[Movie] Pirates Of The Caribbean: At World's End

The only thing that really disappointed me was the way the Calypso/Davy Jones thing worked out. She just kinda disappeared and all the character development that went into feeling sympathy for him got shot to hell.

It just felt like they hadn't properly written everything out beforehand. But it was entertaining.

I really like the characters in this series, so watching them do just about anything, even if it doesn't seem to wrap up very well, is entertainment enough for me.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Cellius

I hope all you experts waited until after the credits!

What happens? I didn't wait for the end of the credits, lol. I was pretty eager to get out of there. I'll bet it's some sort of setup for a 4th movie... *facepalm*

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by SpaceOddity

What happens? I didn't wait for the end of the credits, lol. I was pretty eager to get out of there. I'll bet it's some sort of setup for a 4th movie... *facepalm*

Spoiler:

It's ten years later, and Elizabeth and her ten year old child wait on the cliffs for Will and the Dutchman to arrive.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

It was the only heartfelt sequence, and it wasn't even apart of the movie.

EDIT: Remember the episode of the Simpsons when Mel Gibson asks Homer to help him make his movie, and Homer completely ruins what was originally an amazing movie that everyone loved? You know, by adding in completely over the top stunts and making characters do things for no reason at all?

Yeah, that's exactly what I think happened to this movie.

The difference is that this movie obviously never had a test screening. The director/writers did it all themselves.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by rockthepartay

The difference is that this movie obviously never had a test screening. The director/writers did it all themselves.

Yes. Obviously.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Figuratively, of course.

You know what I mean.

In any case, I'll probably end up liking the movie more when I watch it on DVD. When I think about the film, there were some parts that I really enjoyed. It's just the little things that bothered me.

Spoiler:

They never explained the history of Beckett and Jack like I thought they would. We still don't know the mark or whatever that Jack left on Beckett.

I hated how the Kraken was killed off. It was such a threat in the second movie that to get rid of it so easily seemed poorly written.

Finally, the deaths of Governor Swann and Norrington were just poor. Nothing dramatic and we were never given a proper farewell to these characters that we've been with since the beginning.

I just feel gypped.

FELIPE NO

I remember reading that they rushed to get this movie out the door, and the final product clearly shows it. The story has holes galore, lots of pointless scenes, and most logic flushed down the toilet. What's most disappointing for me however is that the movie shows lots of potential for so much more. Even with all the nonsense, the movie still had enough moments to make it entertaining.

Like Spiderman 3, it also felt to me like they were squeezing characters into the timeframe and really bloated the movie up to make room for the special effects.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Between the mental breakdown and schizophrenia of Jack Sparrow (when we say we want more Jack we don't mean multiple iterations of him), the rock/crabs, the mast-sized giant Caribbean woman no one understands metamorphosizing into millions of crabs, falling over the cliff into Davy Jones' Locker, rocking the boat to flip it into the real world, the pointless pirate in-fighting culminating with Keith Richards' useless cameo that led to the standoff between the East India Trading Company and the ships of the Pirate Lords that ultimately became the most disappointing, most drawn out and time-consuming two-ship battle in the history of cinema, the death of Admiral Norrington (who sadly had to go to make their story work), all of the pointless sexual euphemisms, and the whole Will-Elizabeth bullshit, there were entertaining moments.

They were just so brief and so interspersed that to recall them now would only do more to defeat the ultimate point which I will make right now:

DO NOT SEE PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN III. YOU WILL BE WASTING YOUR TIME AND MONEY TO SEE A FILM THAT IS FAR LESS ENTERTAINING AND ENJOYABLE THAN THE PREVIOUS TWO FILMS COMBINED.

May I suggest piracy?

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by rockthepartay

This is not the same Pirates film as the first one was.

As if the first movie wasn't boring and overbearing. The only fun that I got out of the first film was noticing all of the references to the ride that were interspersed throughout. Then after watching it a second time I started to enjoy the all-out popcorn flick style that the movie carried. There was nothing of a plot to speak of (omg cursed treasure), there was Johnny Depp being as overrated as ever, and there was hotty whatsherface being sexy.

Then the second movie came out last summer. I went to go see it with a friend because it was the first big film of the summer.
It still retained that film-sans-plot style of a true popcorn flick.
Only this time Bill Nighy was in it with his crazy accent and amazing CG body. (an in-joke that summer was doing Davy Jones impersonations "99 soulsss-ah!")
Only in this second film, Depp wasn't as much of a focus and everyone threw a bitch-fit. Which is a shame, really, because the rest of the characters grew so much.

Now the third film is out. They tried for more of a plot, but it didn't really matter. The character of Jack Sparrow finally evolved somewhat, but nowhere near as much as Will Turner or Elizabeth Swan. Oh, and Keith Richards stunk up the film with a pointless cameo (I thought there were going to be flashbacks with him wtf).
So, how about the film's style? It's still the same old popcorn flick that the first one was. It's fun and pointless. It's a typical summer movie. Fans expecting more than what was on screen really built themselves up on a foundation of nothing, didn't they?

Most amazing jew boots

I liked it enough to change my avatar. It was an entertaining and enjoyable movie. I don't really have more to say but I try not to take movies so seriously so I tend to enjoy them.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by The Dopefish

rocking the boat to flip it into the real world

Hey, I liked that bit. A little dash of wierdness, given the context, was appropriate. The whole rest of Davy Jones' locker was painfully mundane, but there was the seed of brilliance in that bit.

Agreement on the pointlessness of Keith Richards' cameo. It was still fun to see him at all, but I was expecting them to use his cameo for some character development with Jack or something, not HEY KIDS LOOK IT'S KEITH RICHARDS

It's really sad. A little tinkering with the script and Pirates 3 would have been servicable. But this is what happens when movie execs see dollar signs. It's why I've been slow to see Spiderman 3, and why I'm cringing at the thought of Shrek 3.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Monkey King

HEY KIDS LOOK IT'S KEITH RICHARDS

That's the thing, though: the majority of the audience WAS kids (younger than high school). If they weren't informed beforehand of the fact that it was Keith Richards and who he is then the cameo is even more pointless. Kids these days probably wouldn't know who the Rolling Stones are if someone slapped them in the face with a Paint It Black 45.

I was speaking idiomatically.

I liked the movie.. and I disagree with the reviewers who say the story is too confusing, or all this traffic directing bullshit. If you've seen the movies in order, there shouldn't be any confusing part to it. Granted, the Calypso arc in At World's End had a rather empty ending, but everything else made sense, including Pearl vs Dutchman without the other ships. Did you really want to see a bunch of normal British and pirate ships firing at each other rather than just the Pearl, Dutchman, and their respective main characters battling?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

i enjoyed purely as a popcorn flick, but i agree that there were quite a few spots where the story was just poorly written.

on another note, keira knightley seems to be her sexiest in this installment pirates. yay for that.

FELIPE NO

Just saw it tonight, heh and I loved it. I'm actually surprised that a lot of people were disappointed by it and that many critics hated it, I personally thought it was a lot better than DMC and delivered on the entertainment. Oh and man, Geoffery Rush was awesome! So glad they brought back his character, love his crazy laugh. It was great to see that they had an explanation to why the Dutchman's crew were fishmen.

Heh, though the movie did have some problems and I do agree that some things were just wasted, eg. the build up of a Pirates vs British battle only for it to not happen at all. The Davy Jones/Calypso's didn't finish out as well as I hoped, was kinda expecting more than a maelstrom from Calypso (and boy was hard to make out what she was saying sometimes, kinda wish there were subtitles for her lines). I hated the marriage-battle thing I thought that was just meh, and Beckett's death that was just "ok... will you die already?" Oh and that assasin guy (took over command of Dutchman after Norrington died, whose death was just poorly executed) I thought he should have died back in Singapore by the other girl's hand (the sister I believe), so stupid they just kept dragging him on. And man, I was hoping for some more Kraken, what a shame.

Heh, anyway I know that just made it sound like I hated the film more than love, but I'm just being nitpicky and just had let out some of the stuff that annoyed me. Overall though, loved the movie! Oh and the soundtrack/score was awesome, probably the best of the trilogy!

Oh and them ending it back at square one was kinda interesting and does leave room for a sequel. By the way, did anyone catch the scene after the credits? They showed Elizabeth and Will's next meeting after 10 years. Anyone else notice that their son is the same kid from the beginning of the movie, that was singing just before he was hung? I found that to be kinda interesting.

My buddy sent me this interesting theory, not his and didn't send a source to it, about the relation between Will and Elizabeth's son to the kid at the beginning.

Quote:

Ok.
The thought here is that the kid at the begininng who is being hung is Will Turners kid, and his father taught him that song and gave him that coin so he can call for him if he is ever in trouble.
Cutler Beckett is still alive (he is shown sitting, perhaps he was paralyzed) and its trying to gegt revenge on Will for foiling his plans, which is why he says "finally" when told they have started inging, becuase he knows Will is coming back. The scene at the beginning of the third will actully be the beginning of the 4th movie, and they will rescue Will's son like they rescued jack at the end of the first movie.

An interesting theory, but I personally hope that isn't the direction they choose for a 4th movie should it happen. Just more Jack Sparrow and enough of the Turners please.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Hantei

Anyone else notice that their son is the same kid from the beginning of the movie, that was singing just before he was hung? I found that to be kinda interesting.

Are you sure it's the same kid? I didn't really get a great look at his face, but I doubt the beginning would actually take place 10+ years after the rest of the movie.
That just wouldn't make any sense whatsoever, especially considering how later in the movie someone says that "the song has been sung".

Jam it back in, in the dark.

It was the same child actor playing a different character. You see it all the time. LotR did it constantly.

Also, this movie was a disjointed piece of crap. Weird David Lynchian beginning followed by an old west style showdown on a beach with a bad ending does not a movie make. A few funny moments, some nice action bits, but overall? AWFUL.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Meh, i liked it well enough. Honestly, the only things that really bothered me was the closureless Calypso thing that seemed to be just pasted in there (though i think it will play a part in the fourth movie, if there is one, as Barbossa was brought back by her specifically so he could set her free) and Jack's intro in the locker. It was cool enough, a little annoying though, and it didn't feel like part of the rest of the movie.

I loved the final battle, Pearl v Dutchman. The wedding scene i thought was highly entertaining.

I also liked how they more or less eliminated any sense of protagonism from any of the characters, and more or less put them all on the same level, much like the Lord of the Rings movies.

I think in the end, i'm gonna treat the second two as seperate from the first, and more or less the same movie. There's little difference in characters, plot elements, and such, whereas the first one is completley different.

I'd see it again, but not for full price.

Frankly, if the fourth movie were on the same level as this one, i'd see it, no questions asked.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

^ I totally agree with what you said there.

I really loved how Elisabeth 'progressed' through the film. From 'girl' to 'king', heh. Not to mention her costume was totally awesome. And the speech she gave when they were headed into battle, that was great. Though, I expected it to be like in the first movie where they sent her packing in a little lifeboat. XD

I always knew there was something up with Tia Dalma, but I didn't know it was just a bad case of crabs. She could've cleared that up easily enough.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Meh, just saw it, had it's points, wasn't horrible. I don't know, it just felt like the story had already ended, and yet they still kept going. So overall I felt like the plot was being pushed down my throat, and left out a lot of needed explanations for stuff.

Whatever, I still like the first the best.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

It was the same child actor playing a different character. You see it all the time. LotR did it constantly.

Examples?

Most amazing jew boots

Well, I rather enjoyed it. The action sequences were top drawer, the best being the showdown between The Dutchman and The Pearl, man that was ace. The bit with releasing Calypso was a bit weak though, other than that it was a good film. I'd pay to see it again.

Keith Richards was criminally under used, I felt that they could have done so much more with his role.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Cellius

Examples?

LotR example: Sam's children are all hobbit children from the birthday in movie one.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Oh yeah, and also Jackson's kids are hobbits, Rohirrim, and Gondor citizens respectively.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I enjoyed it too. The only thing I found seriously weak, was Tia Dalma. I didn't understand the whole growing huge, uttering nonsense and exploding in crabs.
Hoist your colours gave me goosebumps. Sooo good.

There's nowhere I can't reach.