AndyDursin wrote:They're going to be hugely disappointed by the box-office this weekend, it's way under expectations. When it doesn't get a bump on Saturday but goes downward on a holiday weekend, that's not an encouraging sign.
IMO the movie's bad vibes are going to really hurt word of mouth.
BTW I'm still trying to figure out what the payoff was from the whole Davy Jones-Calypso thing. The more you think about it, the less impressive this film becomes. Regrettably.
Something that got passed along to me:
SPOILERS! kind of...
...."According to the film's writers, there's a line of dialogue that got cut between Davy Jones and Calypso, that explains why he was so hurt because she wasn't there for him when he came ashore after his first 10 years. Not only did it mean he didn't get to be with her, but it also meant he was cursed to go back out to sea for another 10 years. The curse of The Dutchman is broken if, after the ten years, the captain's lover remains faithful. The final post-credits scene suggests that Will can return to land as he pleases, as Elizabeth has remained true. The green flash, which symbolizes a soul returning from the dead, supports this.".....
^^ The film is already pretty dang long. Why not include tidbits like these and finish it?
I suspect these two POTC sequels will fare better in the home market. I almost wonder if there will be some sort of a Director's Cut of POTC 3 in light of something like this.
Weird that they would cut that. I was left with the impression that Bloom could come back only 1 night every 10 years! LOL.
Re: the sequels doing better on video. Remember you can't do any better than what DEAD MAN'S CHEST hauled in at the box-office (over $400 million domestic) last year. Wasn't it the highest grossing film of 2006 or close to it?
This movie isn't going to do as well, mainly because it's not nearly as good as either of its predecessors. I think repeat business is going to be pretty small, because of the nature of the film -- it's darker, less humorous, a lot more slow going, and has less action. From that really grim opening scene, it was all kind of "down."
The entire China thing really did not work for me -- I didn't like the way it looked (claustrophobic sets), was shot (overly dark), or its point (could've been entirely cut). I also thought the "Shipwreck Cove" looked like a Christmas tree -- talk about wasted production design from the usually-reliable Rick Heinrichs!
Offing Pryce and Davenport the way they did was just beyond weak (obviously it was going to take too much effort for them to work them into the story), and Tom Hollander's villainy really didn't satisfy me there either. (I read one critic say the film's best special effect was when he went through the boat as it exploded at the end in slo-mo -- and that was all you needed to know about how the movie turned out.)
There just was too much going on, and not enough set pieces to go with them. Go back to the first movie and you had Depp, Rush, and a group of cursed skeletal sailors. In this movie you had 3 dozen sea monsters, a giant woman, a cursed pirate, and about a half-dozen subplots all intersecting at once. Was there really any need for Chow Yun Fat? And other than the long climax there wasn't much action, which is what surprised me here more than anything.
I still feel this group could turn out another great movie with Depp in time -- in fact I still think the chemistry between him and Knightley was a LOT more interesting (and palpable) than her scenes with Bloom! I say find a female lead for him to really play off and work that angle into another installment, but otherwise start over (outside of probably bringing back the wacky pirates and English sailor guys, who worked well as comic relief).
The whole thing with Jones and Calypso was wasted-
[color=cyan]SPOILER ALERT[/color]
what was the point of releasing her if not to either have her help Jones and the East India Company or defeat them-it was just thrown away.
Why in hell did they cut that line about remaining true to the one you love, unless it was to set up a fourth film where Depp gets Bloom out of his predicament in 175 minutes. . .
I did like the homage to Leone/Morricone, although I think there were about 5 people in the theater, including me and my wife that got the joke. . .
Good score work by Zimmer, IMHO.
JDvDHeise
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."-Gene Wilder to Cleavon Little in BLAZING SADDLES
I did like the homage to Leone/Morricone, although I think there were about 5 people in the theater, including me and my wife that got the joke. . .
Good score work by Zimmer, IMHO.
I agree, though I found the music in that particular moment to be a little over the top with too much guitar. At least one guy in front of me yelled out "this music sucks!" during it. It was amusing but excessive (both the score AND his reaction
I'm a fan of the old argument that a movie should only be as long as it needs to in order to tell its story. In terms of PIRATES, I enjoyed PIRATES 2 greatly, was never bored, but could feel that it was a bit overlong. I always hate to read comments from fans who just want all deleted scenes placed back in a movie, as if they are pages cut from a book containing valuable information. They simply don't understand the art of editing and finding the right pace for a film, which means what was cut should stay cut. With James Cameron, I love the man's movies but have hated all his director's cuts. ALIENS, THE ABYSS, T2, what have you, the theatrical editions are what I prefer to watch as they are much leaner, meaner and more engaging. I love the LOTR films and acknowledge that the special editions do well with the truckload of story to move through, with ROTK being the film that benefits the most, in my opinion. I kinda thought that PIRATES 3 would end up being shorter than the second, seeing as how it was just about wrapping up the plot points. Imagine my surprise when I found out it was longer!
I did like the homage to Leone/Morricone, although I think there were about 5 people in the theater, including me and my wife that got the joke. . .
Good score work by Zimmer, IMHO.
I agree, though I found the music in that particular moment to be a little over the top with too much guitar. At least one guy in front of me yelled out "this music sucks!" during it. It was amusing but excessive (both the score AND his reaction
I will never understand why some people feel the need to shout out their opinions during the movie like that. Did I ask for that? Do I care? Save it for your own living room, imbecile.
I did like the homage to Leone/Morricone, although I think there were about 5 people in the theater, including me and my wife that got the joke. . .
Good score work by Zimmer, IMHO.
I agree, though I found the music in that particular moment to be a little over the top with too much guitar. At least one guy in front of me yelled out "this music sucks!" during it. It was amusing but excessive (both the score AND his reaction
I will never understand why some people feel the need to shout out their opinions during the movie like that. Did I ask for that? Do I care? Save it for your own living room, imbecile.
One of the reasons why I stopped going to the theater after that last LOTR film.
Between idiots like that, brats, cellphones and now thanks to HD and affordable home theater...going to the movie theater is totally not worth it anymore IMO.
I hear you guys, I've been doing the same thing. When it's $10 per ticket and you can buy the DVD for less than double that, why even bother going to the movies?
What I've also noticed is the theater I always go to now has digital projection on half of the screens, and I swear the image is more in focus on my HDTV than it is in the theater. Watching PIRATES the other night, I was not blown away by it, and this is on a gigantic screen with 500 seats or thereabouts. (I usually call ahead when I do go to the movies to make sure whatever I'm seeing is on one of the three giant screens in the complex I go to).
Some movies I don't want to wait to see, but that list seems to go down more and more each year, sadly.
One other thing that bugged me about this particular installment -- why was so much of it shot in the dark?
The original movie and the second film as well had scenes played in broad daylight, on the lovely Caribbean locales where they were shooting.
So much of this film was just DARK and ugly looking -- even the protracted fight at the end was in a rainstorm against green screen.
I didn't care for how it looked, it was a definite departure from the earlier films. And if it was by design because the film itself was "dark," that was a big error in judgment there
IMO I got the impression they did as much of it in the studio as possible given the release date they had to meet. Was probably, and sadly, easier that way.
They need to take a few years off and come back with a fourth film that harkens back to everything that made part 1 great and fix up the mess that part 3 made.
I didn't hate this film but the more I ponder it and let it digest the more I realize that I was indeed letdown by it, especially as it concerns how several of the characters were handled.
Eric W. wrote:They need to take a few years off and come back with a fourth film that harkens back to everything that made part 1 great and fix up the mess that part 3 made.
I didn't hate this film but the more I ponder it and let it digest the more I realize that I was indeed letdown by it, especially as it concerns how several of the characters were handled.
The way it looked, the way it was written...just had a "we're out of gas" kind of feel to it.
I didn't hate it either -- my favorite moment was when they went into "the locker" to retrieve Jack and the screen blacked out...to a montage of audio clips (dialogue and music) from the actual Disney World/Disney Land ride! A real nice tip of the hat.
There were some good scenes (I loved the multiple Depps even if a lot of people in the audience seemed uncomfortable by its handling), but I'd just chalk it up as a disappointment.
What's worse, I don't see many good things coming down the pike this summer. TRANSFORMERS looks bad, DIE HARD may be good but who knows...other than HARRY POTTER and 1408 (which looks great) it could be a long summer at the movies.
What was this movie even about? I couldn't begin to follow it. Barbossa was resurrected by some rastafarian woman who is actually a the goddess Calypso and was Davy Jones' mistress but Davy Jones' heart is in a wooden box...
Apart from these problems I found it a tedious, overlong bore. And I do have an attention span (Lawrence of Arabia is my favorite movie) but I'm kind of partial to movies which are made from finished screenplays, which have distinct characters and scenes which actually propel the story forward (and which don't try to hide narrative gaps behind endless effects and action scenes).
All the movies today seem to be made by guys who came from commercials and music videos (and have no concept of long-form storytelling), or they're sci-fi / D&D / comic book geeks (who only care about effects).
Andy, you need to get a root-canal emoticon for when we discuss movies like this!
Okay- I was confused. As I was driving home and listening to the score in the car, I thought that maybe I was dumb or didn't pay attention to the previous films and was missing out. But after reading your review tonight Andy I feel better- the movie really didn't make much sense.
My biggest problem with it wasn't even the length. It was that I never really cared for Will Turner or Elizabeth or any of the secondary characters. Jack Sparrow IS the film, and Barbossa is in second place for me. Otherwise, everyone seemed, well, undimensional. When Elizabeth took on leadership duties, I laughed....it seemed goofy and out of place. The series never delivered on the relationships between the characters, and I just couldn't follow the movie at all.
For me, it was no better or no worse than the previous film (I did enjoy the first film though). This one was easily my least favorite of the summer so far.
Don't feel bad Michael -- nobody could figure out the Davy Jones/Calypso relationship!
As I wrote I really think the writers painted themselves into a corner in this sequel, raising all kinds of questions they didn't have proper resolutions for. Having to shoot these consecutively only gave them less room for error, and quite obviously AT WORLD'S END didn't deliver at all. As I said it's the worst kind of sequel too.
And as far as the Orlando Bloom/Keira thing goes, I mean, we're supposed to believe she would still want 1 Night EVERY 10 YEARS with him? What the HELL is that? Seriously, whoever concocted that...really, it's just laughable, even for a pure fantasy like this film. No suspension of disbelief works in that instance!
The whole thing with Jones and Calypso was wasted-
