, such as when Farmer is saving his two mates from the river.
Unfortunately, as the score distracts, it is least present at times when it would be nice to be distracted by the poor acting. Look at the credits and you won't expect much acting, but most of the lines are delivered as if they're being read for the first time and the actors don't really know where the story is going. Sometimes it sounds like they ad lib, like saying "What the hell does that mean?" in such a colloquial way, just after asking with great feeling "What games are the gods playing with me?" and getting a response that sounds creatively zen.
The effects of course aren't special. They pale next to movies of the same era. This is all about budget of course, so I won't criticize too much. Much can be done with little, given the right eye for the look of the scenes, and these scenes stage very well, even if they look like castoffs from the Lord of the Rings prop department.
The story isn't very interesting, the acting isn't very interesting, and the filming isn't very exciting. Overall, it's only of interest to devoted fans of a.) any of the leads, just to complete the chore of watching all their respective works; b.) the fantasy-action genre in general, although this only moderately qualifies as either or c.) movies that are bad in the not- laughable way.
P.S. I find it interesting that IMDb suggests that I might also like movies with much shorter names such as Avatar, Willow and Beowulf. I guess they figure once I've read the unnecessarily long name of this movie I'd be glad for a movie I could talk about.
Well, In the Name of the King seems to have not had enough budget for a proper composer, but the music very often doesn't fit in the slightest. Often it seems almost comical, such as when Farmer is saving his two mates from the river.
Unfortunately, as the score distracts, it is least present at times when it would be nice to be distracted by the poor acting. Look at the credits and you won't expect much acting, but most of the lines are delivered as if they're being read for the first time and the actors don't really know where the story is going. Sometimes it sounds like they ad lib, like saying "What the hell does that mean?" in such a colloquial way, just after asking with great feeling "What games are the gods playing with me?" and getting a response that sounds creatively zen.
The effects of course aren't special. They pale next to movies of the same era. This is all about budget of course, so I won't criticize too much. Much can be done with little, given the right eye for the look of the scenes, and these scenes stage very well, even if they look like castoffs from the Lord of the Rings prop department.
The story isn't very interesting, the acting isn't very interesting, and the filming isn't very exciting. Overall, it's only of interest to devoted fans of a.) any of the leads, just to complete the chore of watching all their respective works; b.) the fantasy-action genre in general, although this only moderately qualifies as either or c.) movies that are bad in the not- laughable way.
P.S. I find it interesting that IMDb suggests that I might also like movies with much shorter names such as Avatar, Willow and Beowulf. I guess they figure once I've read the unnecessarily long name of this movie I'd be glad for a movie I could talk about.
