Escape to the Movies: Prince of Persia

matsugawa

New member
Mar 18, 2009
673
0
0
Bob, I think you've utterly and completely hit the nail on the head regarding video games getting made into films with the statement about "rising to the challenge." The problem with video games now is that they incorporate so many cinematic elements that making them into films is almost a step back if not standing right on the line. Back in the 16-bit (and earlier) days, the games didn't have "cinematic" elements, so there was more of a challenge involved in adapting them to the big screen. Sometimes it works, but most times not. Even then, when it works, it works because, to paraphrase what you said once before, "it has its guts ripped out" and replaced with recycled material. For example, the plot of the Mortal Kombat game doesn't lend itself all that well to a film, so its plot is replaced with that of Enter the Dragon.

Maybe we have to just accept the fact that it's entirely possible we've waited too long to adapt some of our favorite and most popular games into movies. The only video game film I'd ever get genuinely excited over is that once-hyped-but-now-revealed-as-just-a-rumored Metroid film with Ang Lee attached (of course, I'm one of those weirdos who really liked Ang Lee's version of The Hulk). Ah, well....
 

ObsessiveSketch

Senior Member
Nov 6, 2009
574
0
21
Huh...well damn, now I'm gonna have to go see it! >.<

As for the 'whitewashing' thing, I'm gonna go with 'they hate the main character's BLUE EYES.' I think that's the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. Most other traits can be glossed over or hand-waved away, but blue eyes is quite the deal-breaker.

Also, I just realized that the spellchecker on this site accepts 'gonna' as a word...huh.
 

RestamSalucard

New member
Feb 26, 2010
77
0
0
Vitor Goncalves said:
RestamSalucard said:
Vitor Goncalves said:
As for the ending, only explanation for MovieBob to not like it is, he was expecting it to be different from the game ending. And actually MovieBob, it was, or were you sleeping?!
In the game the villain doesn't die and that's what allows plot for the rest of the SoT trilogy.
Yes, but that's because he was ressurected in the third game when the Prince created a Time Paradox in the second; do keep up.
The vizir was not ressurected in game, prince made time go back, to when the vizir was still alive. The difference is in the movie the uncle plot is unmasked as soon as the events resume and he end up being executed there, while in the game the vizir is left to live enough to justify the sequel.
What? The Vizer DIED! The Prince went back in time and ***** slapped him with his sword, he falls over with an overly dramatic, "I could have been... immortal..." and he DIED! The only reason he exists in 3 is because the Prince prevented the sands from being created in the past in 2, preventing the Prince from finding and unleashing the sands, but also preventing said ***** slapping. Therefore the Vizer is still alive and has taken over India, allowing him to invade Persia in 3. I mean, did we play the same games or are you just retarded?
 

OmikronApex

New member
Nov 9, 2009
4
0
0
As always, a very good review. I saw the movie yesterday and my thoughts towards it were exactly the same as yours. So thumbs up for that.

But what the hell is your guys problem with the final episode of Lost? It ended just like it began, with a lot of unanswered questions. Which to me is far better than answering all those questions in the final episode. It would be an information overflow if they did it like that. But how they actually did it, lets all viewers put their imagination into the series and have their very own ending.

Hope you understand my opinion. And Bob, looking very forward to the next episode^^

Greets,
OmikronApex
 

Firia

New member
Sep 17, 2007
1,945
0
0
"First genuinely good video game movie?" That's what I said about Mortal Kombat (what?), Resident Evil, Silent Hill... and in that order! I'm not prepared to say that about this movie because I feel like there have been good adaptions of video games to movies that were both loyal to the game concept, and fun/interesting to watch.
 

WaderiAAA

Derp Master
Aug 11, 2009
869
0
0
Yeah, Yatzee pretty much covered the Persians don't sound Persian theme a while back - although in that case it was too American rather than too British.
 

UtopiaV1

New member
Feb 8, 2009
493
0
0
MovieBob said:
UtopiaV1 said:
I think you stuck your neck out there for no reason, don't be suprised if someone bites you for it. Don't forget Judaism is a religion, not an ethnicity.
JUDAISM is a religion. However, the term used was "The Jewish Peoples," which much of anthropology classifies as a "race" - if not also an "ethnicity" - originating in the Middle East (note that the map depicts a period and area of the ancient Middle East, not the modern state of Israel) and subsequently migrating throughout the rest of the world; though one recognizes that this is one of those areas where the actual "split" between seperate cultures and seperate races is increasingly nebulous.

Primarily, it's in there because I found it interesting that Gyllenhaal is recieving the lion's share of grief over the film's casting of "white" actors in Middle Eastern and/or Persian roles, when in the not-too-distant past he wouldn't have been considered "white" to begin with (neither would any of the main cast except for Gemma Arterton, really.)
Oh good, for some reason I thought you'd circled Israel and I was all ready to hear the announcement you'd been kidnapped by extremists etc. Still, I suppose I overreacted, it's just like saying that most Americans originate from here:


Closing note, I think it's great that the lines between white and not-white are blurring, hopefully it'll make people more accepting of other people and cultures, and then we can all live in a world of rainbows and lollipops and children dancing with gumdrop smiles. Seriously, I really hope that's the case.
 

steamweedlegoblin

New member
Apr 28, 2010
185
0
0
Subzerowings said:
Lost ended?
Yeah right....
Soon you'll probably see some lame commercial where every one is back on the island again (again).
No we won't.

They're all dead now

Anyway, I thought the movie was great fun. It's the first movie that I'm actually proud to say to people that it was based on a video game.
 

Imrix

New member
Nov 21, 2007
32
0
0
Funny thing, the 'whitewashing' in this movie actually makes a certain amount of sense. Geneologically speaking, the ancient Persians were actually indo-eurupean, and primarily caucasian.

Same thing with The Last Airbender, actually. The Water Tribe is really the only group with a legitimately non-white appearence- mostly it's just a matter of hairstyles.
 

Galad

New member
Nov 4, 2009
691
0
0
The ending screen around the subtitles that spoilers the movie made me forget about going to see it. Thanks for keeping me off movies I won't like, MovieBob.
 

kozmo

New member
Mar 1, 2009
121
0
0
there were two ancient persian empires, the first pagan one was the biggest one and that was the picture of the map. there are no facts about how people in that empire looked. the 300 movie is based about that persian empire and thats why they look ridicouls.

the second persian empire who was not much smaller, and was in the medieval ages, after Persia turned muslim. there calture and there clothes became like that arabs (people from the arabic half Isle) who ones ruled Persia and converted them to Islam. The prince of persia movie might be based about that empire because that if you look at the characters they look like muslims from movies about crusades.

about the fact that the charactares don't have a persian accent i have two things to say.
one: ancient medieval persian and modern persian are so completly differnet that it would be completly pointless
two: if the charcters did have persian accents it wouldn't make the movie any more realistic (since tha characters would still be talking in English), it would just make it harder for people to understand what the charcters are saying since they all have accents.

last thing: I loved this movie when i watched it and i also loved the video games
 

ZerOmega

New member
Sep 14, 2008
154
0
0
That you for the spoiler warning. You have no idea how much those things mean to me personally.

The final episode of Lost hasn't been showed in here (Finland) yet.
 

Kruxxor

New member
Jan 18, 2009
392
0
0
I don't understand what's happened here. Am I in an alternate universe?

I saw the Prince of Persia film on Wednesday and I thought the film sucked. Not even because it's meant to be based on the game, just as a film I think it was terrible.

Beginning of the film was just Aladdin.

Middle of the film was Assassins Creed (They totally stole one of the scenes from Assassins Creed when you uncover more of the map)

And the ending was pointless.



***********************************************************************************************
SPOILER




In a sense, according to the movie, all that happened was he became a Prince, stormed a Holy City and got married to the Princess. All the other stuff didn't "really" happen. It's not clever and it's been done a thousand times. They even state in the film that you could rewind time endlessly but it would destroy the world. But it was okay to rewind time for that certain period to put him back at the battle at the beginning?

I don't see how anyone can see this movie as being "good"...
 

kozmo

New member
Mar 1, 2009
121
0
0
Kruxxor said:
I don't understand what's happened here. Am I in an alternate universe?

SPOILER




In a sense, according to the movie, all that happened was he became a Prince, stormed a Holy City and got married to the Princess. All the other stuff didn't "really" happen. It's not clever and it's been done a thousand times. They even state in the film that you could rewind time endlessly but it would destroy the world. But it was okay to rewind time for that certain period to put him back at the battle at the beginning?

I don't see how anyone can see this movie as being "good"...
SPOILER

it's not about what "really" happened or not, it's about seeing a movie. in the movie the stuff that didn't "really" happen were interesting (to my opinion), the characters were good enough and the effects were nice.

even though your right and most of the movie didn;t "really" happen, you did see it in the movie and so wether or not it happened has no point for it as a movie.

about the fact that rewinding time can destroy the world and that he rewinded it to the very begining without doing so, your completly right it's a huge fuck in the movie. but think about it this way, the bad guy wanted to rewind it many years back, while desmond rewinded a couple of days, so he didn't use that much sand.

i see this movie as good simply because i liked it, its my opinion that this movie is good, just like its your opinion that it isn't.

your right that there is a lot to hate if you look at it, but there is also a lot to like
 

IanBrazen

New member
Oct 17, 2008
726
0
0
Why does everyone forget that [HEADING=2]SILENT HILL[/HEADING] was a videogame movie, and a damn good one at that.
 

oranger

New member
May 27, 2008
704
0
0
well, I'm getting the feeling moviebob is a bit...jaded.
He's seeing stuff that isn't there: allegory to the Iraq mwd thing? maybe...or maybe they just thought it was a sweet plot element.
And the lack of minority actors? well, it'd look pretty strange if half the cast was white, and half the cast wasn't, but the story wanted you to think they were all of the same ethnicity.
Maybe jaded isn't the word? I remember his Book of Eli review, and he was wrong, the God thing didn't detract from the film.
 

Subzerowings

New member
May 1, 2009
989
0
0
dradiscontact said:
No we won't.

They're all dead now

Anyway, I thought the movie was great fun. It's the first movie that I'm actually proud to say to people that it was based on a video game.
This might seem far-fetched to some people, but they can always do this:
They're all dead. Or are they? Find out what really happened! Same bat time, same bat channel!
Seriously, they can do anything from spin-offs to alternate endings if they were being paid for it.
 

O maestre

New member
Nov 19, 2008
882
0
0
Baby Tea said:
EnigmaHarper said:
I honestly don't understand what everyone's deal is with "whitewashing." I think if you have an actor that is good in a role it shouldn't matter what color he is.
It's about authenticity.
Some (silly) people might claim is has something to do with racism, but really: It's about authenticity.
Ancient Persia would have been populated by Persians, so have a Persian Cast makes it more believable. You can't say Slumdog Millionaire would have been nearly as good is the cast was all Asian. Or that any movie portraying the Yakuza as African guys would be believable. The point of a movie is to tell a story, and you grip people into a story with atmosphere. The proper ethnicity really helps that atmosphere.

It's not a deal breaker, mind you (Not for the sane, or people who have any inkling of an imagination), but it really does help the immersion of the tale unfolding on the big screen in front of you.
its not just about authenticity for me it is also about effort, the fact that they took practically staple hollywood actors instead of going the extra mile, means something. the movie will give off a vibe that its just another movie on the hollywood mass production conveyor belt.

what i am trying to say basically is that why should i bother with a movie when the makers themselves didn't bother with it.

then again the "prince of persia" franchise isn't the most complex in regards to story in the gameing world, so i guess this kind of movie is nothing if not appropriate. so i am not so peeved about the "whitewashing" issue, i am still going to see it when it comes out on dvd since bob thinks its the first good "game" movie.

however if the source material had been from something other than a game, like an old myth or a book or even a game that was deeper, then i would have agreed that the "whitewashing" would be lazy and ignorant