shushens
Joined Nov 2006
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews30
shushens's rating
This film, like other films from Eggers, is a cinematographic gem. If this were his second feature, as he originally intended, it would probably have made a bigger stir. I was relieved to see that unlike some parts of 'The Witch', I did not feel like I was watching paint dry. Eggers pacing and flow of storytelling have definitely improved.
Given the very grim and grey premise, the shallow characters, often unrelatable, did not bother me much.
The reason 7 stars is the best I could do for this film is, every detail of this story has been done and redone so many times already in the last 100 years that in order to have a proper breakthrough, there needed to be at least some elements the audience did not see coming.
Unfortunately, it seems like Eggers focused his entire attention to the way the story is told and not at all on what the story actually was, ultimately leaving me with an underwhelming 'been there, seen that before' feeling.
To summarise, Eggers crafts a stunningly beautiful vehicle that makes a lap around the extremely well-trodden track.
Given the very grim and grey premise, the shallow characters, often unrelatable, did not bother me much.
The reason 7 stars is the best I could do for this film is, every detail of this story has been done and redone so many times already in the last 100 years that in order to have a proper breakthrough, there needed to be at least some elements the audience did not see coming.
Unfortunately, it seems like Eggers focused his entire attention to the way the story is told and not at all on what the story actually was, ultimately leaving me with an underwhelming 'been there, seen that before' feeling.
To summarise, Eggers crafts a stunningly beautiful vehicle that makes a lap around the extremely well-trodden track.
Better than Ocean 13 perhaps, but still quite bad. Gina Carano did so much better than John Cena. Too bad the director was Soderberg and not an 'actually' intelligent man. IMDb published an interview of Antonio Banderas on Haywire, but I wonder why. His screen time is less than 5 minutes in total, and not the most interesting 5 minutes either. Reasons are not explained, characters are not detailed, it is not a respectable film overall. Some people called Mallory the female Bourn. That is another mystery, because when I saw the world through Bourn's eyes, I never had any problem understanding what he was feeling or going through. In this film, I had no attachment with any of the characters. If the bad guys just killed Gina Carano in the middle of the film, I would not really feel any different, because I had no idea why a bunch of people were just randomly hurting, shooting at, or killing each other. I read a review a while back, where someone criticized those who came to watch this film expecting a real action film or some award- winning performances. He wrote he liked this film honestly because of the surreal feel. I can kind of appreciate his remark. Surrealism and retardedness are two extremes that can sometimes cross over from one side to the other. For mentally healthy people, who expect to see female Bourn with stylish performances from McGregor, Banderas, Fassbender, etc., I do not recommend this film at all. The film is well shot, well edited, the soundtrack is not too horrible, so I give it a 5. If I had to rate only the substance, I would rate it 1, like many others have done.
I watched Sands of Time today ignoring all the negative reviews. It is true that if you have not played the game, you will not come to appreciate the film much. I heard Mechnar was in-the-loop all the way. But I feel if they took me instead, I would have suggested better cinematography and dialogues, if nothing else.
Jordan wrote somewhere that the prince had to be given a name because there were several conversations addressing him. Not mentioning his name even once would make things abnormally dramatic. Princes and princesses almost always were addressed by their positions and peers, at least in India. I do not know about Persia though, but does anybody? Prince calling princess by her first name within moments of introduction, even under stress, reminds me of IT companies, not Persian royal dynasty, or any other noble bloodline for that matter. If Jordan watched some Japanese films involving princes and princesses, he would know how far the story could progress before the princess were called anything other than hiime (princess).
But having said all that, I am very happy I watched it. Though it blew the chance of being an epic or even a memorable film, it still struck a poignant chord somewhere, bringing back many a sweet memory. Perhaps the credit is largely due to the game and not to the film. But the world was never a fair place to begin with.
The ending of the film was predictable. The game Sands of Time did not give the story any closure and left the gamers begging for more (though they never really received what they begged for). The film does. Just like Pirates of the Caribbean, Disney wants to observe box office success first and then bring up some weird new disaster scenario, along with some new prophecies, to start a sequel, if one ever comes out.
What bothered me the most in the whole film was the feeling of haste. People were delivering dialogues like they were being timed. People were fighting and even relaxing under strict time constraint. Scene transition, camera movement, warm moments, everything was rushed, often unnecessarily. Some moments in a larger than life tale deserve to be lingered. Sands of Time, of all stories, should not have excluded that from consideration. It ruined the film to a great extent, though perhaps a teenager who has no clue what PoP is all about will have fewer yawns watching the film because of this.
No or very little attention has been paid to the way words were delivered. Evidently there is no way of telling how an actual conversation between a Hindu and a Persia would sound back then (whenever that is), but a style could have been implemented to make the language sound a little more flowery, a little less discrete and a lot more exotic. They somehow, in their good conscience, excluded "Oh $hit!" and "What an a$$hole!". The rest was pretty much modern day American street English, which, under these circumstances, was revolting at best. Richard Coyle had probably never imagined talking without a British accent, but I expected far better from Alfred Molina and Ben Kingsley. Kingsley has spoken with excellent Middle Eastern accent before in The House of Sand and Fog. Doing that here would make his shallow part somewhat redeemable. It would not be considered a spoiler, I am sure, to say Ben is the villain in the story. He found out about the dagger and the power it could unleash. But under no circumstances he uttered one word of how he became privy to that information. Information of such gravity must have been a closely kept secret. Skipping bits and pieces of cement in the story made the weak plot weaker.
The chemistry between Tamina (I do not like that name one bit) and Dastan (I dislike it a little less than Tamina) was, in one word, easy. That, however pleasant at the moment, was highly uncalled for. The resistance Tamina put in for the prince was strictly a formality, as if the director would say "Cut! That's going too far!" if she warmed up to him any easier. The resistance, the defiance, the sarcasm, the arrogance, the deceptiveness with which she hid her concerns for the prince, and most other character traits of Farah were missing in the film. Remembering Farah constantly seemed to be the only way of coping it. Of that I read here everyday from so many American viewers, I am convinced those subtle nuances of her character would not go unnoticed in the film. Why I came to see nothing of it is completely beyond my wits. Close to the end, when Dastan delivered Tamina a surprise, (can't say what that is but those who have played the game should be able to guess) Gemma totally failed to portray the mixture of awe, amazement, delight, curiosity and dilemma. It was a very defining moment in the story. She ruined it. However, I chose not to hold it against her. If she was in charge of the production, she would have shown wisdom enough never to pick herself for that role. She has done a good job considering.
Prince of Persia to me is more fun to watch than films like Robin Hood, directed by a man far more great than Mike Newell is. Mike, however, just like most other directors making game-to-movie-adaptations, forgot to watch and learn from the great directors who have attempted similar ambiances and done a far better job. He, along with Jordan Mechnar, should have thoroughly studied the likes of Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut, if for no better reason, then at least to understand when to take things slow and let a passionate viewer cherish the moment, and the fact that the secret to an enjoyable film is not as conspicuous as a silly sequence about ostrich racing.
Jordan wrote somewhere that the prince had to be given a name because there were several conversations addressing him. Not mentioning his name even once would make things abnormally dramatic. Princes and princesses almost always were addressed by their positions and peers, at least in India. I do not know about Persia though, but does anybody? Prince calling princess by her first name within moments of introduction, even under stress, reminds me of IT companies, not Persian royal dynasty, or any other noble bloodline for that matter. If Jordan watched some Japanese films involving princes and princesses, he would know how far the story could progress before the princess were called anything other than hiime (princess).
But having said all that, I am very happy I watched it. Though it blew the chance of being an epic or even a memorable film, it still struck a poignant chord somewhere, bringing back many a sweet memory. Perhaps the credit is largely due to the game and not to the film. But the world was never a fair place to begin with.
The ending of the film was predictable. The game Sands of Time did not give the story any closure and left the gamers begging for more (though they never really received what they begged for). The film does. Just like Pirates of the Caribbean, Disney wants to observe box office success first and then bring up some weird new disaster scenario, along with some new prophecies, to start a sequel, if one ever comes out.
What bothered me the most in the whole film was the feeling of haste. People were delivering dialogues like they were being timed. People were fighting and even relaxing under strict time constraint. Scene transition, camera movement, warm moments, everything was rushed, often unnecessarily. Some moments in a larger than life tale deserve to be lingered. Sands of Time, of all stories, should not have excluded that from consideration. It ruined the film to a great extent, though perhaps a teenager who has no clue what PoP is all about will have fewer yawns watching the film because of this.
No or very little attention has been paid to the way words were delivered. Evidently there is no way of telling how an actual conversation between a Hindu and a Persia would sound back then (whenever that is), but a style could have been implemented to make the language sound a little more flowery, a little less discrete and a lot more exotic. They somehow, in their good conscience, excluded "Oh $hit!" and "What an a$$hole!". The rest was pretty much modern day American street English, which, under these circumstances, was revolting at best. Richard Coyle had probably never imagined talking without a British accent, but I expected far better from Alfred Molina and Ben Kingsley. Kingsley has spoken with excellent Middle Eastern accent before in The House of Sand and Fog. Doing that here would make his shallow part somewhat redeemable. It would not be considered a spoiler, I am sure, to say Ben is the villain in the story. He found out about the dagger and the power it could unleash. But under no circumstances he uttered one word of how he became privy to that information. Information of such gravity must have been a closely kept secret. Skipping bits and pieces of cement in the story made the weak plot weaker.
The chemistry between Tamina (I do not like that name one bit) and Dastan (I dislike it a little less than Tamina) was, in one word, easy. That, however pleasant at the moment, was highly uncalled for. The resistance Tamina put in for the prince was strictly a formality, as if the director would say "Cut! That's going too far!" if she warmed up to him any easier. The resistance, the defiance, the sarcasm, the arrogance, the deceptiveness with which she hid her concerns for the prince, and most other character traits of Farah were missing in the film. Remembering Farah constantly seemed to be the only way of coping it. Of that I read here everyday from so many American viewers, I am convinced those subtle nuances of her character would not go unnoticed in the film. Why I came to see nothing of it is completely beyond my wits. Close to the end, when Dastan delivered Tamina a surprise, (can't say what that is but those who have played the game should be able to guess) Gemma totally failed to portray the mixture of awe, amazement, delight, curiosity and dilemma. It was a very defining moment in the story. She ruined it. However, I chose not to hold it against her. If she was in charge of the production, she would have shown wisdom enough never to pick herself for that role. She has done a good job considering.
Prince of Persia to me is more fun to watch than films like Robin Hood, directed by a man far more great than Mike Newell is. Mike, however, just like most other directors making game-to-movie-adaptations, forgot to watch and learn from the great directors who have attempted similar ambiances and done a far better job. He, along with Jordan Mechnar, should have thoroughly studied the likes of Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut, if for no better reason, then at least to understand when to take things slow and let a passionate viewer cherish the moment, and the fact that the secret to an enjoyable film is not as conspicuous as a silly sequence about ostrich racing.
