Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

2010 "Defy the Future"
6.5| 1h56m| PG-13| en| More Info
Released: 27 May 2010 Released
Producted By: Walt Disney Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: https://movies.disney.com/prince-of-persia-the-sands-of-time
Synopsis

A rogue prince reluctantly joins forces with a mysterious princess and together, they race against dark forces to safeguard an ancient dagger capable of releasing the Sands of Time – gift from the gods that can reverse time and allow its possessor to rule the world.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Walt Disney Pictures

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Mike_Devine Video game-based films have mostly suffered at the box office, with only a few bright spots - namely the 'Lara Croft: Tomb Raider' series (and a lot of that was due to the "Jolie Effect"). 2010 brought us Disney's attempt in 'Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time,' which was directed by Mike Newell and produced by none other than Jerry Bruckheimer.The $200M big-budget action blockbuster was a blistering blunder at the box office, which explains why there was never a follow-up effort. At one point, Disney was hopeful that 'Persia' could follow in the footsteps of successful franchises like 'Pirates of the Caribbean' or 'National Treasure.' So what went wrong? For one, while Jake Gyllenhaal is generally a good actor, he didn't fit the part of Prince Dastan, the protagonist who stumbles upon a magic dagger that can turn back time, as well as a feisty princess (Gemma Arterton) who becomes quite a handful for him, given the rest of the situation he's in. Gyllenhaal is as wooden as a park bench and has an accent that is pretty much indistinguishable.In a nutshell, 'Persia' is a total mess. It's not entertaining, feels unintentionally comical at points and is just ridiculously campy. Whether it's the fighting scenes that look like a 12-year-old designed them, complete with slow-mo and over-the-top sound effects, or characters who add little-to-no value, there's plenty of that to go around here. Even talented actors like Sir Ben Kingsley and Alfred Molina have their talents wasted in this film. The only good thing about 'Persia' is it's not too long, at just under two hours.No doubt, 'Prince of Persia: The Sands of Times' was a big gamble taken by the Mouse House, and like most video game adaptations, it crumbled under its own weight.
Benedito Dias Rodrigues Superproduction well done with great locations on Marrocos and an excellent cast and a good story could be wrong??? well if you believe that mortal guy make all things that show on the movie you probably is mad!! The good thing in this movie is Alfredo Molina who don't like to pay taxes who like anyway!! but he is very funny and helps the picture,but prince Dastan should be in marvel super heroes instead this movie!!
BA_Harrison Disney's The Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time is a film clearly designed to appeal to the entire family: for the mums to drool over, we have a buffed up Jake Gyllenhaal; for the dads there is the beautiful (but incredibly wooden) Gemma Arterton; and for the kids there is plenty of video game style action. Oh, and there's an ostrich race, and who doesn't like an ostrich race?Shame that they forgot all about a decent plot.The 'scribbled on the back of a napkin during a power lunch' story that has been built around the popular video game series sees Gyllenhaal's Prince Dastan trying to prevent a magical dagger that can reverse time from falling into the wrong hands. This allows for tons of ridiculous stunt-filled action in which Gyllenhaal's character performs impressive, nay impossible, feats of physicality, a fair amount of mild violence, and a little romance (although Gyllenhaal and Arterton share zero chemistry). Sadly any sense of genuine excitement or fun is swamped by the sheer predictability of proceedings (Ben Kingsley is the real villain? You don't say!) and the glut of CGI enhanced action set-pieces that only serve to bore.
duerden60 Come on, I'm all for a fun movie with a beautiful girl and a macho bloke doing amazing stunts, and I can suspend belief up to a point, but the trite dialogue, the impossible plot and too much makeup made it laughable. Gemma was miscast in my view, it needed someone who could play posh totty, not somebody who sounded as though they had just stepped off the bus from Essex. (and Gemma is fine in things such as 'Hansel and Gretel; witch hunters')but perhaps Keira Knightley would have been much better as the Royal Princess who could be tough when required. Where all the money was spent I don't know but much was wasted. Jake Gyllenhaal was great in the part but Ben Kingsley, Alfred Molina and others obviously decided they were in a pantomime and just had fun then collected the money.