"PRINCE OF PERSIA: THE SANDS OF TIME" (2010) (Jake Gyllenhaal, Gemma Arterton) (PG-13)
If you've come from our parental review of this film and wish to return to it, simply click on your browser's BACK button.
Otherwise, use the following link to read our complete Parental Review of this film.
QUICK TAKE:
Action/Adventure: An adopted prince must prove he didn't kill his father, the King of Persia, all while contending with a magical dagger that can stop and reverse time.
PLOT:
15 years after being adopted by King Sharaman (RONALD PICKUP), former orphan Dastan (JAKE GYLLENHAAL) is now one of the royal princes of ancient Persia, alongside Garsiv (TOBY KEBBELL) and Tus (RICHARD COYLE), while their uncle, Nizam (BEN KINGSLEY), serves as the King's most trusted friend and advisor. Although Dastan's blood isn't that of royalty and he's occasionally distracted by rough and tumble activities with his friend Bis (REECE RITCHIE), he's a capable warrior.
To prove that, and when word arrives that the people of Alamut are harboring dangerous weapons, thus necessitating an invasion -- at least in Tus' eyes, Dastan takes the lead and beats his brothers into the kingdom, thus helping ensure their victory over Princess Tamina (GEMMA ARTERTON) and her people.
The victory celebration is short-lived, however, as one of the recovered spoils, a regal robe, ends up killing the King through its poisonous acidity. Since Dastan was the one who delivered it to his adoptive father, everything believes he's the murderer, and thus he and Tamina flee into the desert, a bounty now on their heads.
Needing to clear his name and avenge his father's death, Dastan discovers that a unique dagger possessed by Tamina has amazing powers in that it can stop and reverse time. Realizing it's the reason for the King's murder, Dastan is determined to bring the dagger to Tus, the new king, and explain what's occurred.
But he must not only contend with that story sounding far-fetched, but also Tamina being determined to protect that dagger at all costs. They must also deal with a group of desert people, lead by Sheikh Amar (ALFRED MOLINA) and his knife-proficient lieutenant, Seso (STEVE TOUSSAINT), and a dangerous Hassansin mystic (GÍSLI ÖRN GARĐARSSON) and his band of warriors who all serve as additional obstacles in Dastan's quest.
OUR TAKE: 4 out of 10
You certainly don't have to admire, but you clearly have to acknowledge Hollywood's persistence, determination and optimism when it comes to generating profits. Like an old-fashioned bloodhound, they'll latch onto the scent of money and follow it to the ends of the Earth. What else could explain why the studios keep making movies based on video games? The answer is obviously moola, and the video game industry is an enormous cash cow that Hollywood wants to sink its fangs into and reap some of those rewards.
Yet, like most any parasite, most of the results aren't particularly pretty. Some do make money (such as the first "Tomb Raider" and "Pokémon" films), but most are mediocre hits at best, and nearly all of them are ugly ducklings (what's with all of the animal metaphors?) from an artistic standpoint. And both of those faults stem from the nature of the beast.
Unlike comic books that use storytelling as the basis of their existence, video games are an interactive experience where story takes a back seat to first-person immersion in the game playing. As a result, movies based on comic books often (but not always) turn out to be huge commercial and critical hits, while those based on video games usually end up akin to watching someone else playing the latest release. Unless you're a diehard fan of the franchise, there's little reason to express anything more than a passing interest in what's thrown up on the screen.
That's certainly the case with "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time," a sword and sandals type action-adventure pic that's based on a video game that debuted way back in 1989 and has gone through several reincarnations since then. With producer Jerry Bruckheimer behind the project, the apparent hope is that he'll be able to turn this into a monstrous franchise just as he did with the unlikely source material of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" ride at Disney's theme parks.
While I'm sure it will make money (nearly all Bruckheimer films seem to as he has some sort of Midas touch), it's unlikely this one will match the lucrativeness of that previous franchise. And that's because it's nowhere as fun, funny, engaging and/or exciting as the original "Pirates" flick. Simply put, Jake Gyllenhaal (taking a break from serious fare, although this thankfully isn't a return to "Bubble Boy") is no Johnny Depp, director Mike Newell apparently watched the video game too many times rather than study what Gore Verbinski did to make the pirate movie so entertaining, the special effects aren't as good, and the overall effort lacks the rousing spectacle aura that permeated and effortlessly flowed forth from the preceding offering.
Like that one updating the old seafaring swashbuckler genre, this is a modern retrofit of an old Hollywood staple, the sword and sandals epic. You know, the ones set in ancient times, featuring kingdoms, royalty, mystical and/or mythological beings, monsters or elements, lots of clashing swords and related stunt work, and at least one trip (and often several) through the desert. Hollywood (along with foreign studios) once made such films with regularity, but I don't know that this offering, along with the recent remake of "Clash of the Titans," is going to herald the return of a new such era.
The biggest issues, as is often the case with video game adaptations, are the lackluster and/or ill-conceived and executed storytelling and direction. While the basic plot elements are Hollywood standards -- a person goes on the run while trying to clear their name from a murder they didn't commit; is teamed with a member of the opposite sex they initially don't get along with (that being Gemma Arterton playing the pretty and tough chick capable of handling herself, although the antagonist chemistry between her and Gyllenhaal doesn't sparkle); and supporting characters that alternate between menace (Ben Kingsley) and/or comic relief (Alfred Molina pulling double-duty here) -- they just don't gel this time around.
Of course, it doesn't help that Newell (who's no hack as he's also helmed "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire," "Donnie Brasco" and "Four Weddings and a Funeral") and his editing team of Mick Audsley, Michael Kahh and Martin Walsh have essentially filmed a live-action video game rather than create a movie that works on its own. As a result, the story -- penned by Boaz Yakin and Doug Miro & Carlo Bernard -- is muddled at best, often leaving the viewer to wonder who's who, what's what and why we should care about anyone or anything. Meanwhile, the "weapons of mass destruction" political statement (a kingdom is invaded under false information about advanced and dangerous weapons) doesn't do anything for the film beyond draw attention to itself.
Speaking of that, the action is edited to within an inch of its life (while the trademark Bruckheimer spin-around camera shot is also present), thus robbing such scenes of the clarity and engagement factor they so desperately need. To top it off, the various bits of homage, theft or whatever you want to call it in terms of occasionally referencing "Raiders of the Lost Ark" only point out what a masterful and enjoyable throwback effort that film was and this one isn't.
While I initially had the same sort of reaction to the Brendan Fraser remake of the "The Mummy," at least that one had over-the-top spectacle and purposeful goofiness going for it, and I'll admit that flick has grown on me since my initial review. Only time will tell if "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time" will enjoy the same modified reaction from yours truly. At first glance, though, it's nothing special and feels more like a money-making scheme than a need to tell a rousing story and do that well. It rates as a 4 out of 10.
![[Screen It]](/images/underground_header.jpg)