Pirates 3

[LemmingofGlory]

Note that Pirates 2 spoilers may exist within this post (though hopefully no more than is revealed in previews for 3). Pirates 3 spoilers have been avoided.


First, they gave us Pirates of the Caribbean, which was awesome. When one realizes the source material was an amusement park ride, its awesomeness is elevated into the realm of the immeasurable.

Then, they gave us Pirates 2, which was considerably different from the first. It was longer, the plot appeared to depend an ungodly amount upon sheer chance and coincidence, and pirate favorite Jack Sparrow seemed to engage in far more deliberate dickery than his prequel self. Sparrow's wit, luck, and eccentricies felt muted and replaced by far less likeable qualities. It was fun but had little heart, and it made me apprehensive about the forthcoming third film.

Finally, we have Pirates 3, which absolves its immediate predecessor for any wrongdoing. In my wholly biased opinion, the definitive reason is the return of Barbossa. It's not just that Barbossa is enormously fun on-screen. It's not just that he's played by the amazing Geoffrey Rush. It's his role as foil to Jack Sparrow that, I think, makes this film so much more enjoyable. But what else is good?

Among other things, the "Pirates" mythology is more fully explored. The piratey version of the afterlife and other mythical elements really strike the imagination. And Tia Dalma (the voodoo priestess) was one of the most amusing characters from the second film and does not disappoint in the third, by my reckoning.

The plot. There's a dizzying amount of double-crossing and changing of allegiance. Oftentimes in movies where characters have serveral conflicting goals, I find myself deciding which path would be ideal and sitting waiting for it to occur. Here I found myself unable to arrive at a "best case" scenario, so I was left to sit and eagerly watch as the story unfolded.

I wholeheartedly recommend the film to anyone up for a fun swashbuckling popcorn movie, but be prepared to spend three hours on your butt (that's including previews). There is no need to make further films in this franchise, but after this one, I'd go see a fourth.

-Lem


P.S. Remember to stay past the credits!

[Rhydderch Hael]

The best thing Pirates II had going for it was Keira Knightly in a wedding dress with a flintlock pistol. I hope Number 3 does a better job kedging out of the doldrums.

[Hammerskjold]

Most of the reason I enjoyed part 2 was Bill Nighy\Davy Jones and Will's father. Other than that most of the swashbuckling was good enough, but it seemed it could use more trimming. The rest just seemed too much padding or a 'I know this will sound confusing but it will all make sense when you go see part 3, trust us'.

Which left me kind of wary since the last time I saw this tactic, it was Matrix 2 aka Colonel Sanders confronts Neo ergo cogito ipso facto.

I probably will go see 3 despite my reservations because Barbossa and Davy Jones will probably be worth the ticket price for me.

[Chesspiece_face]

The best thing Pirates II had going for it was Keira Knightly in a wedding dress with a flintlock pistol. I hope Number 3 does a better job kedging out of the doldrums.

The only thing i found worthwhile for pirates II was the return of barbossa. I suppose the rest was acceptable as far as being the middle movie in a trilogy. It set all the characters on their eventual paths, added a lot of over-arching conflicts as opposed to the localized, personal conflicts that inevitably make up the plot of the initial instalment, and it had everyones favorite rogue/swashbuckler frozen in carbonite... or eaten by a monster, whatever. taken by itself, though, part II should have been renamed Pirates of the Caribean: When Krakens Attack. Seriously, I watched the same damn 20 minute scene at least 3 times in that movie. And even though the 30 minutes i spent on the island with the cannibals was amusing, it added zip to the story.

and they missed a golden trilogy opportunity with that too. why didn't jack go back to the cannibal island and wield his power over them as king to command them to fight in the upcoming epic battle. they could have rowed their fleet of pontoons over the armada and devoured all the evil english. :P

[Occhidiangela]

Note that Pirates 2 . . .

Sucked the fun out of a fun story.

However, its main suckage eas its length, it ponderousness, its very opposition to brevity being the soul of wit, the wit that made Pirates I so good.

Mixing mythology is dicey, with Krakens, Davy Jones, Blackbeard, and Maelstrom all tossed into the gumbo, but it can work.

So, Pirates 3.

Good enough. Too long, by an hour. Jack Sparrow comes back as him, and I have to say the Locker scenes, the madness, the weirdness, and the way out of the trap were lovely. Down is up, or at least a pillow stuffing.

It went downhill from there, I wanted a pillow for the yawnfest, to include the deus ex machina of the BEI and idiocy near the end. Bah. Don't make bad guys stupid, just make them evil.

Why was the song from the beginning not rewoven into the themes at the end?

Why were the pieces of eight not rewoven into the story?

Why did it have to take 3 hours to "get on with it" and finally sew it all up?

Why didn't they weave the song "Derelict" into the film?

Oh, thank goodness Keith Richard made his appearance, he did well.

Don't spend full price, do a matinee show, and empty your bladder before show time.

Then, enjoy. Enough fun to excuse the blatant cheese.

Occhi

[Tris]

I haven't gone to see it. However, DJ and company remind me somewhat of Illithids from D&D:P

Will have to say that the special effects look amazing.

The promo music reminds me somewhat of Morrowind and Oblivion. Which is better than what I'm currently listening to:P (Liszt's Les Preludes for piano + organ... it's definitely not organsmic:P)

[Merlinios]

*snip*

Here's how to enjoy the movie much more: ignore the plot. The storyline was full of tangents that were never, but should have been, addressed. It is one-dimensional, and feels like the director is trying to beat you over the head with it. But everything else was utterly fantastic. Sparrow was much better than the second film, probably a good deal because Barbossa returns. The wordplay and banter were phenomenal (although the average movie-goer where I live seems to appreciate a monkey doing something stupid quite a bit more). The music was the best I've heard in a movie since Lord of the Rings.

So I guess if you're out to see movies only for the storyline, you might want to consider skipping this one, but all of the little things were done better than pretty much anything out there these days.

--me

[NuurAbSaal]

Watched it yesterday and was wholly disappointed.

My take on it all:

Bleh:
Too many new characters introduced without need or explanation, plot overly complicated, but not in a good way.
Just too many new things/elements pop up that either don't make a lot of sense in context with the first two movies, or were not explained or expanded upon.
The conclusion of the Will / Elisabeth storyline is great in my opinion, but plays no role in the film other then to provide yet another ending -> Endings: much like LotR, this film suffers from not providing one, but multiple ending points.
In my opinon, the Jack Sparrow we loved in part one was destroyed in this part.

Yay:
Special effects glorious. Mr. Rush a pleasure to watch. Scantily clad Keira. eith Richards looks like he was born a pirate. A few good laughs along the way.

I can't shake the feeling that this could have been a much better movie, had the authors not gotten lost in their script along the way.

take care
Tarabulus

[swirly]

I can't shake the feeling that this could have been a much better movie, had the authors not gotten lost in their script along the way.

I felt the same way about the second movie. I recall watching the special features and they just kept saying over and over how they weren't sure things were going to get done, that this went wrong and that went wrong, that everything was being rushed to meet the deadline. The feeling I left the special features with was that they were so occupied trying to get things done that they didn't have a chance to actually polish things. Considering that the second and third movie were done back to back, I'm thinking that the third is probably the same. (I've not seen the third so can't comment directly on it)

This brings me to a side topic, movies done back to back. I think this is a bad thing that has started happening in recent years. They do it to save money, but to me it feels like they end up with movies that aren't as well done. They get so tied up in getting everything coordinated and done that neither movie ends up getting the time and attention it might have gotten otherwise. Which is pretty much my exact feeling for the second pirate movie and I'm assuming will be for the third. They just weren't able to put the effort into getting things right.

[VinnieJones]

I haven't seen three yet but I"m glad I'm not the only person who didn't really enjoy two. The best laughs from two in the theater I was in was when I started singing the phantom of the opera theme while they were showing Davey Jones playing his organ.

[NuurAbSaal]

I haven't seen three yet but I"m glad I'm not the only person who didn't really enjoy two. The best laughs from two in the theater I was in was when I started singing the phantom of the opera theme while they were showing Davey Jones playing his organ.

Well, there were some nice scenes, the coffin/bird combination right at the beginning for example:)

take care
Tarabulus