During the mid-00s, there was puzzlement at how Uwe Boll was able to raise large budgets and attract name casts despite his inability to make good (or even profitable) films. Alone In The Dark cost $20 million to make, took $10 million worldwide and yet somebody handed him $70 million to make In The Name Of The King: A Dungeon Siege Tale. If AITD caused his investors to open their coffers, you have to wonder if they were nucking futs. Even after multiple viewings, the movie remains completely impenetrable. From the opening text crawl to the motivation of the villain, its impossible to become involved because youre never exactly sure whats going on. Screenwriter Blair Erickson claimed Boll wanted an action film with a mysterious central character not unlike Blade or The Crow, but after expressing his disappointment at Ericksons draft in a harshly-worded e-mail (your story is an authors piece, a drama, where we spend time with people!!!), the writer dropped out. Boll eventually handed writing duties to producers Michael Roesch and Peter Scheerer (who also scripted the in-name-only sequel), who were unable to lick the central problem: rather than tell an origin story, the film had to follow on from Alone In The Dark: The New Nightmare, the fourth entry in the videogame franchise. In other words, the movie was only ever going to appeal (or make sense) to hardcore gamers. It was setting itself up to fail.
Ian Watson is the author of 'Midnight Movie Madness', a 600+ page guide to "bad" movies from 'Reefer Madness' to 'Poultrygeist: Night of the Chicken Dead.'
