Not as good as the game.

Rating: 5/10 (29 May 2010)

I hate to say this, but the game Prince of Persia is superior to this film in every way.
The game is funnier, has better dialogue, and (IMO) has a better ending.
There were a couple moments in the film where some original vision came through, but ultimately the movie felt watered down, clichéd (studio-driven) and lacked any real character. The acting wasn't bad, but it had such a dull script to work with.
I think I should excuse the film for any problems about "plot" or "writing," though. This is, after all, a movie based on a video game which is based on acrobatics. And there are some good stunts in the movie, but not nearly enough to carry the film. Not even enough to make it a selling point for the movie. And to its credit, the movie didn't "mess anything up" from the first game's major storyline. Perhaps the writers and producers thought it best to keep things simple so as to not stray too far from the established game story. Unfortunately, I think they over-simplified...
..Why doesn't the prince narrate this story? ..Why doesn't the prince have the same wit he had in the game? ..Why is the dagger only used two or three times? ..Why are there sub-plots in a film that barely has a central story to begin with? ..And for the love of god, what is the point of the intro/exit titles that appear with the sand dunes? They're completely inane and don't fit the tone of the film.
So if I had gone into this film with no expectations, I would have said it was a mediocre action/adventure movie, worth a rental but that's it. But it's based on such a great game, a game that actually had a plot and storyline. I wished the filmmakers had trusted the game's universe more, and relied less on watered-down adventure-movie clichés. This one could've been great...if only Hollywood could turn back time and try again.