Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time
The film's ad campaign is trying hard to drum up memories of the studio's Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy. It's not surprising. Both Pirates and Prince are old-fashioned swashbuckling adventures infused with modern day effects. They also both share Jerry Bruckheimer as head producer. That's where the similarities end. There is no character who stands out and grabs the audience, like Johnny Depp's off-beat Captain Jack Sparrow in the Pirate films. Instead, we get Jake Gyllenhaal as the titular Prince Dastan. Don't get me wrong, he's a very talented actor, and he certainly looks the part with a perfectly sculpted new body that must have required a lot of physical preparation before the cameras started rolling. But as a character, Dastan is as dull as they come. He's fit and athletic, but comes up dry in the personality department. And whenever he's around his romantic female lead, the sparks never fly. He seems timid, almost as if he's afraid to even hold her hand, let alone kiss her.
But, I'm getting ahead of myself. When the film kicks off, Dastan is only a small boy living on the streets, and isn't even a Prince yet. He has no family, but he does have an unnatural athletic ability for a 10-year-old which allows him to climb up walls like a monkey, and leap across rooftops. (All with the aid of questionable CG and effects, of course.) The good Kind of Persia, Sharaman (Ronald Pickup) sees the boy in action, and decides to adopt him on the spot. Dastan is welcomed into the royal family, where the king already has two sons, the noble Tus (Richard Coyle) and the hot-headed Garsiv (Tony Kebbell). There's another person living at the castle too, the king's brother and most trusted adviser, Nizam (Ben Kingsley). He keeps to himself during the first half of the movie, standing in the background, dressed in dark clothes and wearing black eyeliner. This naturally means he will play a bigger role later on. It couldn't be more obvious what role he will play in the second and third act if he had a big sign hanging over him the entire time saying, "Hi, I'm the real villain! Don't tell anyone, okay??"
Flash forward to 15 years later. With Dastan's help, the Persian army is able to invade a holy kingdom, and kidnap its Princess, the lovely Tamina (Gemma Arterton from the recent Clash of the Titans). It's believed that the kingdom is selling weapons to Persia's enemies, but Dastan and a few others have their doubts. The invasion is a success nonetheless, and just as the celebration is about to begin, Sharaman is murdered, with Dastan the most likely suspect. He escapes with the help of Tamina, and together, they figure out the real reason behind the invasion campaign. There's a mythical dagger that's a treasure of the holy kingdom, because it holds the ability to turn back time. Whoever possesses it could change history and the very royal family of Persia itself. Dastan and Tamina travel the desert, meet up with some bandits led by a character who will become the comic relief sidekick (Alfred Molina), and try to clear Dastan's name while also protecting the sacred dagger.
While the film's main source of inspiration comes from a classic video game series, you could also argue that Prince of Persia borrows quite heavily from a number of other sources, including the Indiana Jones films and The Mummy series with Brendan Fraser. However, it misses the mark when it comes to copying what made those films work with audiences. The witty love/hate banter between Dastan and Tamina is never sharp enough, or funny enough. The action also never quite thrills like it should. There's a sluggish quality to the film. It's not enough to grind the film to a halt or make it boring, but it still seems to be dragging its feet when it should be lively and exciting. The characters lack the spark to allow them to be memorable, and we never feel the rush we should feel when their lives are in danger. The character that comes the closest to working is Molina's character. He gets off a couple good one liners. But it's not enough.
At least the movie doesn't wear out its welcome, running just under two hours. Director Mike Newell (Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire) doesn't fully grab our attention, but he at least manages to keep things moving. There's a big sequence about every 15 minutes or so. Of course, this also means the script and the characters never quite get developed enough. It's never explained why the magical dagger can only transport the user back in time, and not forward. You'd think someone would at least ask if they could travel forward in time, but no one does. I do wish Newell had given the film a sharper look, however. As mentioned before, the effects are passable at best, but they seem somewhat dated and never quite convincing. With the talent this film was able to draw, you'd think they would sink a little more money into the effects, especially since they play a crucial part in this film.
See the movie times in your area or buy the DVD at Amazon.com!
I have only vague memories of the previous 
The movie opens two years after the events of the first film. Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker) is happily married to her husband, Mr. Big (Chris Noth), but there's trouble in paradise. She wants to go out, spend money, and have fun at parties and celebrity scenes. He wants to stay in, lie on the couch, order take out, and watch old black and white movies. If they can't reach a compromise, they may actually have to consider spending two days a week apart from each other, so they can do their own thing, without having to worry about upsetting the other. As for Carrie's friends, Charlotte (Kristin Davis) is having a hard time balancing raising two young daughters, and dealing with the kids' sexy Irish nanny, who never wears a bra under her shirt. Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) is not happy at her job, and quits so she can spend more time with her husband and kid. And by spend more time, I mean she quits her job, races to the school so she can see her son give his science project presentation, cheer for him when he wins, and then the husband and kid are never seen or mentioned again. Finally, Samantha (Kim Cattrall) is a 52-year-old woman with the sex drive of a 22-year-old, and kicks off the plot (such as it is) after about an hour or so of having the four girls wander aimlessly around New York, shop, and talk about sex and men.
Samantha, it seems, has managed to use her connections to a Hollywood movie star she used to date to score an all expense paid week-long trip to Abu Dhabi. They're treated like royalty, are put up in a $20,000 per night suite with a staff of sexy young butlers waiting on their beck and call, and then they spend the next hour wandering aimlessly around the Middle East, shop, and talk about sex and men. The scenery change adds nothing. The movie is still as brainless, materialistic, annoying, and vapid as it was in New York, only now we're looking at sand dunes. Series fans might find this thrilling somehow. Anyone who knows nothing about these characters, or the show that spawned them, will be bored out of their skulls. They'll also be mystified by the film's opening 20 minutes or so, which is dedicated to a lavish gay wedding between two characters who obviously played some role on the show, but the movie fails to clue us in as to how or just who they really are. They show up off and on throughout the movie, but play no real role, and serve no purpose. Oh, and they get Liza Minnelli to give the sermon at their wedding. Afterward, we get to see Minnelli give her rendition of the song "Single Ladies". It's a rendition I'll be spending the rest of the summer trying to forcefully remove from my mind.
I'm not leaving much out here. There's not much in 
Speaking of Carrie's narration, that's another thing I had a hard time believing. She's supposed to be a respected writer, with many successful books to her credit, but the narration she's been given is so simplistic. I especially love how her narration sometimes points out the obvious. We see Carrie and her husband pulling up to their apartment building in a car after returning home from the wedding, so her voice over chimes in with "We came home to our apartment". It's not so much a voice over providing the character's inner thoughts, as it is a play-by-play of what's going on. As if the filmmakers thought we might not be able to keep up with the elaborate plot of a luxury getaway. I say, if your movie runs two and a half hours, and the entirety of its plot can be scribbled on one side of a napkin, the audience should be smart enough to figure things out on its own.
The idea behind the character of MacGruber is that he's supposed to be a parody of 80s TV series, 
The plot, of course, doesn't matter. It concerns MacGruber, a faded action hero, being called back into action by his old military friend, Col. James Faith (Powers Booth). 10 years ago, MacGruber was about to marry his true love, Casey (Maya Rudolph), only to have her get blown to bits by a bomb planted by his arch nemesis, Dieter Von Cunth (Val Kilmer). And yes, the "h" at the end of the villain's name is silent. (ho, ho) Cunth is back, and he's stolen a nuclear warhead, which he plans to use to blow up Washington D.C. MacGruber is ready to fight his old nemesis, and gathers up the old team who used to fight along side him. The only person from his old team he doesn't bring back is the one who recently came out of the closet, and is now in a gay relationship. (har har, hee hee) With the old team assembled, he's ready to fight, only to wind up accidentally blowing them all up in a bomb blast.
With his team dead, MacGruber is forced to turn to rookie Lt. Dixon Piper (Ryan Phillippe) and former flame Vicki St. Elmo (Kristen Wiig) to help him fight Cunth. What follows are a series of endless and tedious scenes where the same jokes are repeated over and over again. MacGruber will usually do something really brash or stupid (his preferred method of killing people is to rip people's throats out with his bare hands, making sure to leave a trail of bodies in his wake), or he cowardly hides when the bad guys start shooting at him, using his two teammates as human shields. I understand that this is supposed to be the joke, but I did not find MacGruber himself funny in the slightest. His arrogance is not funny, his cowardliness is not funny, and neither is his running gag where he's always carrying his car stereo everywhere he goes, blasting inappropriate 80s power ballads. Maybe the fact that he always has his teammates disguise themselves as him (so they can draw all the fire) could be funny in another movie, but it falls with a deafening thud here.
So does every single gag the movie attempts. That's because it keeps on mistaking shock value for wit. In one scene, the evil Cunth is painting a portrait, using a naked elderly woman with giant breasts sitting in the middle of the room as his model. That's literally where the gag begins and ends. They don't give the woman anything funny to say or do, we're just supposed to laugh at the fact there's a naked old woman in the room. Likewise, there's a scene where MacGruber goes to the cemetery to visit the grave of his dead wife, and he proceeds to strip naked and begin dry humping her tombstone in front of another person. Once again, there's no real reason for this, we're just supposed to be delighted at the brashness of the scene. Forte and his fellow writers (all 
The spark and the originality may be long gone, but the characters are still as appealing as ever, and the movie itself boasts some impressive animation. 
A disgraced magical con man named Rumpelstiltskin (Dreamworks animator Walt Dohn) hears Shrek's wish, and sees it as his opportunity to return to power. We learn in a short prologue that the impish sprite once tried to trick the King and Queen of Far Far Away (John Cleese and Julie Andrews) into turning their kingdom over to him, but his plot failed, due to Shrek rescuing their daughter in the original film. He's blamed the ogre for his misfortune ever since, and sees this as his chance for revenge. He tricks Shrek into signing a contract that will give him one full day as the ogre he used to be - Feared by villagers, chased by mobs with torches and pitchforks, and causing chaos wherever he goes. Unfortunately, the fine print of the contract also allows Rumpelstiltskin to reshape reality into his own design. No one remembers who Shrek is, and all of his past actions never happened. Therefore, Princess Fiona was never rescued (she ended up saving herself), and Rumpelstiltskin now rules the kingdom of Far Far Away with an iron fist. All of Shrek's former friends are affected by the wish as well. Not only do they not remember him, but their lives have all taken turns for the worse under the new rule of the kingdom.
I liked this aspect of the movie showing us different sides of the characters. While Donkey is more or less the same (only now he's forced to work for the evil Rumpelstiltskin as a pack mule), the once lively Puss-in-Boots has become an obese and pampered feline who can barely fit into his trademark boots, let alone battle evil forces. Princess Fiona has gone through the biggest change. Because she ended up saving herself from the dragon, she feels she can't rely on anyone but herself, and has become a hardened warrior princess who does not believe in love or friendship. This poses a problem for Shrek, as the only way he can return everything to its rightful form is by sharing "true love's kiss" with the Princess. We also get to see what's happened to some of the minor characters. I smiled during the brief scene depicting the Gingerbread Man finding work as a gladiator, battling vicious animal crackers.
If 
As far as visuals go, 
The plot is certainly nothing new, but that comes with the territory by now. In my opinion, a romantic comedy lives or dies by its lead characters, and whether we wish to see them get together by the end. It also helps if they've been written with a certain degree of intelligence, and are allowed to at least act like adults. The characters in 
There are a team of women dedicated to answering the letters that are left behind every day, and Sophie becomes wrapped up in the idea, and joins them in writing responses. This leads to a fateful discovery when Sophie discovers a letter from 50 years ago hidden behind a loose brick in the house. The letter is from a then fifteen-year-old girl named Claire who talks of a man she fell in love with in Verona named Lorenzo, but she had to leave home for London, England. Sophie decides to respond to the letter, not certain if it will even reach the person, or even if this Claire is still at the address listed. Fortunately, enough, she is, and the now elderly Claire (Vanessa Redgrave) and her handsome yet ill-tempered grandson Charlie (Christopher Egan) arrive in Verona to both find the woman who responded to her letter from long ago, and to hopefully track down the man Claire was forced to leave. Sophie agrees to help them on their search, and they begin a wide search across Verona for the elusive Lorenzo.
I don't think it's a spoiler to reveal that Sophie and Charlie start out hating each other and trading sarcastic barbs, but slowly begin to see more in each other during the course of the road trip. I'm also sure that some of the more logical members of the audience will wonder why the three heroes waste so much time driving around, going door-to-door asking for information, when they could just call or do all their research on line. The answer is simple, really. First, logic has no place in a piece of fluff entertainment, even a fine crafted one such as this. And second, we wouldn't be treated to the beautiful and perfectly photographed landscapes. There's something to be said for cinematography in a movie such as this. Director Gary Winick (recovering nicely from last year's unwatchable 
And that's really the key here. We like the characters, we like the performances, and we want to see the characters end up happy in the end. As always, it's all about chemistry. As the central lovers, Seyfried and Egan have great on-screen chemistry, both antagonistic and eventually romantic. Yes, their relationship is forced and somewhat fanciful, but their performances help flesh out what could have been two dimensional characters that were slaves to the plot, and turn them into characters that are easy to like. Seyfried makes a great romantic dreamer with her expressive eyes, and Egan's dry wit makes a good counter-balance. As for Redgrave, her character may exist mainly to drive the plot, but she still manages to make the character stand out with plenty of warmth, charm, and the lines that get the biggest laughs in the film. Her younger co-stars may be the center of the film, but she steals scenes away from them every chance she gets.
Yes, the movie does not stray far from the romantic comedy formula. The plot is so predictable you could set your watch by it. And the characters do make decisions for the convenience of the plot, especially in the third act. But the characters and the performances here are a step above what we usually get. Queen Latifah is a wonderful actress who has proven herself many times, but seldom gets lead roles, as she doesn't quite fit the mold of a Hollywood starlet. She's wonderful here as Leslie, a physical therapist who is looking for love, but unlike a lot of heroines in romantic comedies, is not obsessed with finding it. She's an intelligent and likable woman who lives with her colorful and caring parents, and her best friend Morgan (Paula Patton), who is determined to live the good life by marrying a professional basketball star. Leslie is content with her life, but wouldn't mind finding a man who sees her as more than just a "good friend". She gets that chance when she has a "meet cute" with Scott McKnight (rap artist Common) at a gas station.
Scott is a star player on Leslie's favorite basketball team, the New Jersey Nets. They instantly hit it off, and he invites her to his lavish birthday party the coming weekend. Leslie arrives, but makes the mistake of bringing Morgan along, who instantly steals Scott's attention. He becomes instantly smitten with her, and before long, Morgan is living Leslie's dream. I had some trouble believing this plot point, as Leslie is infinitely more charming and likable than the obviously shallow Morgan. Scott is portrayed as a fairly smart and likable guy, and I had a hard time buying that he would take the shallow girl over the obviously better Leslie. But, he does, and even proposes to her. Leslie's used to this happening, and pretends to be happy for the sake of both of her friends. But then Scott suffers a serious knee injury during a game that could derail his career. Leslie is assigned to be his personal live-in physical therapist to help him recover. There's an obvious connection during their time together, and Scott slowly begins to realize what we figured out the moment they first met back at the gas station.
Yes, we know everything that's going to happen before the characters do. We're not surprised when Morgan walks out on Scott, when it looks like his career might be over because of the injury, and he won't be able to continue the lavish lifestyle she wants. We're also not surprised that she tries to win him back when things start looking up for him again. 
In a nice change of pace while watching a romantic comedy, I actually did want to see the lead characters get together by the end of the movie. Queen Latifah and Common are able to create characters that we probably wouldn't mind meeting in real life, and have great chemistry together. This is no surprise for Latifah, and she shown just how charismatic she can be time and time again. But I was really impressed by Common, who brings real warmth and sensitivity without a hint of falseness in his performance. The character he plays here is a big change from the one he played just last month, where he played a crooked cop chasing after Steve Carell and Tina Fey in 
To be fair, this is not a bad movie, just an indifferent one. The movie looks like it cost a lot to make ($200 million, according to some reports), there are a lot of fine actors up on the screen, and the movie itself is never actually boring. It's just so drab and ordinary. We expect at least thrilling adventure, but there's a surprising lack of swordplay and battles, and way too many scenes of people standing around, discussing 12th Century British politics about taxes and invading French armies. You know the movie is in trouble when Robin himself, the master thief who stole from the rich and gave to the poor, disappears into the background in almost every scene he's in. Russell Crowe plays him here. This is the fifth movie he's done with Ridley Scott in 10 years, and easily the most forgettable role he's been given in their partnership. He has a steely gaze, he pouts, he shoots an occasional arrow or leads a charge of soldiers, and he sometimes hangs out with Marion Loxley (Cate Blanchett), whom he is supposed to be romantically involved with eventually, but we sense no sparks between the two actors. When he tells her he loves her late in the film, it is wooden and unconvincing.
At the beginning of the film, Robin is a soldier fighting for King Richard the Lionheart (Danny Huston), and his crusade against the French army. Richard is slain in battle, and Robin assumes the identity of a fallen knight (Douglas Hodge) to return the King's crown to his homeland. With Richard dead, his wormy and jealous brother John (Oscar Isaac) takes the throne, and immediately starts taxing the poor. There's another villain, in the form of John's most trusted follower, Godfrey (Mark Strong), who is plotting to betray his kingdom for the French army. Meanwhile, Robin sets about tracking down the family of the fallen knight whose identity he is using, and befriends the aging Sir Walter Loxley (Max Von Sydow) and his daughter-in-law Marion (who was the wife of the knight). We get a series of events that are supposed to lead up to Robin turning against the cruel King John and becoming an outlaw, but the film never gives us enough reason to care. The characters rarely rise above two dimensions, and although famous faces like Friar Tuck (Mark Addy), Little John (Kevin Durand), and the Sheriff of Nottingham (Matthew Macfayden) show up, they leave absolutely no impression whatsoever.
Much of this has to do with the fact that the script seems far more interested in the backstory, than the characters inhabiting the plot. It goes to great lengths to explain everything, but never gives us enough reason to care. When Robin and Marion share the same room for the night, there is no sexual energy. When Robin and his friends rob a carriage in order to help a poor farm village, the movie seems to be paying lip service to the legend, rather than explaining it. And when Robin leads a massive army in a charge against the invading French forces, there is no excitement. It's just a lot of swords flying around, and faceless extras getting stabbed. Sure, it's shot well enough, but we have no emotional investment with anyone on the battlefield. In fact, the main thing that stands out about the climactic battle is that when the French boats arrive on the British shore, it looks uncannily like the opening scene of 
Despite my many complaints, I must state once again that I was never bored by 
The witty banter and repartee between Stark and Potts was one of the pleasures of the original film, and while it's still present here, it kind of gets drowned out by everything else going on. Like a lot of recent superhero sequels (
That's not to take away the things that 
This is not the fault of the performance Rourke. He's fine enough in the way he gives his steely stare, and gives creepy smiles with his metallic teeth. But the character itself is completely forgettable. After an impressive debut scene, where he confronts Stark on a race track, the character is forced into the background for a majority of the movie, obsessed with getting his hands on better technology and with his pet bird. We learn little about his back story, other than why he has a grudge against Stark, so he never comes across as a genuine threat. Working out slightly better is the other main villain in the sequel, Justin Hammer, a rival arms manufacturer who wants Stark's technology. He's played by Sam Rockwell, with a comic but slimy and smarmy attitude that makes you want to see him fall almost from the moment you see him. He's not as intimidating as Rourke's character, but he gets more screen time, and seems to have more than one dimension to his character.
All this, and I haven't mentioned Stark's new assistant, Natalie (Scarlett Johansson), who is secretly a butt-kicking, spandex-clad agent for a top secret organization. She exists for eye candy (both for Stark, and the audience), and possible sexual tension, which is never quite explored to the extent that it should be, making her character kind of pointless in the end. Stark's old friend from the first film, James Rhodes (Don Cheadle, stepping in for Terrence Howard), gets in on the action as well by donning his own Iron Man-style fighting suit. It's all a lot of build up to a climactic fight, where the two must team up together, that's well-staged, but doesn't last long enough to be memorable. There's a subplot between the two hinting at a possible rivalry which is murky at best, and underdeveloped at worst. Though Cheadle is a fine actor, he never really gets the right chemistry in his scenes with Downey.
Speaking of Downey, he is what makes the film worth watching, warts and all. He's fun, he's acidic with his wit, and his heart always seems to be in the material, whether in or out of the costume. The movie tries to give his character a bit of added drama by revealing that the technology that is keeping him alive is also slowly killing him. But it's dealt with and resolved in such a haphazard manner, you almost wonder why the movie tried to make us care. We love Downey, and we love his portrayal of Stark, so we go with it. He sells the movie, because he is the very heart of it. All the characters competing for screen time, all the overstuffed plots, all the underdeveloped ideas, they all take a back seat when Downey is on his game, which fortunately is most of the time he's on camera. He's just as much fun to watch as he was the first time, if not more so.
