As far as Tom Selleck goes, I have seen him do some very uneven performances. Some have been like this one has been described, and some have been much better.
His strong attribute has typically been the "strong silent type" that doesn't say too much Yet, based on the strength of
some
roles, I have to wonder if he wasn't mostly cast (in his career) as the ruggedly handsome character for the box office draw, (and TV ratings), and suffered from the expectations of the writers and directors.
Just a sidenote, back in the days of MAGNUM, P.I., our group had a young guy that
looked a LOT
like Tom Selleck (but only about 5-ft 5-inches tall in shoes), and for months(!!!), women from all over the building would find all manner of excuses to walk by his desk, ask questions, and bring him things (needed/requested or not), etc (Our boss was less than pleased with all the attention, interruptions, and distractions involved, but eventually decided that was hardly his fault.)
That particular appeal shouldn't be ignored Just saying.

Seeing this with a nearly full audience in 1992, I remember several moments where the audience laughed where they werent suppose to. Indeed it was funny. But the best of all was the first appearance of Tom Selleck as the king, looking just like the Cowardly Lion from Wizard of Oz.
This ranks among the worst films I've ever seen, but seeing something this bad, this uneven, and with such a jumbled message, I realized for the first time what an accomplishment it is to make a very good film.

This message has been deleted.