| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (28)

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:02PM Shogan said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It also fails to star a Persian as the Prince of Persia. Fail.

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:06PM juju187 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
jake gyllenhaal star as the brokeback prince
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:07PM Gir said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm pretty sure there are thousands of persians here in the US. Couldn't they have just picked one.....anyone could do.
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 8:24PM EngadgetSoFunny said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, honestly, he has a persian-ish looking face when in a dark scene. At least he's proven throughout his carrer in movies like Red October(the movie where he's busy the rocket and his father is a coal miner) he can actually act a bit.

I'd prefer a reasonably talented actor who has the possibility of looking persian ish over a hot bimboseque filled movie with talentless bimbos. IE DoA movie. God, I'm not sure if it was Uwe's fault entirely as his crew had no acting ability. Their only natural ability appeared to be situps and pectoral implant surgeries(both female and male stars)

I actually saw to day a 2007/2008 comparison shot in People magazine during my break at work and he's starting to look pretty good. He's packed on another 10-15 pounds of muscle doing weight lifting and yoga/etc for flexibility. Anyways, he looks in much better shape.

He's starting to look similar to the Prince of Persia star's main character's look.
Reply

Posted: Aug 3rd 2008 4:33AM Saria the Cat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is the same problem I had with Memoirs of a Geisha. The lack of actual Japanese people in that cast was embarrassing and while the movie was beautiful, if you had even a modicum of knowledge about Japanese language/culture, it made you grimace. SERIOUSLY, Zhang Ziyi, the famous CHINESE actress with a CHINESE accent known for her roles in CHINESE films?!

/rant
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:04PM Gir said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"don't worry, we mean the movie"

How does that make it any better. Now I have to wait another year );

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:05PM Gir said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
ooooooooooooooo!!!!!
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:13PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I would much rather that this movie not see the light of day at all, shame that it was only delayed...
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:22PM Gir said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Look, I know this movie is gonna suck, but the best part of this movie is when he starts jumping from wall to wall and runs on walls and stuff...thats gonna be sick, but the rest of the movie is gonna suck. They better use parkour in this movie and lots and lots of it.
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 10:25AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'd rather the movie never appeared too, its sounds very bad.

But you still win for the awesome name, avatar and scream!
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:06PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
i wasnt gonna see it anyway

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 9:19PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Joystiq may be cynical, but I have high hopes for this movie. Plus, you make fun of the fact that it's not being touted as a "videogame movie", but in my book, the fact that it's not being designed solely after the video game is a great thing. Because, I mean, when has there ever been a good movie made that way?

Plus, I like Jake Gyllenhaal.

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 10:32PM iHavePants said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
See, the problem with your argument is that most terrible "video game movies" ARE terrible because they changed it away from what made the game so appealing in the first place. Why even base it off a game if you don't care for the game itself?
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 11:32PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No, that's flawed logic. Video game movies aren't terrible because they deviate from the original material, they're terrible because they try to become simply film versions of their video game counterparts. All that's doing is removing the interactivity from the experience, so why wouldn't you just play the game instead? No, the problem with video game movies is that they don't try to be their own entity, create an independent movie that doesn't require, you know, knowledge of the entire video game series to enjoy.
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 5:32AM iHavePants said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Your logic is flawed because it isn't based on anything. The majority of video game movies deviate a great deal from the original game, normally only leaving one or two features of the game in the movie.

Doom became about lab mutant people on Mars instead of Demons, and the movie was terrible anyway.

Hitman's Agent 47 was no longer a clone (the main plot point for all of the games), and his character changed compleltely.

Alone in The Dark had hardly anything to do with the games AT ALL.

Super Mario Brothers was set in the future, with human/dinosaur hybrids and Bowser portrayed by Dennis Hopper.

AVP movies completely change the setting and story continuity of the games.

Now name your bombs which stuck too close to the format please.
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 5:57AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Stop making out your opinions as facts. Movies will always, ALWAYS deviate from their original source. That includes video games, books, comics, anime, scripts, ideas, other movies, and any of the above that is based on another (example, there's a Men in Black comic book based on the cartoon that's based on the movie that's based on the original comic...-_-)

Whether or not the movie sucks is up to each viewer's discretion. Personally, I like the Resident Evil movies just because they're zombie films. I can't stand it when a fanboy cries YOU CAN'T JUST PUNCH NEMESIS CUZ HE KICKS UR ASS LOLZ
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 7:09AM iHavePants said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
See Dio, I'm just confused by your reasoning. If you just watch it as a Zombie Movie, then it shouldn't be needing the Video Game IP. If they DO make a Video Game movie, they might as well make it more than a vague resemblence through vaseline. Otherwise it's just cashing in on the name. Even if the movie in question is good.
Reply

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 10:35AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Making alterations isn't a bad thing. The LOTR movies for example made huge alterations, but they really captured the essence of the books.

Ihavepants is right that most video game movies have had 0.1% to do with the game. They chuck in a few settings and a few characters with the same name - but essentially its an original movie with a cash-in name.

Probably the most successful Vg movies (financially) have been the Resident Evil movies... but they have a TOTALLY different style to the games. They use a few settings and characters, but essentially its a different IP.

Probably the most popular videogame movie among fans was Silent Hill. (i thought it was ok.) and its the one that stuck closest to the IP.. and didn't suffer too much for it.

Of course, the choice of game matters. Making a game based on a platformer or fighting game obviously entails big changes... but thats why they are dumb choices.

But Prince of Persia has an excellent, movie-like plot, with great, very filmable characters. Its one of the few games that'd make a great movie with NO changes. But of course they will...
Reply

Posted: Aug 3rd 2008 4:42AM Saria the Cat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ihavepants: Sometimes, in order to maintain your sanity when experiencing any adaptation of anything, you must view the adaptation as a separate entity from the original.

For example, if I had actually tried comparing the movie Queen of the Damned to the book Queen of the Damned by Rice, my brain would have exploded. Instead, I accepted that the movie was very enjoyable in its own bubble and the book very good as well and that they should never be compared, ever, ever.

In order to enjoy movies based off of books or video games, one must sometimes do this. Of course, it doesn't work if the game/movie/book just sucks period.
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 10:29PM burn1n9m4n said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I believe that you misspelled the actresses name. Its "Gemma Arterton" not "Gemma Arteron" which is why you couldn't find this link on imdb:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2605345/

Coincidentally, she's also going to be in Quantum of Solace.

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 10:34PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Please just spare everyone the hellish toture of putting the movie out with Jake Gyllenhaal as the prince. Please PLEASE! I

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 10:35PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
How about postpone the movie indefinately and save us all from the hellish toture of watching Jake Gyllenhaal butcher Prince of Persia. Or recast it? All in favor of a recasting say I!!

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 10:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 10:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
How about postpone the movie indefinately and save us all from the hellish toture of watching Jake Gyllenhaal butcher Prince of Persia. Or recast it? All in favor of a recasting say I!!

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 10:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
II
Reply

Posted: Aug 1st 2008 10:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
How about postpone the movie indefinately and save us all from the hellish toture of watching Jake Gyllenhaal butcher Prince of Persia. Or recast it? All in favor of a recasting say I!!

Posted: Aug 2nd 2008 10:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
III
Reply

Posted: Aug 3rd 2008 6:12AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ben Kingsley is a glorified Michael Madsen.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW