YOUR SUMMER MOVIE SUCKS: Does Disney's Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time Suck Back The Clock?

"Any attempt to create a magical fun adventure falls flat, ultimately turning into a convoluted mess that barely registers once the end credits roll. It's always so obviously trying to be something else. Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time just doesn't work. Jake Gyllenhaal...seems completely out of place in the role of Dastan. The forced chemistry between Gyllenhaal and Gemma Arterton contributes to the problems because so much of the movie focuses on them, and their trading of jabs isn't as much fun as it should be. The visual FX are also cheesy. The movie's biggest stumbling block is in trying to create a sense of danger while never getting very serious, and by the time our heroes are being attacked by flying CG snakes, the movie has lost any chance of coming back."

"At times you'd be forgiven for thinking you'd wandered into Pirates 4. There's a little less sense of peril to the picture than might perhaps be demanded of a film designed to keep us engaged until its finale. Gemma Arterton feels like she's wandered in from another movie. Ben Kingsley is the real duff note. (His) attitude seems to suggest the whole adventure is rather beneath him, and since the movie's finale relies on us buying that character, his apathy further removes from the sense of excitement in these closing scenes. There's too much wrong with the film for it to really engage. As the credits roll the real sense is one of overwhelming disappointment at an opportunity missed.

"A narratively cheesy, special effects driven action-adventure, which is likely to satisfy only young, indiscriminating children and teenagers. Unfortunately, impersonally and indifferently directed by Mike Newell. Simplistic to a fault. It's hard to think of another contemporary director, who goes out of his way to defy the approach of autherism, jumping from genre to genre and from format to format--but to largely unimpressive results. Anachronistic dialogue, and references to current politics, specifically the Iraq War and weapons of mass destruction, threaten to turn the saga into an indefinable mishmash, a hodge-podge of a movie. An old-fashioned, innocuous tale."

"Slips from the mind all too easily. Won't connect with other auds on the level of Jerry Bruckheimer's Pirates of the Caribbean franchise. Pic's lack of game-changing originality, distinguishing anarchic streak or 3D wow factor may relegate this to summertime also-ran status. Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time feels resolutely old-fashioned. The script lacks the deliberately anachronistic, tongue-in-cheek humor auds have come to expect from big-budget period productions. Gyllenhaal (is) a minor disappointment. The wolfish charisma he usually projects in smaller dramas seems to have degraded here into hangdog dopiness. There's a sense the pic has altogether too much design and not enough style."

"This humdrum fantasy epic lacks muscle. Those who've seen director Mike Newell's DOA Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix shouldn't be surprised at how flat and dull this spectacle is. His fantasy-filmmaking ability ranks somewhere between nil and zilch. Just...a lot of incoherent action sequences, a(nd a) listless romance."

"Yes, there's no avoiding the obvious, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time arrives dragging that old bête noire for the blockbuster consumer: 'based on a video-game'. The results find a tepid middle ground between a hurl-it-up-there approach, and (a) devoted restraint in the cause of character and story. Most of their dialogue is as crusty as the city walls. A suicidal ostrich comes very close to giving the finest performance in the film. Its restraint might put off thrill-seekers, but if you can endure the wooden dialogue and sloppy exposition, it musters the entertainment quotient of a middle-order Harry Potter."

"Silly, over-complicated video game adaptation. A series of painfully complicated events. Director Mike Newell, having displayed his FX chops on Harry Potter, makes everything look very nice and feel fleetingly exciting, but even he can't do anything about the fundamental silliness of the plot, which is so convoluted that its protagonists have to regularly stop and shout out what "must" be done to ensure all the 10-year-olds in the audience don't get hopelessly confused.

"Might be the worst of an already bad bunch. There's simply nothing good about it. The special effects are ropey, the plot creaks, the performances are indifferent and - worst of all - it patronizes the viewer with dialogue that explains what's about to happen at every turn. What is wrong with the film? The effects. Looks...like a cheap videogame. When it comes to the acting,
 things are no better. The original videogame was a lot more fun. In fact, so is banging a rusty nail through your 
big toe."