Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
466 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
The sands have spread fairly thin and it shows... but surprisingly in a good way
OrinAGN28 May 2010
The common view amongst "professional" reviews is that the movie is average. scoring below 50% from Rotten Tomatoes, and MetaCritic, and notably a 2 out of 4 stars from Roger Ebert. The average user ranking on MC puts it at 9 out of 10.

Most reviews range anywhere from 8 out of 10, to as low as 2 or 3 out of 10.

If there's one thing critics can agree on, its that the movie is clichéd, borrowing elements from plenty of epics based in the Middle East and fantasy alike, and that it's loads of fun.

The one thing no one can agree on is whether that's good or bad.

It should be pointed out that this film is produced by the same company/studio that brought us 'Pirates of the Caribbean', and it certainly shows.

With that said, I'll lead into my thoughts on the film. The first "Pirates" scored on average a 7.8 - 6.4 of 10, while the sequels averaged anywhere from 4.5 to 5.3. I'd say this movie is better than the sequels while not as good as the first.

So, I'd give it roughly a 7 out of 10.

The story is fun, for what it is. Which is a rough retelling of the video game "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time", while incorporating elements of the following two sequels, as well as incorporating stylistic elements from the following game and the first three of the original trilogy. Thats right! Based loosely on one game, borrowing elements from SIX more. The movie is stretched too thin, and it shows.

The movie feels like your prototypical "sword and sandal" action flick, borrowing heavily from films like "The Thief of Baghdad", and stories found in "1001 Nights". So think 'Arabian Nights', Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves, Aladdin, all mixed with some Steve Reeves 'Hercules' and Robert E. Howard 'Conan' flash.

Is it as cheesy as that sounds? YES! Is it as awesome as that sounds? YES!

But it's still well edited, well acted, well scored (Harry Gregson-Williams never fails), and overall well done enough to merit an enjoyable experience.

The ONLY complaints I can think of are few, but here they are: A bit too much CGI, not on the stunts (not much CGI there surprisingly) but on things like demonic-esque snakes (you'll see). Too much random slow-motion. The sexual-tension seemed too forced (too many of those really slow "they're about to kiss but don't" moments). And whereas yes, the ending is supposed to have a "Deus-Ex-Machina" feel to it, in the game it is much more thorough and more explained, in the movie you're just expected to roll with it.

Other than that. A fun night at the movies! Grab your over-priced candy, soda, and popcorn (or do like me and sneak snacks in) and have fun with friends, family and loved ones, recapturing the fun escapism of your childhood with an epic but cliché action movie.

Hope you enjoyed my review... And I hope you enjoy the movie too!
277 out of 362 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Not Your Average Video Game Flick
bucaneerfilms3 May 2010
Tonight I was fortunate enough to see an advanced screening of this film. Like many, I became a fan of this franchise with the Sands of Time trilogy, and I was very excited when I learned that there were plans to make a feature film based on it. The storyline of the game is very cinematic (at least in the aforementioned trilogy, not necessarily in the previous games in the series) so I felt that at film adaptation would be an impressive epic.

Having finally seen this movie, I can say that I was not at all disappointed!

One of the main strengths going into this movie was it's involvement of the series creator Jordan Mechner. He crafted a very engaging screen story that pushed beyond the controller, creating an entirely new addition to the mythos. I know that at times including the creator can sometimes stifle the process, as many will fight changes to the source material that may need to be altered to work better with a director's vision; but I feel that Mechner's involvement showed his desire to see his brain-child develop into a success on the big screen.

In addition to involving Mechner, the other big strength was the way that the filmmakers chose to handle the story. Let's face it, movies based on video games have a very poor track record. Super Mario Brothers, Street Fighter, Tomb Raider... all of them made for films that were mediocre at best, and downright abysmal at worst. Prince of Persia had a mighty big hurdle to clear with this, and they found the perfect team to tackle it. Jerry Bruckheimer and Disney already accomplished a similar feat when they brought Pirates of the Caribbean to the big screen (a movie based on a theme park ride, in a genre that had not seen success in 50 years!)

Their strategy was the same, they wrote their own story that borrowed elements from the game, but did not strictly follow it. The film stands alone, and does not require it's audience to be intimately familiar with the source material. The nods to the game throughout were great, but I was relieved that I was able to enjoy this film for what it was, rather than constantly looking for where it deviated from the games.

This movie clearly was made for someone like me, and in my party of four, three of us, who were all guys, loved it. The fourth, who was the only woman in the group, was less than impressed, and complained that it was too much action. If you're expecting Citizen Kane, you stand to be disappointed, but if you expect this to be another video game adaptation, you are in for a real treat!
367 out of 535 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
It was entertaining and fun
thefilmgourmet22 May 2010
First of all when I read some of the reviews about this movie all my excitement was drained but I went to see it anyway. What do you now, the movie was great. It was fun, had a lot of action in it, the CGI was nice (excecpt few scenes in the beginning). I thought acting was nice Gyllenhaal (prince) and Arterton (Princess) did a good job in my opinion. As a fun of the game; the script wasn't entirely accurate just like most of the movies based on games but it didn't stray too far either. OK it was not the perfect movie but it was something that I would go and watch its sequel.

Overall I enjoyed myself and I believe if you go open minded you will enjoy yourself too.
231 out of 332 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
It is refreshing!
miriam-rios28 May 2010
Did you see Iron Man and Robin Hood? Yes? Well, this film is better, simply because the story is original. I know, I know, it is based on the computer game...which I used to play ages ago...but the story portrayed in the script is classic and refreshing at the same time; the performances are natural and the stunt scenes are unbelievable. Now, what did Iron Man 2 miss and this movie excels at? Plot, and a fast action pace without being over caffeinated big bang explosions (ever saw G.I. Joe?)

Having said that, you must be warned, the dialogues are simple but not stupid and it does contain a fair amount of moral references.

Sure everyone is crying out loud about the British accents... "ohh but Persians didn't speak English" yeah but this isn't The Passion of The Christ, or Apocalypto and Mel Gibson was nowhere near the production, Jake Gyllenhaal is an American, but the rest of the cast is British, makes sense they should all have a similar accent doesn't it?? So quit yer whining

Overall a good wholesome fun summer movie. worth repeating!
308 out of 462 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Very Entertaining Summer Blockbuster Film!
3xHCCH30 May 2010
I was looking forward to this film because of the hype, and I was afraid to be disappointed. But as the film unfolded, I most definitely enjoyed this adventure from beginning to end.

Jake Gyllenhaal plays the titular Prince of Persia, Dastan, who was an urchin picked by the King from the marketplace to be his third son. He and his brothers get caught in a web of political high jinx that cross their paths with Princess Tamina of Alamut (played by Gemma Arterton), and the fabled powers of the Sands of Time.

This is Jake Gyllenhaal's most accessible film so far, and he goes to town with it. OK, granted he does not look the least bit Persian, or of that particular time period, but somehow his charisma was able to carry us on this fantastic ride. I also enjoyed his interaction with the beautiful Arterton, which sparks with humor and romance. She was my favorite part of "Clash of the Titans (2010)," and same here.

I highly recommend this film for a good old-fashioned, action-adventure film set in ancient times. The parkour sequences are definitely of the highest order and very well-edited and photographed. The sets and visual effects are excellent. Best of all, the story is intelligent and well-constructed. Producer Jerry Bruckheimer has again delivered a very entertaining summer blockbuster. A very well-executed film of its genre. A must watch!
110 out of 158 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Underrated
monkeymajik15329 May 2010
I didn't expect much from this movie, and wasn't planning on watching it after watching the trailer, which had somehow managed to butcher the action sequences which turned to be pretty good in the movie. It hardly depicted the movie for what it made out to be, so i'm more than glad that i did. At first glance Jake wouldn't be my first choice for the role of the prince as i didn't think he really looked the part, with his slightly goofy looking demeanor, but he made up for it as he certainly played the part(and thanks to the costume designer, dressed the part), coupled with a good body double the parkour wasn't far off either. There was good chemistry between the male and female leads, however, granted perhaps overplayed in less than idyllic moments for pda haha, which some might find cliché but hardly something to dwell on in this pretty awesome movie so its not as bad as other critics claim. It offers aesthetically pleasing graphics (as to be expected of the people who worked on the pirates of the Caribbean) and although deviated from the plot of the game, the important aspects blended well and made for an enjoyable, and not totally predictable storyline. Another epic jerry epic i say. I sincerely hope they make a sequel, especially if the the dark prince is involved in the storyline, that would be badass (magma cracks already showing on the prince's body during slow mo time travel scenes so fingers crossed)
233 out of 355 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Movies like this don't come along often- enjoy it in the theatre Warning: Spoilers
Prince of Persia was an immensely enjoyable movie. Below I list the positives and few negatives of the movie before summarising.

Positives - What I liked about Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

~Its beautiful

The visuals in this movie are stunning. Everything from the cinematography of the desert landscapes to the city of Alamut and the beautiful sets are a real treat to look at.

~The two leads are excellent

The chemistry between Gyllenhaal and Arterton is fantastic and they, like the visuals, are great to look at. Arterton is stunning as Princess Tamina and Gyllenhaal is as watchable as always. The supporting actors all do their jobs decently.

~The fight choreography and parkour

Parkour is going to be the new big thing in movieland so I hear and its great to watch, really adding an exciting new element to the tried and tested swordfight

~The story wasn't actually totally predictable

I haven't played the games so I didn't really know what I was in for with the plot, only that it involved some sands of time... Call me a moron but I actually found quite a lot of what happened in the movie very unpredictable and the ending of the movie for me was totally unexpected.

Negatives- What could have been better

~Historical inaccuracy

I thought the movie was meant to be in Sassanid Persia (3rd-7th century AD) but the map at the beginning clearly showed Achaemenid Persia which was quite confusing so the inclusion of crossbows and the mention of the "Turkish" was quite out of place. The Mughuls are also mentioned which is out of place regardless since they Mughuls were Mongols... The movie does include a dagger which can turn back time so perhaps the whole point of moot but I don't feel some more research would have hurt.

~Could have been funnier

The movie could have been a little funnier but the storyline moved at such a pace that there wasn't much chance for much hijinks. There were some funny lines in there however and as I mentioned before, the chemistry between Arteron and Gyllenhaal was very enjoyable

##Conclusion##

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time is not the type of movie that comes along often. How often do you really get to see a beautifully shot film set in Ancient Persia featuring such good leads and original story? It was an enjoyable movie and a great movie in its own right I say, bring on the sequels - just don't mess them up like Pirates of the Caribbean.
143 out of 223 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The video game series sets the precident for the movie
interrealm5 May 2010
It isn't often that a video game is so vivid, so involving...so enveloping, that it is looked on as a possible movie franchise on all those merits. Usually, just the action (Doom, Final Fantasy), or just the body (Lara Croft...Tomb Raider) or just some other one aspect makes for a great game, but an underwhelming movie. I had the pleasure of watching this movie in an early screening on Monday night, and it is definitely a step above and beyond the aforementioned videogames-turned-movies.

The hallmark from the very beginning of the Prince of Persia franchise (a primitive DOS programmed, side-scrolling adventure through a castle to rescue a locked-up princess) was not only having a great story, but telling it in such a way to keep the player in that world. This film, surprisingly enough, doesn't play out quite as closely to the video games as I had expected. Still, without spoiling either the games or this movie, I can say that it shows Jordan Mechner had full involvement in the movie. Many storytelling elements present in the "Prince of Peria: The Sands of Time" video game can be found here, and made for a very entertaining romp through the vast lands of Persia.

I would say that my main gripe is the under-use of parkour, the running/fighting style the Prince deploys in the video games. This is a hard gripe to substantiate though, because of how difficult parkour is to execute, let alone master, nonetheless I had expected something resembling the wall-running, banner-ripping moves seen in the "Sands of Time" video game trilogy. It's harder still to be too down on a little parkour, due to Disney's desire that this film would be the first in a Prince of Persia movie franchise, equal to or greater than the "Pirates of the Caribbean" movie franchise. Therefore, I await with anticipation the creativity that more parkour would bring to the stories this most agile Prince can tell.

"Prince of Peria: The Sands of Time" gets 8 of 10 stars.
228 out of 377 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
6.4/10? very very underrated!! Deserves much more!
WOW,i just came back from the I-max cinema and this movie was so so good! Prince of Persia makes Pirates of the Caribbean look like a joke..

I always loved the Prince of Persia games played the 2d ones and all the way up to two thrones, this movie had much resemblance to the game, but unlike other video game movies it wasn't trying to hard to show it off to the audience.Best video game movie without a doubt!

I think the reason some people are rating this so low is because they are USED to rating video game movies so low as they have all failed up to now!

This movie deserves a solid 7.5/10.Ill rate it 10 right now because I'm just so amazed of how much i enjoyed this movie.

IF YOU GO INTO THE CINEMA TAKING THIS MOVIE SO SERIOUSLY YOU WILL BE DISAPPOINTED. This movie doesn't try to be what its not.

It has amazing park-our,good romance, amazing action and fabulous special effects. I recommend this movie to everyone cause its truly awesome!
318 out of 564 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Surprisingly Good
acebreaoeva14 August 2018
I've never played the Prince of Persia games, but this movie wants me to try one of the games. The movie is very good and the visuals are stunning.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Entertaining summer romp
dvc515927 May 2010
Movies are like food. There are some which are bitter and hard to swallow yet nutritious in every aspect, and those which are tasty albeit fattening. "Prince Of Persia" falls in the latter category, it's fun to watch and enjoyable, and where intelligence doesn't really matter.

With Jerry Bruckheimer producing, lots of action, adventure and excitement are promised. With "Prince Of Persia: The Sands Of Time" he continues that promise. The film, from start to finish, is filled with well-choreographed sword-fighting action, fantastic special effects, sweepingly exotic scenery, lavish production design, and a good, sweeping music score by Harry Gregson-Williams. During the action scenes the camera does not shake that much compared to recent movies... although I admit there are one too many slow-motion sequences, that (although gorgeous to look at) distracts the audience too much. However Bruckheimer has a thing for slo-mo, so he's excused. The screenplay is about what you'd expect for a Hollywood-filmed Arabian adventure.

The actors did a good job with the material they're given. Jake Gyllenhaal emits sex appeal and charisma throughout, walking through the film with ease. And he's quite good with the action sequences and fighting! Jake, welcome to the action hero club. A big surprise though is Gemma Arterton's performance as Princess Tamina; it is a HUGE improvement from her bland performances in "Quantum Of Solace" and "Clash Of The Titans"; here Arterton manages to inject wit, charm AND emotion into her character, not to mention looking gorgeous at the same time. However I was slightly disappointed by Ben Kingsley's performance - a two dimensional villain. Granted, Kingsley acted great in the role but I felt like it just didn't match to his standards. Alfred Molina has a funny supporting role and the rest of the cast did quite a good job, although I wish a little characterization would come from this.

Still, Mike Newell's tight direction manage to put all these amazing factors together, thus he and Bruckheimer not only made an entertaining summer blockbuster, they also made arguably one of, if not the, best movies based on a video game ever. Period.

In short, if you want to take a little escape from reality, go back in time to "Prince of Persia" and enjoy. It's fun and light on the brain.

Entertainment value: 9/10

Overall: 7/10
111 out of 199 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Good Movie - as a Fan i enjoyed it.
tubekw12 May 2010
As a Prince of Persia fan i enjoyed this movie. The Park our scenes were stunning. There is a lot of Action in this movie which is in my view a good decision. If you are looking for a some good Swords battles you will enjoy this Movie. the different Assassins characters were also a interesting part of this Movie. I have to mention that Disney done a great job with the atmosphere Music in this Movie. I think Disney did a great job with this movie,at first i was very skeptical with Disney producing it. But with Pirates of the Caribbean and Prince of Persia I'm very satisfied with Disney's quality as a big blockbuster Movie Producer. Overall it was a Good Movie, i will buy the Blue ray version of it.
201 out of 382 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Bruckheimer and CGI Effects Dominate a Paper-Thin, Fleet-Footed Video Game-Derived Epic
EUyeshima2 June 2010
The sight of Jake Gyllenhaal in a defiantly heroic pose with his imposing dagger on the poster of this 2010 fantasy adventure would seem to portend a film filled with self-parody, but alas, the actor takes the Aladdin-like title role semi-seriously. He's actually better than expected in the over-the-top derring-do role, but the movie itself is absurdly convoluted and overly ridiculous, even by the standards of the 2003 video game which inspired this CGI-saturated production. It should come as no surprise that the executive producer is action-schlock master Jerry Bruckheimer, whose commercial track record extends from "Beverly Hills Cop" to the "National Treasure" franchise. What did surprise me is that the director is Mike Newell, better known for soft, female-oriented fare such as "Enchanted April" and "Four Weddings and a Funeral". However, both he and Gyllenhaal give themselves almost entirely to Bruckheimer's more commercial, comic-book sensibilities.

The fanciful plot takes place in the sixth century B.C. where we find a Persian street urchin named Dastan being adopted by King Sharaman for his courageous acrobatics in a crowded marketplace. He grows up with his loyal foster brothers Garsiv and Tus, the rightful heirs to the throne who lead the Persian army in an attack on the sacred city of Alamut. In a none-too-subtle allusion to current-day Iraq, the siege on Alamut comes from a wrongful assumption that the city's people are selling weapons to their enemies. Behind the assault is the King's brother and trusted adviser, the Dick Cheney-like Nizam. Elsewhere in the city, Dashan leads a swashbuckling rogue effort that leads him to the comely Princess Tamina who holds the secret behind the mythical Dagger of Time. The dagger has time-bending powers that allow the user to undo any mistake and redo any moment. In short order, Dashan gets framed for murder and escapes with Tamina and the dagger.

All sorts of contrived shenanigans subsequently follow with the addition of Sheik Amar, an ostrich-racing thief who amusingly hates both taxes and the confining role of government, as the dagger elusively changes hands and a fatalistic sinkhole yields an ending that may remind you of Pam's unexpected discovery of Bobby in the shower on "Dallas". Aside from Gyllenhaal's muscular performance, Gemma Arterton (a memorable bit as Strawberry Fields in "Quantum of Solace") makes a fetching princess with plenty of predictable moxy. As Nizam, Ben Kingsley is not nearly as embarrassing here as he was in "The Love Guru", but his Oscar will continue collecting dust by itself with his string of disappointing movie choices. The ethnically versatile Alfred Molina steals the film in an act of petty larceny as the comical sheik. With so many special effects coming at the viewer uninterrupted, it was extremely difficult to find a core of humanity in this whole venture. But that's Bruckheimer's objective after all - to overwhelm your senses until you turn into the exact same pulp he chooses to present to all the fanboys and fangirls who will flock to this paper-thin extravaganza.
41 out of 71 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Good Sword and Sandals Adventure, but Fans of the Games will be Disappointed
jaredpahl15 September 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Prince of Persia: the Sands of Time is supposed to be based on the video games of the early 2000s, and it does have some of the elements from the games: parkour, time-shifting elements, etc., but the film version of the PS2 classic is closer to an average sword and sandal adventure than the magical, sprawling world of the video game.

Prince of Persia tells the story of Prince Dastan, an Aladdin-type orphan thief turned Arabian hero, played by Jake Gyllenhaal, as he attempts to stop the evil vizier, played by Ben Kingsley, from destroying the world and capture the affection of Gemma Arterton's beautiful princess Tamina. There is more to the story, but it all amounts to the basic "stop the bad guy, get the girl" story. That's not always a bad thing though, and Prince of Persia does add some clever time reversing tricks to the plot thanks to a mystical dagger that runs on the sands of time. However, with the exception of a back story regarding a ostrich farmer played by the always wonderful Alfred Molina, Prince of Persia's story is fairly strait forward.

Still, this outline could've made a truly great film, but Prince of Persia: Sands of Time fumbles some key elements. For one, the set design and the locations don't have the same type of flair as the game at all. Where the film could've taken us to enchanted gardens and vast temples, it sticks close to the typical cityscapes and mountain ranges. While some of the sets and locations in the film are impressive, it seems like a big missed opportunity to create a truly unique Arabian world. The other thing holding Prince of Persia back from reaching the heights of its video game inspiration is the action. The Prince of Persia series of games is built on parkour and sword combat. The movie has a fair amount of parkour and of course there is some fighting, but it all seems small-scale. The parkour is simple and practical instead of daring and dramatic like it is in the games. The same goes for the fighting. In the games it is epic, in the film it's kind of boring.

Don't get me wrong, Prince of Persia is a fun movie. The action is fast yet cohesive, the sets and costume give off a nice Arabian flair, and Alfred Molina breaks up the stiffness of the main characters nicely. It's simple, mindless Jerry Bruckheimer produced fun, but considering its source material, it could've been great. For fans of classic sword and sandal adventures it is well worth a watch, but fans of the game might be disappointed.

67/100
14 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
When a very best combat/platform game turns age 21, now it became a Swashbuckler film
CihanVercan15 June 2010
Prince of Persia is the BEST PLATFORM GAME on computer I ever played as a child. It's not that industrial standard movies can create new ideas, they have to find a source to make an adaptation, but Sands of Time doesn't stand enough loyal to its title. What not staying loyal to Prince of Persia means, there is not any visually admirable combat with the film at all. When it's been first released, AUTUMN 1989, in Apple II; there were only a palace, a peasant child, a princess under the Caliph's servitude and hundreds of guardians defending the palace. Our peasant child as a spy was there to rescue the princess to bring her back to father the Persian Emperor. Looking at the continuation of the game series, the story is taken back in time about 15 centuries back to Persian realm before the birth of Christ. When I played the 2003 Sands of Time game on X-Box, the combat sense of the game had been gone. It was rather boring and bothersome since our peasant has become a prince, with not much to do other than jumping back and forth over the house roofs like Spider-Man.

What's good with the movie better than its 2003 version of video game is we have more challenges than the game here. It's widely enriched with industrial standards. Classic cat and mouse type tags, rebel and noble girl falling in love with the boy, people from evil side turning to good side, suspicious characters seeking tricky and manipulative ways of possessing more power and authority, good side falls into an adventure/journey as a team, proves the importance of teamwork and beats the odds: The very-well known SWASHBUCKLER clichés since 1950s' Erol Flynn flicks, 1960s' Akira Kurosawa Seven Samurai, 1980s' Conan the Barbarian with Arnie, Indiana Jones with Harrie, 1990s' The Mummy, and from recent years the LOTR and the Pirates of the Caribbean. Prince of Persia has a lot to offer to the video game fans, but not much to offer for movie fans at all.

With great aspects from locations and change on weather conditions especially on desert, this movie is considerably interesting, even though most of them are CGI; animals from desert, the OSTRICHS, the COBRA SNAKES and ARMORED HORSES even though it's not appropriate with its history.

Sands of Time as a production had great potential of usage in props, but either the producers never made a deep research or may be they just couldn't provide them. In the computer game, the props were the heart of the franchise. FLYING CARPET, DOUBLE-SIDED ALTER-EGO CREATOR MIRROR, POTHOLE AMBUSHES, BARRED DOORS, ROTTEN PUNK FLOORS, ELIXIRS...(for the full list props from the game, please go to the Message Board to find my message, in the title page). Here in the film, a large barred door been used, but it was a pre-built one with very well-known studio usage from 1980s' RED SONJA especially. Other cons were the SACRED DAGGER which given its name to the title of the movie, the POISONED KING DALMATIC. Other than those the costumes of the actors were only average. But the Princess needed a better costume other than a gown.

I found the editing job in the introduction scenes and the first half very pathetic. It became a matter of story design afterwards. There are bunches of continuation mistakes, costume changes without the location changes and errors in every other scene while telling the drama sequences. I'm crazy for sword combats in action movies, but Sands of Time displayed one of the worst sword combats I've ever seen, Jake needed to practise more on handling swords. In this case, even the Pirates of the Caribbean was so-so. If it's the matter the best sword combat was used in Star Wars 30 years ago. As a reminder, the first 3 games until 1999, Prince of Persia was full of excitement with its excellent sword combat simulations. Instead of sword combat, we witness the agility skills of our Prince, making the guardians run after him, jumping back and forth over the house roofs. If you're using agility skills to display in such a Swashbuckler; then what's Spider-Man, X-Men, BatMan for? For the cuts and takes from the action scenes, which is hard to say "combat", director Mike Newell has preferred mostly C.U. shots, that's dated back to John Woo, which is underclass nowadays. So as an action genre, Sands of Time fails almost every aspect. But there is one thing, I most fond of is the Hassansin soldiers and their combat weapons, and the successful sound effects comes with them.

The story design is pathetic, but we feel a nice development work on the story-telling. There is not many heritages from Persian Mythology, so it's fine and dandy to draw the long bow, but why is it always TIME-TRAVEL, isn't there anything else for the Mythological Gods to represent their power on Earth? After the first half, when the exact idea of who is on evil side, who is on good side is established, and when it's their time to challenge each other; it becomes breath-taking to watch and admire the Sands of Time.

Story: 3/10 , Story Development: 9/10, Production Design: 2/10, Sounds: 7/10, Effects: 7/10, Acting: 5/10, Script: 3/10, Visuals: 7/10, Action: 5/10, Adventure: 7/10, Fantasy and Creativity: 4/10.

Overall my mark is 6.5/10. Time is never wasted if it's for fun while watching Sands of Time
22 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Sadly, it spent too much time being run-of-the-mill.
honorhorror14 June 2010
I tend to feel Prince of Persia the movie owed me a watchable story, after paying 140 Baht(more than average in Thai cinemas) and two unremarkable hours in the digital cinema. I also tend to doubt the possibility this movie will ever speak to you with any messages, should them be fairy tale messages or serious politic messages. That being said, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time is quite a disappointment from a bunch of names I admired.

The Parkour sequences were fun to watch, so was the siege sequence, but if you have watched the trailer, you've seen them all. It's never really captivating. You got eye candies, just like you've got Dastan and Princess Tamina, but you've also got terrible performances and disturbing character background illustration. That part that talked about Tamina's coronation as the Sand prophet was so hilariously bad that I almost laughed out. What was more hilarious was her character's development after the flashback, that Tamina transformed magically from a cursing,sarcastic-talking person into a religiously holified person......

I guess the movie's intrinsically bad because of the script, that they tried to please all the demographic groups so they had to forgo all the valid, culture-identifying messages. The CGI landscapes of ancient Persia spent many millions, yet never succeeded in giving you anything material. The story had Dastan started in the slum, and granted him a heart of gold that cemented sibling love as the only thing that's closest to a "soul" in this hollow story. Unfortunately, the most emotional role who also provided the best fighting sequence is not our prince, but some "knife thrower".

I gave the movie 6/10 out of the respect for Ben Kinsley having very dark eyeliner, and the final act that somehow managed to save this movie. What I like to talk more about is the potential it wasted in this great context. With human dreams to go back in time to fix mistakes, sands as the symbol of infinite bleakness/lifelessness, exotic locations with exotic tales, POP the movie could have told you a story, favorably in a fable style, just like the original games. Yet it misused the knife of time, made the prince an underachiever in almost every remarkable aspects in the original game, and tell you craps like "some souls are bound beyond time". Time-traveling in a fantasy context was great, at least in Groundhog Day, The Girl Who Leapt Through Time, and the Sands of Time games.For the record, The Two Thrones gave you great opportunities to recognize and reflex on your own dark sides, and suggested you to choose the way of repent rather than the way of chasing shadows. Are mainstream audiences really so secular that they can't even stand fables with a bit biblical touch? Or are they only being awed enough to respect some environmentalism because Avatar had awesome visuals? I doubt it, and I strongly believe someone can make a much-better POP movie that is really epic.
17 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A fantastic piece of work
Hollywoodrulez29 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Well having played all the games I can honestly say I didn't know what to think when I found out that Jake gyellenhaal would be playing dasdan in the film. Well as always Jake impressed me at his fullest and the film was a fantastic piece of work. I expected it to be once I knew Jerry bruckhiemer was the producer and once again he impressed me. The visual effects team on the film deserves to be credited due to there brilliant work throughout the entire movie. The last effect sold the work of the effects team to me as outstanding. I also really like the way the director chose to open and close the film with the same shot and subtitles. After the film is done you really understand why the director did that. I really hope they follow this great film up with an equally great sequel and i don't think I will be disappointed.
49 out of 97 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Storybook review
shanayneigh26 August 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Once upon a time there lived a young prince named Dastan. Even though the prince was Persian, he spoke like a cockney chimney sweep (with sporadic touches of Australian).

The prince was an athletic young fellow, climbing walls and jumping between buildings, in a manner reminiscent - not of the Prince of Persia game franchise - but of the hero Altair from Assassin's Creed, with some shots being direct homages (read: ripoffs).

The olden days of yore in Persia was a wondrous period, filled with hammy acting, crappy CGI, and Persians who speak Arabic instead of Persian (save for the main characters who speak Queen's English).

But it was also a time of great peril, with one of the greatest dangers being a clan of wizard ninjas called "Hassansins" (not a typo) - predating the existence of the real Hashshashins by roughly 1500 years.

One day, for reasons which are not entirely clear, the prince and his royal family invade a sacred city. There he comes across a young princess with full, luscious lips and annoying voice, and the two embark on an adventure together.

Sparks fly between the young couple. Well, not the young couple of *this* film, but the one from the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise - something which this movie desperately aspires to be. The couple in this movie has the chemistry of a vacuum, and the screen fizzles as they deliver their supposedly witty banter.

They charge to and fro in the Persian country side, bumping into comedy sidekicks and gallant black men who (of course) die first.

The couple is trying to stop something, which isn't entirely clear, from happening. Or are they trying to make something happen? The viewer can barely remember, as he couldn't care less by this point.
28 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
You'll want to rewind two hours
rooee27 May 2010
I remember playing the original Prince of Persia on the Amiga 500. It was a race against time to rescue a princess from an evil vizier. And that was it. No time-bending; no art du déplacement. Just fencing and jumping and pits of spikes.

The new tie-in from increasingly hack-like director Mike Newell is based on more recent incarnations, of course. But however complex modern videogames have become, it's not that interesting to watch someone else play a computer game, and that's basically what you get here. The Sands of Time element involves a dagger with a button which rewinds time by a few seconds. You can imagine a young Spielberg revelling in a craftily-written scene in which the smouldering heroes bicker and flirt, jostling events to out-do one another, subtly subverting our expectations whilst satisfying our need to be entertained. This script (the product of four minds, including original PoP creator, Jordan Mechner) gets the bickering and flirting bit, but there's none of the craft.

In fact, the script is downright lame. Lots of plot, yes, but written so thuddingly, and with so much exposition, that none of the boring characters have a chance to do any acting. Least of all Sir Ben Kingsley, who seems to be having zero fun as the sinister patriarch. There's some wit in Alfred Molina's Sheik Amar, but ultimately his presence only serves to remind us that the aforementioned Mr Spielberg made a vastly superior action adventure 28 years ago.

Indeed, Raiders of the Lost Ark spawned a phenomenal franchise. Disney and Bruckheimer may hope for similar affection, or at least the dollars of the Pirates machine - but I fear they'll receive neither.
28 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Good fun, even for non-fans of the genre
nolketessa16 June 2010
OK, let me start by saying that I am not a person who likes fantasy movies, I am not a person who likes action movies and I have never in my life played a computer game (not counting Patience and Spider Solitaire). I do however like me some Jake Gyllenhaal and when I read that for this movie he had trained an additional 5 pounds of muscle onto his body AND that he speaks with an English accent, I knew I had to see it, if only to swoon for two hours. So I admit I went in for completely shallow reasons.

As for the shallowness, I was amply rewarded. My oh my that Jake looks good!! And I really loved him with his English accent - I certainly hope he will do that more often. For those leaning more towards enjoying female beauty there is Gemma Arterton who is a stunning beauty so they were quite the handsome couple.

But all in all I was pleasantly surprised by the movie. It had a good story to it, the acting was steady, the tone was humorous and the CGI people went all out for the lush scenery and the crowd scenes. Two additional reasons that I thoroughly enjoyed it were: (1) Alfred Molina who provided the humour bits in his role of Sheik Amar (I sat through the end credits because he was unrecognizable to me and I wanted to know who played the part. What a 180 degree turn from his part in An Education where I saw him last!), and (2) the use of parkour/freerunning we see Jake do in his role of Prince Dastan. Obviously he must have had a stunt double for this and some parts of it must have been enhanced by CGI but still it was a welcome change to the standard (to this genre of movie) chasing scenes which I am not particularly a fan of.

If - contrary to me - you are a fan of fantasy and action, you will enjoy this even more than I did, and I already enjoyed it very much. A couple of hours of unpretentious fun of the kind that Jerry Bruckheimer has such a knack for. Well done.
17 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Come on rating 6.9 only ????? should be 8 at least or more than that..
ellyrulez30 May 2010
Prince of Persia : Sands of Time Movie is awesome, it has good effects , realistic sound effects , lots of action. Ma favorite effect is when he uses the Dagger of Time , it looks really cool and amazing . The good thing about this movie is,that the story has not been copied exactly from the GAME...it has its own ending , a unique one , nice comedy here and there . I really love this movie and I cant wait for the sequel ...hope so there is one (I have a doubt because the ending in this movie is completely different from the game.)

Guys just because this movie is based on the game , that doesn't mean everything in the movie needs to be exact just like in the game , this movie is so much better than the iron man 2 movie

Please guys rate this movie better , give it a rating that it deserves.

LOVE THE MOVIE , you guys should definitely watch it in the theaters , that is how you will get the full effect and fun of the movie.
22 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
All the pain in the world will not help you find something that does not exist.
This is the perfect movie to watch while playing Farmville. There is absolutely nothing that requires your attention as it is two hours of fighting and nothing more.

I was not surprised to find that it was based upon a video game. Watching this movie is basically the same, and isn't fighting and killing what video games are all about? You could have substituted anyone for Jake Gyllenhaal and Gemma Arterton, or anyone else in this movie and you would have ended up with the same result. There was no requirement for actors above screaming and providing a lot of work for stunt doubles. Bobby Holland Hanton, double for Gyllenhaal was one among over 100 stunt performers!

Was it a waste of time? No. It was a perfect popcorn movie for those who are into video games, and for the young. It's like eating pizza: you know you shouldn't but, but it tastes so good while you are.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Prince of the Theme Park
jeddjong26 March 2011
In 1989, Jordan Mechner created the first Prince of Persia video game on an Apple II. Since then, the video game franchise has come a long way and is one of the more successful and recognizable titles in the industry. Jerry Bruckheimer Films acquired the film rights to the 2003 video game Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time and now it's a Disney blockbuster.

Prince Dastan (Gyllenhaal), an orphan from the streets of Sixth Century Persia, is taken in by King Sharaman (Ronald Pickup) and his brother Nizam (Kingsley). Dastan takes his place as the adopted brother of the two sons of Sharaman, growing up as a Prince. Now adults, the three princes lead an assault on the Holy City of Alamut, suspected to be the site of several forges where weapons for enemies of Persia are manufactured.

In Alamut, they encounter Princess Tamina (Arterton), the guardian of the Dagger of Time. The wielder of the Dagger can turn back time and only he is aware of what happened. Dastan is framed for murder at the victory celebration, and escapes with Tamina. Neither likes the other a whole lot, but have to cooperate so that Dastan can prove his innocence and Tamina can safeguard the dagger.

Along the way, they meet Sheik Amar (Alfred Molina), an "entrepreneur" who runs an ostrich-racing syndicate. Amar assists Dastan and Tamina in traveling to a sanctuary where the dagger can be safe. They are ambushed by Hassansins, treacherous hired killers skilled in a variety of deadly arts.

It is revealed that Nizam is behind the scheme and plans to use the dagger to turn back time such that he and not his brother Sharaman would be the true king. Dastan and Tamina thus have to prevent the dagger from falling into the hands of the evil Nizam.

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time sets out to be an epic, sweeping adventure. There is some spectacle, several good action sequences and well-choreographed fight scenes. Despite this, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time feels more like an average Hollywood actioner dressed as a sword-and-sandals tale.

It is more than obvious that the film's main purpose is to try to replicate the success achieved by Disney and Bruckheimer's previous venture, the Pirates of the Caribbean film franchise. As such, comparisons are inevitable. Unfortunately, Prince of Persia: the Sands of Time does not feel as refreshing and swashbuckling as the Pirates of the Caribbean films, especially the first movie. It had a bigger scope, took greater risks filmmaking-wise and really broke more ground. Elements of other Disney films are readily recognizable: the street urchin-turned prince from Aladdin and the evil uncle from The Lion King, among others.

The film boasts a cast that can be best described as "interesting". Indie darling Jake Gyllenhaal may seem the furthest thing from a marketable action star, but he is very charming and likable as Dastan. Gyllenhaal's dedication is also evident in the amount of muscle mass he gained to play the Prince, providing plenty of eye candy in what is not a typical ladies' film. Gyllenhaal performed many of his own stunts, including swordfighting and parkour-style jumping across rooftops. Who knows, this may be the start of the Brokeback Mountain guy's mainstream movie action star career.

It is a bit of a pity then that his leading lady doesn't exude the same kind of appeal. The casting of Gemma Arterton seems to be inspired by choosing fellow English Rose Keira Knightley as the leading lady of the Pirates of the Caribbean films. Arterton is stiff and shares little chemistry with Gyllenhaal, and looks nothing like the perceived image of a Far Eastern princess. There is a scene where Tamina removes her veil and the whole room gasps at her beauty-while Arterton is somewhat attractive, that's incredulous at best. I would have rather a Bollywood beauty be cast as Tamina, someone like Malika Sherawat, Frieda Pinto or Katrina Kaif.

Ben Kingsley is excellent as a mustache-twirling evil uncle, and it is no surprise at all when he is revealed to be the villainous mastermind-that eye shadow should be indication enough. Being half-Indian, he definitely pulls off the Middle-Eastern look better than many of his co-stars.

It is Alfred Molina who steals the show as the comic relief. His character Sheik Amar is greedy, shifty and untrustworthy, but somehow Molina makes him utterly likable, relishing the chance to ham it up just a little.

Filmed partially on location in Morocco, the film possesses a hint of the exotic. However, the film feels culturally and historically ambiguous, especially since everyone speaks with a crisp British accent. Also, the audience can easily tell when the action moves to the sound stage, and, unlike Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, it's not going to win an Oscar for Best Visual Effects-or anything else, for that matter.

That being said, the film is undeniably good fun, and is really something the whole family can enjoy (a good measure of violence keeps it from being too juvenile). Just keep one eye closed to the faults and go along for a theme park-style ride.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Prince of Persia: loud, noisy, clichéd and forgettable
MadMax43334 June 2010
Warning: Spoilers
If I thought the overlong, frightfully dull "Avatar" contained and rehashed every Hollywood cliché ever used, albeit in blue, "Prince of Persia: Sands of Time" runs the gamut of every mindless Hollywood action-feature effect, computerized or not, and even as an admittedly escapism event, it falls short of any intended mark. It is obvious that there is little new under the Hollywood sun. Frankly, 1942's "Arabian Nights" did this plot line much better and Shemp Howard, of Three Stooges fame, surpassed Alfred Molina's deadly dull and ineffective attempt at humor. Jake Gyllenhaal, in spite of much daring-do stunts and macho posturing, is still not the virile stud hero that his handlers are trying to turn him into, and Arterton's clichéd bitchy dialog becomes tedious after 10 minutes. It's a shallow waste of time from beginning to end and how Ben Kingsley could keep a straight face throughout this loud, noisy romp is a testament to his enormous experience in front of a camera.
40 out of 84 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Proof a video game cross over CAN work...
Generic_Gooner24 May 2010
We all know the score. Movie based on a video game, it's going to be poor, right? Well actually Bruckheimer, Newell and Disney beg to differ, and I have to agree with them on this one.

It's not perfect, but it is far superior to many other efforts that came before it. Even those that promised much like Hit-man failed to deliver on the hype beforehand, so with a trailer that had me questioning how good this really was (in hindsight it held back a lot of story reveals and the better scenes, which was quite a gamble) I went in not sure what I would get.

And what I got was a film made by people who seemed to understand what was required to entertain. The flow was perfect, and the story seemed to run cohesively. The story itself wasn't groundbreaking and at times could be a little predictable, but it was enjoyable and not over complicated or patchy.

Jake Gyllenhaal is an indie movie mainstay, so to see him in a role like this was interesting. He certainly looked the part and didn't do a bad job on the English accent, but the acting ability of the guy in general made him believable. Gemma Arteton has at time felt a little wooden in films I have seen her in, but this role of the feisty princess worked well for her and her chemistry with Gyllenhaal made the characters more believable.

The supporting cast were solid too, and the comedy turn from Molina's Amar was a very welcome addition.

But then a film like this will also live or die on the action, and this is an area that may divide people. The film wasn't packed out with it, but what action scenes there were came at perfect moments in the story, and some had genuine class to them. The nod to the earlier prince of Persia games too will not be lost on some of the older audience, like the leaping from one roof to another and climbing and running across strategic poles stuck out of walls. It offered a return to the swashbuckling sword fighting that looks very impressive and doesn't require a CGI monster to enhance it in any way.

To summarise this movie I would offer a comparison to another Disney film that was born of a different media, Pirates of the Caribbean, a ride that became a successful film franchise. Prince of Persia soars towards that level of quality, and is only really let down by a lack of a scene stealer of Captain Jack Sparrow's genius.

But it certainly has made a claim for the best video game adaptation of them all.
23 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed