Bruckheimer might change Prince of Persia time period

by Justin McElroy { Dec 4th 2007 at 1:55PM }

Jerry Bruckheimer spilled a little bit to Collider.com about the upcoming Prince of Persia film that he hopes to start filming in June. Though it seems to still be in the pretty early stages, Bruckheimer says he sees a lot of possibilities for the franchise. One of the things still in flux, he says, is exactly what time period the film will be set in. Though he says it's not going to be in modern day, he won't rule anything else out.

So, let's recap what we know so far: Director Mike Newell isn't playing the game and isn't making a 'videogame movie.' Meanwhile, the movie could be set in any period since the beginning of time. Does anybody else smell a hit? And why do hits smell like diapers?

[Via Shacknews]

Tags: movies, prince-of-persia, princeofpersia, ubisoft

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

gameplayFanBoy @ Dec 4th 2007 2:02PM

Sigh...I just wish people would stop making movies based on games, or games based on movies for that matter. Neither one of these things ever end up being any good.

Hashbrown_Hunter @ Dec 4th 2007 7:15PM

And yet, there's Uwe Boll.

Nellie @ Jan 29th 2008 1:30PM

Hmm, all I know is that they better not mke this movie suck like the directors of Harry Potter did. Prince of Persia is like my favorite video game of all time, I'm really glad Disney's doing this film cause I honestly belive they could do it justice, lets just hope I'm not wrong about it. I would like it to be as good as POTC but not all...fun fun like POTC cause thats really not what its all about. Also I think the actors are gonna be what makes the game...if they don't gt the rigt guy for the Prince....geesh, I hate to see what people would say to THAT, thats like...Game-turned-Movie blasphemy.....also if they give the Prince a name.....that won't work either cause at the end of the game didn't he call himself by that word Farah told him while they were in the dark? *shrugs* Anywaaaay, oh man, I can't wait to see how they do the Sand Creatures! Cool! Anyway, I hope you do well Disney! Us gamers on counting on it! Toodles!

-Nellie R.

HEY!!!! @ Dec 4th 2007 2:04PM

i have feeling this movie is going to suck hard.

Paw @ Dec 4th 2007 2:06PM

Given the photo of Jerry there, I'd wager he is looking at the 1970's porn industry era as one of the top three choices. Seriously...my wife wouldn't let me out of the house looking like that, and I'm not a famous and wealthy movie producer/director.

GRANTED @ Dec 4th 2007 2:45PM

you can actually see the seam of where his old nose was chopped off and replaced with a smaller version. sexy.

plyx @ Dec 4th 2007 2:10PM

It should be in the year 3000. And the Prince should be a robot.

Zootittles @ Dec 4th 2007 2:19PM

Only if he gets to say "Oh hellllll naw!"

plyx @ Dec 4th 2007 2:27PM

Hell, Yeah!
Will Smith as the Prince!

LaughingTarget @ Dec 4th 2007 6:22PM

There will be a lot of explosions and the Prince will have strange mannerisms and walk funny.

hakdragon @ Dec 4th 2007 6:45PM

It's been done...
http://tepasmas.com/img/fresh_prince_of_persia.jpg

Marcelo Abans @ Dec 4th 2007 2:37PM

Jerry Bruckheimer is a fruit. I would love 1 company to keep the game to movie concept in tact. It'd be nice to see.

E.J. @ Dec 4th 2007 2:18PM

I wouldn't doubt Bruckheimer's efforts quite yet. This guy seems to turn everything he touches into gold.

Who would've thought that a movie based on a Disney ride would turn into a successful trilogy?

Zsavior @ Dec 4th 2007 2:22PM

The difference is that was a Disney ride with millions of possibilities in the script. This guy sounds as if he is just trying to cash in on the name Prince of Persia, since older ex gamers, and younger gamers both will recognize the game and have peaked interest. Also 3 movies do not redeem years of cinema rape.

Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Dec 4th 2007 2:28PM

Pirates 2 and 3 were quite crummy compared next to Pirates 1, anyway.

So, 1 movie.

brandon_r87 @ Dec 4th 2007 2:43PM

Box-office gold, that is. Personally, I don't like his movies, maybe with the exception of the first Pirates which was good for a (older) children's movie. He seems to just turn everything into an action sequence and slips in too many larger than life explosions.

That being said, he only ruled out modern day, so he could go all Assassin's Creed on us. Probably a throw away action movie no matter what he does though.

Phranctoast @ Dec 4th 2007 2:56PM

@Zsavior. If he wanted to cash in on a popular game, why not the Halo franchise? POP doesnt have close to the ammount of popularity.

@crono
while I didnt like the 3rd movie as much as the previous ones, I could never say they were unsuccessful.

Ryan Henson Creighton @ Dec 5th 2007 11:31AM

Blockbuster movie based on a Disney ride? Do you mean the Haunted Mansion starring Eddie Murphy?

BPM - The Return @ Dec 4th 2007 2:19PM

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say:

WTF?

Rubix42 @ Dec 4th 2007 2:20PM

I'm not worried. Bruckheimer took a disney ride and made one of the best trilogy's in the last decade. So I bet that his PoP will really shine.

Miguel @ Dec 5th 2007 12:33AM

Uh, "one of the best?" I'm running the Star Wars prequels (horrendous), The Matrix (like Pirates, the second and third flicks were horrible relative to the first) and Shrek...

The claim that it's one of the best trilogies in the last decade doesn't hold water. The ship's run aground.

samfish @ Dec 4th 2007 2:20PM

I think that's good news, really.
Lord knows they haven't met with any (critical) success trying to make the movies stick to the formula established by the video games.

You guys are just going to have to learn what comic geeks learned years ago – some changes are necessary and for the better.

plyx @ Dec 4th 2007 2:23PM

You mean like the Super Mario Bros. movie?

samfish @ Dec 4th 2007 2:24PM

You mean the Greatest Movie Ever?

Intentless @ Dec 4th 2007 2:25PM

Or Doom or Resident Evil (which has become some whole other completly unrelated being?

plyx @ Dec 4th 2007 2:26PM

@Samfish:
Exactly.

Zsavior @ Dec 4th 2007 2:38PM

And the plethora of good comic book movies are? Batman franchise was raped blind, Superman Returns and the Superman series are disappointments. Spider-man turned to EMO man. OH Nicolas cage ghost rider BRILLIANCE!

Ben Aflec Dare Devil now there is a silver screen classic,......On how not to make a movie. Electra lol was that even a movie, seriously wasn't that made for sci-fi or direct to video and some how got to screen. But you know what redeems them all CatWoman ohh man Sharon Stone verse Halle Berry seriously half way through that one all you could think was Tits or GTFO.

Batman Begins, Good, Hell Boy barely passing it, having the most anti-climatic ending ever. So how did Hollywood get the comic books right? It has nothing to do with comics and everything to do with they make piss poor plots and stories, for the sake of trying to cash in on the names. For the exception of Constantine where you really needed the editing cause you didn't want to see Shia Labeoug get doggied(literally) on screen. Batman Begins once again was brillant, 300 was great and Sin City, last two the creator of the comics was directly involved. Other than that, comics have gotten the same raw deal, just people are to tired to care any more,

P.S. I purposely didn't mention Blade because that last movie should be considered blasphemy and a human rights violation towards anybody who went and saw it.

GRANTED @ Dec 4th 2007 2:48PM

lol@zsavior that was a surprisingly accurate and succinct summary of the comic book movie situation. get to wikipedia asap. i esp liked "tits or gtfo".

+1

Chris @ Dec 4th 2007 2:59PM

You kind of forgot X-Men in that list.

gonk @ Dec 4th 2007 3:16PM

xmen 1 was above average, number 2 was average, and number 3 was poor

Zsavior @ Dec 4th 2007 3:22PM

Damn I forgot to Defecate upon those atrocities called the Xmen movie franchise. Change Xmen to Wolverine Run and Gun and you got the proper name. Can wolverine Stab it! Yes he can!

Seriously just replace every line in the xmen movies to, Wolverine NO, or Wolverine STAY, or Wolverine ARRRGGGGG and the plot and story will make the same amount of sense as the actual dialog and story did.

Fantastic Four is actually a horrible comic book series so the source material was portrayed completely right. A dysfunctional family of selfish pricks held together by the lovable Thing.

P.S. The hulk Gets a Pass because they are doing a new one with Ed Norton. And Iron Man Oh Iron man, I'm watching you punk.

samfish @ Dec 4th 2007 3:23PM

Alright, here we go:

Batman:
The Burton movies were pretty damn good. Forever was passable. Robin was awful. Begins is excellent.
Superman:
the first one was excellent, 2nd was good, 3rd was (barely) passable, 4th sucked and Returns was overall enjoyable, just not memorable...and the thing with the kid was stupid.
Spider-Man:
First movie was very good. Second was spectacular. 3rd was...passable, but bogged down by trying to do to much. Further, Emo-Peter in the 3rd one does not dilute the quality of the first two, which you alluded to, z.
X-Men:
First was very good. Second was excellent. 3rd one sucked. Thank having a hack director for that one.
Dare Devil:
Wasn't horrible, but wasn't great by any stretch, either. Nor was it memorable.
Cat Woman:
Possibly the worst movie ever.
Elektra:
Dunno. Never saw it.
Hell Boy:
Was enjoyable, but not really memorable. Better than DD, though.
Sin City:
Excellent movie.
300:
Pretty damn good movie.
The Phantom:
Sucked
TMNT:
Original was fun and still holds up. 2nd was watchable. Animated one was OK, but not particularly memorable.

Now compare that to video game movies-
Resident Evil:
Unwatchable vomit.
...
I mean, do I even have to list the video game movies? The closest we've gotten to a good one is Tomb Raider, followed by, arguably, Mortal Kombat (the second MK movie was hellishly bad, though)...and I guess FFVII, if you want to count DtV, although that was just a bunch of action porn, more than anything else.

Point is, unless you're going to be a snob and are expecting Oscar quality movies, rather than, say, summer action no-brain-required movies, comic book movies have done a pretty good job of translating to the big screen, despite the stinkers among them.

Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Dec 4th 2007 3:30PM

Silent Hill was pretty good, too. I mean, I never played the game and thought it was a great horror movie.

Phranctoast @ Dec 4th 2007 3:46PM

@crono.
yeah, I was one of the few people here to like that movie as well.

Sean Newton @ Dec 4th 2007 4:18PM

...and somehow, you guys forgot Spawn. Or were you TRYING to forget it? I will however say that the movie actually moved a respectable amount in the plotline, unlike the comic book.

Or the Punisher movies. The Dolph one sucked, but I liked the Thomas Jane one.

LaughingTarget @ Dec 4th 2007 6:28PM

I wouldn't call the Spawn live-action all that good. The HBO mini-series was the good stuff.

Comics are a strange breed really. With all the lame alternate universes going around, making movies on them is really easy.

ComicShaman @ Dec 4th 2007 6:51PM

To further round out the list:

The Crow (original movie only) was one of my favorite comic adaptations of all time.

Stardust (sort of based on a comic and a novel) was a lovely film.

Hellblazer was a sad, sad travesty. Who cast Keanu Reeves as Constantine? Had they ever heard of Tim Roth? Pitiful.

I would also mention Robocop (again, the first one only) as a curiosity. It was a quality movie that clearly drew a great deal of inspiration from comics, specifically the Dark Knight Returns. Though it wasn't based on a specific comic book, it still struck me as a superb example of how a comic-based movie should be done.

So comic movies have their ups and downs. Video game movies have been pretty awful overall, with even the best ones failing to distinguish themselves as worth the price of admission.