Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

Newell is good with actors – the mischievous and sparkly Gyllenhaal / Arterton duet is a pleasure to watch – but Newell is desperate not to do it with epic sauce. Even in Harry Potter, it was noticeable when some of the conversations were the funniest and most impressive things about the film. Prince of Persia is putting on a sterile crown. Futile fancy magic with a "game-like" camera, parkour walled in by the editing, and duels that are wooden and lack anything. Some of the images are unbearably plastic instead of fabulously magical. Nevertheless, I had a very satisfying time with the film. As a fairytale it works (thanks to the actors), only the feeling of plastic harmlessness of the environment limits the fantasy. The Prince of Persia is such a nice Disney figure who doesn't offend. Sometimes he delights, sometimes he jumps around without even plucking out of lethargy. Too bad, the potential was there, and it was considerable. I will miss Jake's veal conception in action fantasy. (09/01/2010)

The Sands of Time is a very nice example of how money can be wasted in the film industry when the producer thinks that a grand set design, special effects, and handsome actors in lead roles can accomplish everything. However, the story itself is unremarkable and undeveloped, and the characters get lost in it. Even actors like Ben Kingsley are shamefully underutilized, so I soon felt bored and sleepy. Of course, ladies can admire the warriors' biceps and the dresses of the movie beauties, and gentlemen can enjoy the clanging of weapons, but that doesn't change my conviction that The Sands of Time is also a waste of time. Overall impression: 45%. (03/06/2011)

Surprisingly, it exceeded my (to be honest, very low) expectations. Prince of Persia is a harmless summer blockbuster with a very likeable main couple. The story doesn’t try to be smart (any viewer with at least some experience will guess the ending) and the performances aren’t brilliant, but that would’ve been too much to expect. I had fun, so I’m satisfied. 6/10 (08/18/2010)

This was the first time I have ever experienced being absolutely alone in the auditorium. I proprietorially swooped with a glance over the empty auditorium, laughed and let myself be carried off to far away Persia where the brave prince Dastan, mouthy princess Tamina and one super cool dagger that turns time upside down, wander... wander and save the world and each other and do the usual marvelous fairytale things. A lot has changed since I last played “Prince of Persia" (around the year ‘98). For the better (and that’s saying something, it used to be my favorite platform game, along with “Aladdin") making it even more bombastic. Jerry B. had almost everything in control, as usual: feast-for-the-eyes Gemma Anderton dressed as a princess, towns, palaces, snakes, chasms, traps, but made the mistake of letting that sentimental Mike Newell direct the movie. The only benefit that he brought to the movie is confusing action scenes, but I could easily do without them. He spoiled part four of Potter in the same way, remember? But the saving grace of this movie is the excellent tempo (there’s always something happening and something to look at) and pleasant supporting characters. Initially, I couldn’t imagine Gyllenhaal in a role like this, but in the end I was pleasantly surprised. And Harry Gregson-Williams did a good job with the music and, rather than originality, put his money on tried and tested themes with an oriental taste that is good to listen to. Did you know that ostriches have suicidal tendencies? Look at this poor thing! (07/31/2010)

For the longest time, I didn't want to believe that a feature film inspired by a legendary play could be such a flop. Sometimes it's actually better to go through the play footage and let the movie sleep. The only thing here that had any potential was Gemma Arterton's princess, but even she couldn't get out of the shadow of the likes of Dejah Thoris. (03/23/2021)