Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Prince Of Persia: The Sands of Time

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Prince Of Persia: The Sands of Time Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Prince Of Persia: The Sands of Time - 22/5/2010 5:30:38 PM   
theoriginalcynic

 

Posts: 6521
Joined: 10/4/2007
I thought it was good, three stars.  Jake's accent was all over the place tho and my mate and I were laughing at it.  There were a few unintentional hilarious parts in the film.  Alfred was great providing comic relief, Gemma can act and she looked goreous. Everyone was decent in this.

I don't understand the ending.  If Ben's character pressed the dagger surely he would get to choose to go back in time? So, A how does Jake remember it and B why didn't he go back to when they were kids instead of landing back at the start of the film.  Time travel hu? making their own rules up.

3 stars.  Good summer fun.

< Message edited by theoriginalcynic -- 22/5/2010 5:32:33 PM >

(in reply to R W)
Post #: 31
Boring review..zzzzzzzzzzzzzz - 22/5/2010 7:38:44 PM   
lipton village

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 25/3/2007
Ian Nathan your a pain in the hole. What utter high brow, intellectual snobbery. This reviewer is pompous. He provides very little info about the film but seems to meander off into a stream of conciouness diatribe of a review. Empire, will you get rid of this guy. He reviews films like he was explaining the inner workings of an atom. Pompous, intellectual high brow nonsense and trying far too hard to sound intelligent (which he's not). He's a fool.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 32
RE: Boring review..zzzzzzzzzzzzzz - 23/5/2010 4:12:21 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
quote:

ORIGINAL: lipton village

Ian Nathan your a pain in the hole. What utter high brow, intellectual snobbery. This reviewer is pompous. He provides very little info about the film but seems to meander off into a stream of conciouness diatribe of a review. Empire, will you get rid of this guy. He reviews films like he was explaining the inner workings of an atom. Pompous, intellectual high brow nonsense and trying far too hard to sound intelligent (which he's not). He's a fool.


What an intellectual high brow nonsense post. (what is high brow or intellectual in that review?)


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to lipton village)
Post #: 33
RE: Boring review..zzzzzzzzzzzzzz - 24/5/2010 8:55:21 AM   
BOHEMIANBOB


Posts: 1884
Joined: 31/1/2010
From: Dublin
That is a bit harsh!
I think we have all seen a film,given comment and sometimes said it actually wasn't that bad/good.
Film reviewers get one chance and that's it.
If we didn't disagree witht them,where'd be the fun?
If you are into structural analysis(like poetry in essence) of movies,cool.
I think most people just want a basic review of the film content and then make up their own mind.

_____________________________

Misunderstood.
Don't care.
Have you seen my stolen signature?!

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 34
Better than the review gives it credit for - 24/5/2010 1:00:56 PM   
mojokola

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 30/9/2005
I thought the movie was better than Robin Hood and Iron Man 2. In my opinion, it could be the surprise hit of the year. An enjoyable family movie!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 35
RE: Better than the review gives it credit for - 24/5/2010 1:54:27 PM   
Edward Nygma

 

Posts: 713
Joined: 28/12/2005
Well Prince of Persia was hardly a disappointment in that I personally didn't expect much from it anyway. As far as video game to film adaptations go it's one of the best...or less terrible.

Jake is completely miscast...that accent was just embarrassing. I love the guy and he did his best to make his part work but he's just not right in this role. At all.

Film itself had its fun moments but the direction and editing was all over the place. Such a mess. Especially the ridiculous, nonsensical CGI heavy ending where I was just squinting in order to maybe see something ressembling anything!

Writing was cheesy, love interest was irritating, story was silly...but that was all to be expected. Overall, it's balls. But that special kind of balls you can at least enjoy a little bit. It was more entertaining than Robin Hood at least, although that was probably a slightly better film.


_____________________________

Ben. Affleck.

(in reply to mojokola)
Post #: 36
Not Bad But Not Great Either - 24/5/2010 6:10:00 PM   
Bighousewill

 

Posts: 244
Joined: 5/12/2009
I was only slightly entertained, the quarreling love interest thing is a cliche and the film itself never made me think oh that was cool, and it didnt make me laugh either, I pretty much expected it to be like this.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 37
Not Bad But Not Great Either - 24/5/2010 6:10:01 PM   
Bighousewill

 

Posts: 244
Joined: 5/12/2009
I was only slightly entertained, the quarreling love interest thing is a cliche and the film itself never made me think oh that was cool, and it didnt make me laugh either, I pretty much expected it to be like this.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 38
RE: Not Bad But Not Great Either - 24/5/2010 9:33:38 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 4030
Joined: 19/10/2005
One doesn't really expect much from a film based on a computer game, but considering Arabian Nights-orientated films are extremely rare nowadays I was looking forward to this and it seemed like it would be a lot of fun.  Well it is fairly fun, but probably almost totally forgettable, I can't imagine I'll rememeber much in a few days time.  I have no idea if this is close to the game, but as an Arabian Nights movie it's suprisingly unimaginative and seems to be holding back,despite having one of the most enjoyably absurd MacGuffins of all time [a dagger with sand in the handle that can enable the user to travel back in time a little bit].  There's plenty of action, and some of the early scenes of Jake Gyllenhall [or his stuntmen] have a likeable Douglas Fairbanks Snr/Jackie Chan quality to them, but it seems to get less and less interesting as the film goes on and as usual these days suffers from editing so fast you can't really see what's going on.  The effects drowned climax is very poor.  Gyllenhall and Gemma Arterton both seem uneasy in their roles though their relationship is fun and they do actually have some chemistry together, while Ben Kingsley has fun being nasty in black eye shadow and Alfred Molina has a few funny lines.  With a predictably generic score that sounds just like every other score for a Jerry Bruckheimer production, this does pass the time, but only just.

_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to Bighousewill)
Post #: 39
RE: Better than the review gives it credit for - 24/5/2010 9:35:09 PM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 4030
Joined: 19/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edward Nygma

Well Prince of Persia was hardly a disappointment in that I personally didn't expect much from it anyway. As far as video game to film adaptations go it's one of the best...or less terrible.

Jake is completely miscast...that accent was just embarrassing. I love the guy and he did his best to make his part work but he's just not right in this role. At all.

Film itself had its fun moments but the direction and editing was all over the place. Such a mess. Especially the ridiculous, nonsensical CGI heavy ending where I was just squinting in order to maybe see something ressembling anything!

Writing was cheesy, love interest was irritating, story was silly...but that was all to be expected. Overall, it's balls. But that special kind of balls you can at least enjoy a little bit. It was more entertaining than Robin Hood at least, although that was probably a slightly better film.



I agree Robin Hood was probably a touch better but this was a bit more fun.  For a second time I find myself mostly agreeing with you, what's going on???? lol!

< Message edited by Dr Lenera -- 24/5/2010 9:36:13 PM >


_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to Edward Nygma)
Post #: 40
RE: Better than the review gives it credit for - 24/5/2010 11:58:24 PM   
BOHEMIANBOB


Posts: 1884
Joined: 31/1/2010
From: Dublin
Sorry folks,i agree with most of what you are saying,but ffs "this was more fun"??
For "fun" you mean meandering shite with a worse accent and scenes you cannot even see?
Better than Robin Hood(yes very flawed!!) on this basis??

_____________________________

Misunderstood.
Don't care.
Have you seen my stolen signature?!

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 41
WTF Empire? - 25/5/2010 10:42:58 AM   
Cletus Van Damme

 

Posts: 76
Joined: 3/2/2006
Another truly awful review. Please re read and re-submit. Some sentences make no sense. Are you after the yoof consumer? Empire is again going through a period where it seems to have lost touch with the Englsh language. See the Clash of the Titans review for further evidence.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 42
RE: Better than the review gives it credit for - 25/5/2010 2:07:29 PM   
Edward Nygma

 

Posts: 713
Joined: 28/12/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dr Lenera

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edward Nygma

Well Prince of Persia was hardly a disappointment in that I personally didn't expect much from it anyway. As far as video game to film adaptations go it's one of the best...or less terrible.

Jake is completely miscast...that accent was just embarrassing. I love the guy and he did his best to make his part work but he's just not right in this role. At all.

Film itself had its fun moments but the direction and editing was all over the place. Such a mess. Especially the ridiculous, nonsensical CGI heavy ending where I was just squinting in order to maybe see something ressembling anything!

Writing was cheesy, love interest was irritating, story was silly...but that was all to be expected. Overall, it's balls. But that special kind of balls you can at least enjoy a little bit. It was more entertaining than Robin Hood at least, although that was probably a slightly better film.



I agree Robin Hood was probably a touch better but this was a bit more fun.  For a second time I find myself mostly agreeing with you, what's going on???? lol!


lol Weird indeed...

Don't you worry, I'm sure we'll disagree on something eventually 

Bohemian Bob, we agree that Robin Hood, as a film, was definitely a bit better than Prince of Persia. But Persia was just much more entertaining in a brainless, clichéd, popcorn-movie kind of way. Which doesn't mean it was good. It wasn't! lol


_____________________________

Ben. Affleck.

(in reply to Dr Lenera)
Post #: 43
S(t)and by your Man, maybe !!!........ - 25/5/2010 7:41:59 PM   
n13roy

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 5/10/2005
Well, having just seen this Film today, I suppose you just have to take it with a pinch of Salt ( or Sand ) and go with the flow of it really. Its probably not as bad as some reviews have stated, and one of the best descriptions I heard lately was, an " Adventure in Spectacular Crap "......might be something in that description perhaps !!!.......

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 44
RE: Better than the review gives it credit for - 25/5/2010 10:20:37 PM   
BOHEMIANBOB


Posts: 1884
Joined: 31/1/2010
From: Dublin
Robin Hood is better,but to say a film is better due to it being more "fun" would have some credibility IF the movie was fun,say like the first Pirates movie(unashamed fun!).
But Persia is a bad version of that and not much "fun" at all,with a robotic miscast leading man.
Where does the "fun" end?Scarey Movie?

_____________________________

Misunderstood.
Don't care.
Have you seen my stolen signature?!

(in reply to Edward Nygma)
Post #: 45
RE: Better than the review gives it credit for - 25/5/2010 11:40:32 PM   
doug64


Posts: 67
Joined: 24/11/2009
From: A cupboard in Dundee
having heard and read a lot of bad things about this movie i was a bit worried going in but you know what it aint that bad, indeed up until jake(cant remember the characters name!!) figures out it was his uncle it was zipping along nicely. then it lost its way a bit. it was better than both clash of the titans and robin hood, though thats not saying much. also find it funny people complaing about accents, in a film about a dagger that turns back time...

(in reply to BOHEMIANBOB)
Post #: 46
RE: Better than the review gives it credit for - 26/5/2010 2:51:17 PM   
superdan


Posts: 8304
Joined: 31/7/2008
Watched it this morning and I thought it was alright. It's no Indiana Jones, but it's entertaining enough and as others have said there's some good chemistry between Gyllenhaal and Arterton. I also think his accent isn't as bad as some have made out, I thought he had a good stab at it, one or two wobbles aside.

The main problems for me were ones that I would expect from this sort of film anyway - weak script, plot holes and some lousy supporting players. They aren't bad enough to make the film unwatchable, but it could have been much better.

(in reply to doug64)
Post #: 47
RE: Better than the review gives it credit for - 27/5/2010 12:30:47 AM   
BOHEMIANBOB


Posts: 1884
Joined: 31/1/2010
From: Dublin

quote:

ORIGINAL: doug64

having heard and read a lot of bad things about this movie i was a bit worried going in but you know what it aint that bad, indeed up until jake(cant remember the characters name!!) figures out it was his uncle it was zipping along nicely. then it lost its way a bit. it was better than both clash of the titans and robin hood, though thats not saying much. also find it funny people complaing about accents, in a film about a dagger that turns back time...

Good point!
I mentioned that in relation to Robin Hood and the bad press Crowe got(and deserved in terms of the accent-very lazy!)
This accent is poor too,but 2 things:
1:Neither really bother me to be honest,i'd prefer they just abandoned accents they can't do.
2:Spot on,accents are irrelevent to a silly plot(not a criticism!).

_____________________________

Misunderstood.
Don't care.
Have you seen my stolen signature?!

(in reply to doug64)
Post #: 48
RE: Prince Of Persia - 28/5/2010 9:17:28 AM   
Timon


Posts: 14588
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol
I enjoyed it in a 'old fashioned serial/Adventures of Sinbad' kind of way....

Not particularly memorable apart from the opening assault, but good fun for 2 hours.

3/5


_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to BOHEMIANBOB)
Post #: 49
absolute trash - 29/5/2010 12:36:34 AM   
uheiberg

 

Posts: 65
Joined: 2/1/2006
I cant....... I want..... I....... I.... 3 STARS!!!!?????? THREE???!!! WHAT THE @#$%!^!%@%%@%@%@%@%!!!!! ARE YOU @#$$$ING KIDDING ME!!? Ive been thinking for a while now that Empire sucks big fat hairy donkey balls and the only thing theyre good for is providing news (they can hardly do that right), but this is too much!! you have gone too far. waaaay too far. youre just tryng to please everybody arent you? all I see is 3s and 4s and occasilonally 5s (most of the time misgiven). recently: Cop Out, 2 stars because you were too chicken shit too give it a 1, you even basically said it in the review, integrity down the drain. Robin Hood, 4 stars. I should fucking punch you in the nuts for that one. Dear John, 3 stars. fuck you. i actually could go on and on and i kinda want to but i must sleep and never come back. im probably gonna get another warning. or maybe theyll actually have the balls to take my "commenting privileges", as they so elegantly put it last time, away this time. "try to pull that crap again and you can kiss your commenting privileges goodbye". exact quote.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 50
2 stars max - 29/5/2010 11:55:47 AM   
Sanya

 

Posts: 24
Joined: 8/4/2010
The storytelling is the worst part of the movie, I don't know what happened with Jerry , maybe he is very busy with trasformers, but its hardly an execuse. Also the lack of atmosphere, thats because the place of action change so quickly and without order and also without sence. The main cast is good but no more, their wooden dialogues kill all their play. But sidekicks are realy good .

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 51
Amazing, Perfect To Spend Two Hours With. - 29/5/2010 6:33:59 PM   
joanna likes films

 

Posts: 987
Joined: 27/10/2007
From: Bexhill
I've played all the Prince Of Persia games, enjoying every single one. But when I heard that there was going to be a movie, I was weary that they could ruin it and would be ashamed to play the games anymore. Well, my worries were wrong. It was simply amazing, I was instanly taken within the opening scene to the final moments. Even the credits began to roll, I was still in awe. Jake Gyllehaall IS the Prince Of Persia, no other could play him and he did with a fine art. There was NOTHING wrong with his accent! Gemma Arterton was brilliant as Tamina, the chemisty between them was sizzing and were a couple to root for. Ben Kingsly, Alfred Molina and Toby Kebbell were great and grabbed your attention whenever they were on screen. Beautiful settings, haunting music and plenty of action to pass the two hours away. Five stars.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 52
Amazing, Perfect To Spend Two Hours With. - 29/5/2010 6:34:02 PM   
joanna likes films

 

Posts: 987
Joined: 27/10/2007
From: Bexhill
I've played all the Prince Of Persia games, enjoying every single one. But when I heard that there was going to be a movie, I was weary that they could ruin it and would be ashamed to play the games anymore. Well, my worries were wrong. It was simply amazing, I was instanly taken within the opening scene to the final moments. Even the credits began to roll, I was still in awe. Jake Gyllehaall IS the Prince Of Persia, no other could play him and he did with a fine art. There was NOTHING wrong with his accent! Gemma Arterton was brilliant as Tamina, the chemisty between them was sizzing and were a couple to root for. Ben Kingsly, Alfred Molina and Toby Kebbell were great and grabbed your attention whenever they were on screen. Beautiful settings, haunting music and plenty of action to pass the two hours away. Five stars.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 53
RE: Amazing, Perfect To Spend Two Hours With. - 30/5/2010 2:50:26 PM   
TrailMix

 

Posts: 151
Joined: 29/5/2008
From: Washington, DC
Just got back from seeing it, I really enjoyed it. To defend Jake some, I thought he was really great in the film, and you could tell he was having a good time, which is great. I thought he was charming and witty, and looked a lot like the character should. As for the over all entertainment, I thought the sets were incredible, and I'm a sucker for parkour, so all the chase scenes were really fun for me.

(in reply to joanna likes films)
Post #: 54
- 30/5/2010 3:51:35 PM   
djphilips

 

Posts: 104
Joined: 26/12/2008
From: Malta
Although Prince of Persia does have its major flaws, it does manage to cover them up ever so mildly to the naked eye as to deliver a worthwile experience which is ultimately quite entertaining.
The movie's strenghts undeniably lie in its action scenes - quite simply the best we've seen in a long time; old-fashioned yet always an utter joy to watch and behold. Everything else is so-so at best: the acting is definitely nothing to write home about and Newell is not as experienced as much as Prince of Persia needs him to be, although he does a rather decent job of creating a Pirates of the Caribbean-style adventure which is, most importantly, rewatchable. The main culprit here is the largly untalented writing, as dialogue is often unbearable and plot and pace are both all over the place. The last 15 minutes, especially, can be cringe-worthy.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 55
Worst review ever. - 30/5/2010 7:21:12 PM   
Kilo_T_Mortal


Posts: 13539
Joined: 30/9/2005
Had a great time watching the film, thought it was fun.

My post is really about how badly written this review is. Did no editor glance over it? It borders on incomprehensible. It has no flow and any points are hidden in sentences that, that without seeming overly dramatic (as I wouldn't want to appear that way), seem to continue onwards in some sort of nonsensical spiral down towards a kind of seventh circle of a Dante-inspired hell where writers of reviews are no doubt headed when they keep on bloody writing the same bloody sentence.

A review on a review. What fun.

_____________________________

he's ruining my buestiful threat!

"She must have known about all this before she let that grinning loon put his space-cock anywhere near her?"
horribleives

(in reply to djphilips)
Post #: 56
RE: Worst review ever. - 31/5/2010 6:41:30 AM   
tarantinofan

 

Posts: 1194
Joined: 1/10/2005
A hugely insulting movie. Hollywood once again produces a film of complete ignorance penned by not one, but three dolt heads who spent more time in Camden market researching this film than modern day Persia. The writers pokes fun at the wackos in the Tea Party for resenting big government and fearing state sponsored violence but happily replace Persians with white people with dodgy English accents and bad fake tans and reduces all the minorities to roles as background characters or mystical sorcerers and knife throwers. I felt ashamed that this was another product of a society that is supposed to be making an effort to understand the Middle East, rather than something that continues that societies reputation as a bone headed, big spending country of ignoramuses who couldn't point to Africa on a map. 

(in reply to Kilo_T_Mortal)
Post #: 57
Should have been in 3D - 31/5/2010 1:14:01 PM   
Kurtis93

 

Posts: 45
Joined: 26/5/2009
Jake is very good, he oozes action-hero qualities, and is picture perfect for the role, he doesn't say much in the film, he needs more of he Jack Sparrow charm to him, more a cheeky and cocky prince would have made the film, less sand and swords ( or daggers?) and more cheeky comedy, like Pirates. The film would have been fantastic and more fun in 3D, but like Pirates, not the best film, but a good ride.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 58
Old-fashioned Saturday Morning Entertainment - 1/6/2010 8:38:07 PM   
mojojojo

 

Posts: 10
Joined: 7/1/2006
From: Bristol, UK
Old-school sword & sandals with added parkour. Enjoy it for what it is not what it isn't. Good nod to original games, and doesn't take itself too seriously.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 59
If you love Indiana Jones ... then you will love this! - 2/6/2010 11:37:28 AM   
katelm76

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 10/1/2006
From: Bristol, UK
I wanted to watch this when I first heard about it, then was not too sure after some reviews but when I saw it - LOVED IT! It takes you back to the Indiana Jones films (before Crystal Skull) just an old fashioned action / adventure film. The cast was good with the always excellent Jake Gyllenhaal (good accent!) and it wasn't in 3D which is an added bonus so no glasses!! Can't wait for the sequel!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Prince Of Persia: The Sands of Time Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.258