• As we all know, this is a forum for Kingdom Hearts. Even so, if anybody posts spoilers for Endgame anywhere on this site without spoiler tags, you will be banned. If you change your avatar to something related to Endgame, you will be banned. If you put something in your signature, send a message to somebody that is visibly seen, or share spoilers with somebody who does not wish to see them, you will be banned.

Film ► Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time



REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS

Ulti

hurr hurr hurr
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
10,987
Awards
4
Age
27
Location
In my castle, plotting your demise
  • 2013 Roleplaying Awards
  • Retired Staff
  • Quack Attack
  • Alter Ego
Sorry. It just sort of shares the same kind of epicness as LOTR does. A huge battle at Alamut in the beginning of the movie. A large realistic, artistic world including the snowy mountains. And an adventure to take the dagger to the guardian temple like taking the ring to mount doom. I love LOTR more, but POP made me remember those incredible films.
So, any movie with battles, decent scenery, and a large fetch mission equals LOTR?
 

MomentoMori

Dead Technology
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
2,902
Awards
0
Age
28
Location
This Side of the Screen
Website
mypage.na.square-enix.com
Sorry. It just sort of shares the same kind of epicness as LOTR does. A huge battle at Alamut in the beginning of the movie. A large realistic, artistic world including the snowy mountains. And an adventure to take the dagger to the guardian temple like taking the ring to mount doom. I love LOTR more, but POP made me remember those incredible films.
You just compared a swords-and-sandals movie (that's all it's been reduced to) to LOTR. s1angrypple
 

Home bound

Just Caaaalm Down
Joined
Aug 3, 2005
Messages
1,597
Awards
0
Age
28
Man for a budget this big, I'd figure they'll do a better job with the visual effects. I give it a 3.5/5
It many be too early to tell, but it's not doing too well at the box office. I was hoping for a sequel.
 

wushuman90

New member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
46
Awards
0
I don't know why people are saying the SFX should have been better. Compared to even Avatar. The environment is too breathtaking. Though if you are talking about the rewind then that's ok. I saw a few problems with it.
 

Home bound

Just Caaaalm Down
Joined
Aug 3, 2005
Messages
1,597
Awards
0
Age
28
Ha. I spoke too soon. This film is doing well at the foreign box office already crossed $100 million globally. And Wushuman, I was talking about the sandstorm, sandglass, and snakes. It looked too fake.
 
Last edited:

Raebus

New member
Joined
Aug 5, 2008
Messages
675
Awards
0
Age
31
Location
UK
I thought the special effects were pretty good and didn't notice the "fakeness" of sandstorms and such. :p

It was an alright movie with likeable characters, though it went on a bit too long for my liking. I got kind of bored near the end and that usually doesn't happen, but it was alright.
 

wushuman90

New member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
46
Awards
0
It's the movements. Some of the moments didn't resemble of what it looked in normal time when time was being rewinded. Just in SOME parts though.
 

Johnny Stooge

Hawkguy
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
6,797
Awards
6
Location
Australia.
  • Tomb Raider
  • Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 ReMIX
  • Sleeping Dogs
  • Quack Attack
  • Retired Staff
  • Master of Monologues
So I went and saw this just because I could it and it started after my shift ended.

Sorry. It just sort of shares the same kind of epicness as LOTR does. A huge battle at Alamut in the beginning of the movie. A large realistic, artistic world including the snowy mountains. And an adventure to take the dagger to the guardian temple like taking the ring to mount doom. I love LOTR more, but POP made me remember those incredible films.
Uh taking the dagger to the mountain is no way reminiscent of taking the ring to Mt. Doom. The ring took three movies. The dagger took maybe 10 minutes when they decided that's where they were going. The world was artistic, sure. Realistic? No. The special effects were so whack and that battle at Alamut was nothing like any of the battles from LOTR.
You essentially insulted LOTR by even mentioning it in the same sentence as this movie.

I don't know why people are saying the SFX should have been better. Compared to even Avatar. The environment is too breathtaking. Though if you are talking about the rewind then that's ok. I saw a few problems with it.
All of the special effects were noticeable. You could see the snake was an effect, the dust storm looked stupid and the big expansive location shots looked under-rendered. The point of a special effect is to go unnoticed so as to serve the movie. That did not happen here.

Anyway, Prince of Persia is basically one giant popcorn flick. Very Bruckheimer-esque. It's nothing special and the ending is kinda lame. On Wushuman's scale, I'd give the movie a C+ I guess. A B- would be very lenient.
On a standard scale, it's a 3-star movie. It's not as bad a Uwe Boll game flick, but it doesn't set a new standard. Just something to watch if you have two hours to kill.
 
Top